VickySilver

My 1915 does not have that. It looks like not fully struck up and maybe grease on die or similar.

Well, perhaps we are crossed on terms. The "C" does seem to be incised and even in taking the first closeup picture of reverse, from the picture it appears that the margin or edge of the wing-like shape looks to be as well with discolouration on the inside of the wing being what looks to be the residue. The obverse shape(s) really IMO appear to be localized collections of residue and/or oxidations of that residue. Many dilute dips can do that sort of thing if allowed to dry or desiccate. Still, you have the coin in hand, not us. Interesting, this series was the core of my collection at one point. The 1929 and 1934 dates are the only ones not struck in proof..

I think it might be incised possibly very lightly, including the C, and cleaned with a bit of the residual left. Does it look like the margins of the "wings" are recessed even minimally into the coin. My first thought was just the fluid left behind as per Sword.

Not to enter into this fray, but I wonder if the oxidation that occurs in PVC holders that is green in colour and sometimes called "green slime" is technically verdigris - this occurs on copper and silver, not gold that I've seen.

As far as a joke, I wouldn't say so. Please see my previous notes - on many occasions, if not most, the TPGs grade according to state of preservation with respect to how the coins left the dies. In other words, if softly struck but without wear or distracting marks, a relatively high grade may be achieved. One great example would be from this same date: the 1917 sixpence. I have seen even highly graded specimens that are flat on lion's snout and not well struck details in G's beard and hair even make the exalted MS67 level. A coin such as this, and a recent ?Heritage auction had TWO at that level is IMO inferior to what otherwise would be an MS65 but exceptionally well struck.

I have seen some variation in the strike/poss. age of die but not too sure what else. I think I am not as patient for details as I once was, so may have missed. I know that the coin listed as PCGS64 is nicer than mine for sure, and better struck as well (wonder who has that one?).

Good observations and knowledge shared Jag!

Not that I am aware of, basically the overdate - I have not seen a "normal" second 8 in the digit. What seemed different to you ? His is a relatively nice specimen but perhaps a bit optimistic on the grading.

Yes, I think NGC often gives a "technically" influenced grade. In other words, if a coin is perfect to how it left the die and no handling or bagging that it will rate highly even if softly struck. I'm in the boat where I think presentation that includes originality, and lack of damage are important, but that if G has flat hair & details and shield is blah flat that I will pass. I took some time about 15 years ago or so to assemble the best set I could 1911-1936 and was very choosy in that way. I took the lot and set them up in a Capitol holder which I thought (and still do) was quite impressive. Not rare coins, but pleasant to look at.

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