VickySilver

Sword, thanks for the pictures. Zoo, I have looked with a magnifier and think the apparent lettering issues are related to toning - although I must admit eyes are not as sharp as I'd like.

Good question - I am not sure anyone knows the answer as records are quite scarce for especially the specimen sets (as opposed to the proof sets which were only a bit spotty). I do know that up until 1984, the FM would advertise in the various numismatic papers and journals and would send out fliers to those on their mailing list that had purchased sets in previous years; even though I was in college I used to get specimen sets in those days which were about 30.00 USD per set as opposed to the proof sets which mostly included at least silver crowns and cost much more. As they were in some difficulty for whatever reason after a sale of the parent company, interest and sales petered out in the years after 1981. There also was the expose on the 60 Minutes TV show in 1978 that turned some away....

Yes, that's the coin with VERY poor pictures - and I got the 82.50 or so in eBay bucks! Cert # 85749898

Will get it in about 3-4 hours when I can check.

Too many decimal OMS coins out there. I agree with the price being off by a factor of 10. A predecimal half crown would be best, and prior to the 60s better yet.

I've not been able to shake loose the other 2002 set, and the buyer of this one says that he also got the very rare 1984 Jamaica specimen set! I have not seen that and only one rumoured, perhaps in Russia. I am wondering if the Franklin Mint somehow had a European dealer or depot for some of their later offerings which never made it to the states. I never saw 1984 specimen sets of any of their client countries, and then got the Belize set about 1 1/2 years ago. Their coins of all nations - which include specimen quality coins - offered in the 1990s in huge cardboard format, complete with usually one stamp from the host country is a source for some otherwise VERY scarce coins. I wonder if they just had some coin laying around and through them in. Most of the coins in these sets however are NOT FM issue, so one must look carefully.

Yes, I'll vote for the second as well - the first looks to have the lustre "washed out" by dipping perhaps overzealously. This with the caveat that it is hard to picture slabbed coins. I have an absolutely gorgeous NGC64+ 1907 half crown and can not for the life of me get a decent picture in slab.

I just yesterday got my winning eBay coin after using eBay bucks for a very nice price. I don't know where the other bidders were but was happy to get it for less than 400 quid equivalent. This is PCGS coin number 225223 (not the cert number). Please help post pics if you can. The PCGS picture is not as pleasant as the coin in hand, I am delighted to report, and it seems to not show the rub and ticks shown in the picture. Not a gift, but nice price. I am not sure if it is nicer than the AU58 coin which is also pictured, that one an ex-Spink coin; I don't think I can keep both at this point!

I, for one do like the better specimens of coins. I don't think they are worth the premium in many cases. The problem with the 1951 and 1953 crowns is that I believe much as has been stated above, that I can pluck a specimen from a set that is an early and apparently "more special" strike and this to be virtually indistinguishable from some offered as "VIP". This is true in a slightly different way with the 1928-36 specimen Wreath crowns. IMO the TPGs and many others don't get it right. Caveat emptor!

Ah but we still have the choice as buyers, and can use them as sellers. If we don't like what their judgement, we can pass or offer/sell accordingly. It is marketing certainly, and one can respect it or hate it or not. Appearance has always been a key in choosing a coin, and if an individual judges one coin superior to another and has also included all the other factors (such as price, relationship with a dealer or customer, etc.) then one can choose. I don't think anybody believes these TPGs are Gods, but rather tools that are sometimes useful, and maybe sometimes a source of irritation. They are not the final word.

And worlds better after your treatment, at least from the photos. I wish I could figure out how to downsize my resolution on iPhone to post on here.....

I don't know, I think it's just a case of trying to objectify the subjective. Many, including myself in many instances prefer a currency coin that is well struck with defined definition and marked contrast twixt fields and devices. Regardless if it is first off the dies or not, it would in many corners if not yours bring a premium. Unfortunately, many seem to have gotten lost in the shuffle and seem willing to pay for a trifling difference between a cameo and deep cameo or ultra cameo strike.

Nice job there Rob - who needs google (not productive) when we are fortunate enough to have you around!

I am not sure if the is the W&R coin? Well, he does need to get it ID'd with SG, weight, etc.

First, I have to say this IS NOT MINE! OK, I have a few old Spink Auction catalogues, but none as old as this. On the PCGS chatroom site there is a recent visitor that claims to have from his father's estate an 1848 Godless Gold Florin pattern that his dad obtained from a Spink 1974 LA Hilton Auction. Was there such a sale, and did it feature a gold pattern florin? I certainly give pause to calculate its value if genuine!

65 LOL

These at one time were quite inexpensive and then about 10 years ago began to slowly take off, first the sov and then the others. I got a P63UltraCameo 1887 half sov for USD 350 and then a 1937 P70Cam sovereign for about USD1150

Minor point: I believe one of the bluing culprits is the brand "MS70" for sale in the USA at one time.

Wow, I hate to ask what they got for the '49?? He got a bit mad when slightly dinged on another chatroom, but steer clear of them; they do seem to have a fancy purchasing budget (and a fancier idea of what to price said coins at on their retail list).

I agree, that is a bit over the top. I can see the 1000-1200 range, that's about it for now at least. A bit anticlimactic to see a set that looks like pretty much any other, save the variety. Still, glad to have one.

I happen to like the designs, save the latest Bull. The proofs are IMO a bit overpriced but the others at just above bullion are rather nice. I hope a few will sneak in as scarcer bits.

Probably not of interest to all on here, but was wondering if the RM will ever release actual mintages RELEASED of these in either the currency or the proof. Reported mintages are very confusing, first because as far as I can tell there are none for the "bullion" silver, platinum or gold; even with the proofs of these coins, there are issue and set limits but there seems to be no confirmations as to the number actually released into collector channels.

Yikes, Rob, are you now coming after the shillings? LOL...I like that 1853 best there.

Does not IMO appear to be of Royal Mint manufacture...

As a followup - if anybody cares, PCGS will not certify the scarcer gold versions as they are not in Krause's "Unusual Coins" yet??? This despite being published in the Spink Patina Sale of 2001.