VickySilver

Which according to my research should put the planchet at about 3.25 gm? Please check. The ordinary Brit 3d is about 6.6; however, the RM was fast and furious with planchet production on these and I have near piefort examples approaching 9 gm down to about 4 gm by recollection. Nice bit there, but don't get overexcited.

I don't know why they are so circumspect. The Cayman sets of 1986-88 are about 60% of reported "authorised" mintages 310-320 sets (vs. 500). As I've said some of the Jamaica sets are MUCH scarcer than the authorised mintages would seem to imply. I would say to keep an eye out for all 1996-2002 and myself would tender a very decent offer on the '02.

The '52 2/- is rubbed a bit with retone, not so crazy about it. The '00 a bit finer of course with what look to be only a trace of rub in obv. field to right. BRG as usual with very beautiful bits...

The 1918 KN was "boddybagged" by PCGS for colour! IMO this is not altered. The '18H does not come off as well in photos as in hand as it is very well struck indeed.

And silly me tried contacting them twice through Facebook with no response. I still think it interesting and that even though people may not care, there may be some true rarities, not just Jamaica struck by the Royal Mint in the mid-80s to mid-90s period. There would be authorised mintages but then, at least at times, many fewer actually struck and released to collectors (key word "and" since they may have struck more than actually released. Unfortunately, so many bits are now struck that nobody may care about a coin with actual release numbers 100 or less. One example is a more blatant so-called "hockey puck" of Alderney, the 2005 kilo coin (forget the denomination) with authorised 200 mintage & only 45 actually struck.

Many times not struck up, this does not mean the coin is actually worn - at least to that level. I would not quite give an American MS, but rather AU55-8. Still lovely though.

Wow, that picture really shows some lovely toning. IMO, preferred to the technically higher ranked/numbered pieces that have been mucked with or dipped.

Hey I like the fake! Good job Stuntman!

Well, I did get the 1863/1 shilling that was actually quite prooflike. Some numby years ago fingered it though. Also I got the 1841 shilling more recently that was quite proofy looking as well. A while back I have to confess to getting the MS64 1854 shilling (now I note Stack's has one in "65"! But have to see it). Jaggy hunts down the 6ds, but these I've largely finished so he does not have a lot of competition.The shillings I have been busy upgrading and pretty well know that series up, down, and sideways. Of cours I also got that "golden sixpence" 1843 half sov that Azda hosted a pic of on the Recent Aquisition thread.

LOL! Well, pennies are a rough go in competition for the better bits & DNW got my bank on a few of the silvers....

Nope, not a big player this time and only got some Ed7's. Really more into Vick silver ! LOL! But will chase some penny date rarities - not hypervarietals though, and SS got the only one I really bid on, which he wanted more than I....

Uh, well, they were presented with a bit more lustre than the actual items...Which were nicely struck, just that the metal surfaces on the actual coins are not as nice as the CC pictures.

Wow, that is excellent news. What numerical was it given? Are you to keep or sell? Which venue? I can see it quite possibly selling for somewhere above 6k.

The lettering is to my view clearly less distinct - follow the shape of the "legs" of the "W" in EDWARDUS as one example. Also, the shape of the top of the "I" and its top to bottom taper in "SOIT" is different. Also the top of the "H" in "HONI" left upright/leg terminus is different. I could point out more....

VFs not all that bad?

InterNumi - please find a better example when you can.

Maybe red arsed monkeys eating peanuts more exciting? LOL> Yikes, I think I might have skipped that hike!

The problem is that with so much wear, a lot could be done to wear down a counterfeit to even out the rough bits. This coin reminds me of those 1860's era half crowns that have now been generally debunked but that were so worn as to make ID possible. I remain suspicious.The milling does not look all that great even given the condition, and the lettering, esp. "EDWARDUS" just looks off and a bit wonky IMO.

Yes, I agree with even a bit of lustre about the lettering although tiniest bit of verd hiding in there as well.

Uh, 80k+ worth of curiosity I would guess....

I really hate to hear that but must say I was suspicious when Gibbons took over. Isn't that the corporate way - buy a firm, loot the goodies, dump the benefits and fire a bunch of workers? Hopefully all is well, haven't spoken to him for several months....

Hey, I just got a bottle of Chivas as a gift! (What does Semra look like?)......OK, ignore that.

Fine, with unacceptable harsh cleaning that nets it a fair.

Hey, I was just thinking (and keeping the late, great Prince), maybe her flip side is really fun - aka - SMF, and needs to be approached that way (the "M" stands for Mother!).

Yes, nice coin and probably the correct price. I wonder how much the ?PCGS/NGC 64 would go for?