VickySilver

QE2 washed out of cameo. Def. prooflike, poss. proof - needs to be seen in hand. This has a silver tint/tone to it.

Excellent! I was that way for a while with the Rocking Horse & have I think 11 or so of those. I actually LIKE the Churchill crown in excellent preservation such as this specimen. Don't shoot me please.

Loss of detail is important when it comes to plating and the SG, if accurate, would def. mitigate against a full silver content; tin tends to look quite different and rather "crummy" when circulated and 115 years old! I would tend to favour exactly what was in my first post. Sorry I can't see a fortune in it for you though!

These both appear plated. I am careful in my choice of words, but assertions have no place; I do not believe you can state the 1/2d is NOT plated. I am somewhat of a specialist in both Victorian and E7 silver, but also love off metal strikes (OMS). The farthing is within tolerance on weight, the halfpenny is about 0.5 gm heavy compared to standard. However, the coin DOES appear heavily plated in the photograph with loss of detail secondary to this - a bit of blurring that I have seen often with heavier plating. I will add that heavy plating may be "resistant" to non-penetrating assays/tests, including chemical, scratching, XRF. Specific gravity will pick it up & would anticipate with some likelihood that this 1/2d will register as near copper, but slightly higher. By quick memory, bronze is somewhere around 8.8-8.9 and sterling silver about 10.36-10.39.

With Fortune's Grace, it should be able to tone to an acceptable brown given the tone apparnetly having been stripped off.

I like these as well at that price. I think I have non-packaged 2013 & '14 examples - I suspect some dates may be a bit scarcer than others.

Mintage does not reflect numbers released, or more importantly how many available to collector market....

I hope that doesn't include me as I did send pictures if my satin specimen.

JMHO, but the second coin in the OP is the better by a bit because of strike on reverse as was said but also on the obverse. The second coin may have some minor edge dings, or so it appears. In cases of soft or incomplete striking, the discoloration on "high" points may not always be wear, so be careful (beware, LOL). Newer NGC holders are of the tine type so that most of the edge can in fact be observed.

Yikes, I thought this one was put to bed already. There is a range from PL to more satiny finish that all came from normal dies, depending on die and die state, and different than the specimen satin strikes.

Bull also has some proposed issues for which numbers are given with no actual coins known. Also a small point but some of the later (George V through George VI) "VIP Record Proof" and "Matte Proof" bits are incorrect. PM if further info might be required.

Not far off the price for a real coin in decent preservation!

Without seeing the items, I believe these to be the PCGS and NGC designations for enhanced cameo and describe the same presentation.

I quite agree & like it so much that I got a Cameo66 not long ago as the price was decent IMO for what you got (well, mine was). I also like the crown in cameo but graded cameo '37 crowns have been going up quite a bit lately if 65 or above.

I think, but don't know based on other (uncited) readings that this "pure" silver was the result of acid pickling that enriched the surface by leaching out the lesser metals. I have the Nicholson 1920 specimen halfpenny in nickel that was one of the early attempts after the war to possibly move the standard away from silver all together. This was repeated with 3d and shilling in 1923 and the shilling in 1924 with examples of the latter recorded as struck to 5.0 and 5.7 gm standards. It would be possibly interesting to check the alloy of the Bull coins listed as "Duck tailed" specimens of the silver coins as these may have been experimental alloys, not to mention many others. The BM have quite a collection of different alloy specimens from this period as I recall.

My, my, that's strong stuff. I agree with you that they are not so very "clean", and amazed that they deal in coins that they themselves grade. Just too much profit incentive (well, that was a pleasant way of putting it). On the other hand, if you could by the specimen at a VF price then that would be good. Not to bore, but I have an very rare Vicky halfcrown in my collection that I bought at a Glens sale about 15 years ago that they had as gVF that graded out as MS64. And of course its my coin, but I tend to agree (as I would).

IMO not even a proof. Also, there is a die flaw on G6 cheek, nice reverse although out of focus could be hiding many hairlines, etc.

Nick, I quite agree. That coin appears to be uncirculated, but unfortunately quite softly struck as is seen for this date. I have an extremely well struck example that took some effort to find, so they are out there. IMO that coin obviously dipped however....

Which IMO deserve SOME premium but not 2k worth...Even if specimens were struck at different times and with slightly different techniques, if they can not be readily separated by experts side to side, or even by the very people that struck them, then perhaps many of our separations are arteficial at best. Spencer,who wrote the article in the 1982 Journal of the ANA about VIP Record proofs - and who did an excellent job IMO - struggled to differentiate specimen vs. proof, etc.

Hey that sounds a bit excessive! LOL I just read where the leather HOLDER ALONE for the five 1913 Liberty Nickels sold for USD$10,800!

None struck in silver, and quite a number were returned to the Motherland after the Fair. I think box colour was independent of any variable as far as metal or strike.

That's a very nice coin and much above average for uncirculated specimens!

True, but nice if they dump the arrogance and possibly consider listening when someone is sharing (i.e. willing to teach) with them.

Please see my second post above wherein I tried politely to point out how bad they can be. This is not to say they are always, but that particular performance was borderline shameful. These are coins of a series that I have more than some knowledge of, but then also took pictures FROM THEIR OWN SITE and then also cited my sources, etc. I also gave up on PCGS with variety designations when they repeatedly blew the call on an 1866 with fourth head when I submitted the FOUR major types that are designated in Spink including Maundy - they whiffed and missed all four, and kept sending me coins back in slabs until I finally gave up. I don't care if they have 59 graders if they are that ignorant. Although I do appreciate their efforts ordinarily, they possibly ought to consider the possibility of fallibility.

Yes, more or less my opinion as well although there were what were proof/specimen strikes of the 1920 silver issues and have seen the shilling, florin, and half crown which I have posted and listed in Bull.