VickySilver

wow, the sp. gr. is very close as I recall. If you do that bit with weighing the displaced water & all as I remember...

But the proof incuse 0.500 has the same characteristics as the 0.925 incuse?

Oh lazy me: don't have mine available - 530? Not the 1922 bit?

Bill, I have presented the above example of a "Rocking Horse Crown" that clearly looks to be overgraded by numerous points and has obviously developed a worrisome verdigris spot WITHIN the slab. So that is two severe strikes in my book against them. Another issue I do not think worked out to the satisfaction of many of us is the seemingly too intimate relationship with London Coins - I can not see how this is an issue that they sell coins at commission at auction that have been graded at their site, and that this is an ethical compromise at best. I agree with many of your other points, though have no experience submitting coins through them so can not speak as to Customer Relations, charges, rapidity of service, etc.

Most of the US firms (OK, some on here besides me think ALL) are really just backyard operations t put something in a slab. CCS for example is notorious for this, but even with them Rob's rule applies - bargains can be had for the astute and careful. CGS may be at a crossroads - can they up their customer service even to strangers and can they back their wares?

Yikes, no pissing contests to start I hope.... My wife/lady's bits are bigger, better, etc might bring an avalanche of sordid (ok, delightful) bits to display. What if the ladies start doing comparos here? Perish the thought.. PS - Mine who is vastly younger than me (YES!!!!) is going for an "upgrade" at no cost to yours truly.....

That rim by the date might be damage? Nope, thankfully just oxidation; nice coin overall as were it's mates - I tried to pick out decent ones but was more interested to get the inferior CGS specimen just for comparo & sad to see its getting worse with time as one would think.

Ex-Spink garbled edge 0.925 proof reverse Another raised edge proof reverse

PCGS65 specimen - much better mirror and colour than picture shows though. NGC65 specimen - also better mirror and "color" than picture shows

some more to follow I rotated them but are not rotated on the download... Top is raised edge proof from original silver 6 piece 1935 proof set

Ouch, can we opt for the "X" rated version of this photo?

Well, I put this on the other thread too. Will CGS reimburse - don't think so.. . Not to mention the gross overgrading that makes any of the previous NGC or PCGS examples pale, I must say.... BTW, I generally think CGS does much better, thank God.

OK..... The coin is slabbed as an 85, so the winner is.... drumroll..... Pies! Sorry, no giveaway though. Going to try to photo the other three specimens.

Yes, I think the proof .925 proof offered for sale was the INCUSE type (which in my experience though clearly proof have a different surface). I can not tell by inspection an incuse proof o.500 vs. an incuse proof o.925 - not that there is a large pop. OK, this coin is slabbed NORTH of 80 though; I am serious the Public Relations value of having this coin OFF the market would be of value to them. Actually my other three specimens, including NGC and PCGS are much better and deserving IMO of their grades. PS - did I mention I kind of like this design? If anybody has a lead on currency edge varieties (no edge lettering or "dropped" collar with 1/3 missing) do let me know as I would purchase.

Yikes, sorry for the quality - handheld I-phone. This coin is way up the CGS numerical scale..... Hint: If I was them, I'd buy this one back.

Uggh, let me try this detail blowup again...

So, any last guesses? Hint: its a specimen and grade number higher than guessed so far....Will try for closeup later today. I too have a proof infuse edge tho not sure if .500 or .925. I've been wondering about cracking it out and what to do, the verd almost looks as though a particle is in the slab and then began the spots.

OK, here is a CGS verd for you! Guess the grade?? Wait till you see the two comparos I promised, and then decide which specimen is "best for grade" - will post separately hopefully tomorrow on those...

Right or wrong: marketability.

I need to get these examples posted (the three specimen 1935s) and if Jr. lets me this evening will give it a shot....OK, enough punning.

jaggy, I would keep them unslabbedif its just for your consumption - you know what you have and aren't trying to sell so what would be the point? This comes from someone who is more or less middle of the road about slabs. You trust yourself and not some of the hamfisted dealers that perhaps you have seen...

I second that ....Something you learn over time and with the scarcer bits can actually follow particular coins over time....Almost like old friends. I still think I would vote for the 1924 nickel shilling in both possible iterations as being just a bit more common than the 1923 variant...

A bit of an anecdote, but for interest sake several years ago I got an example of each of the TPGs "work" of a particular issue: the 1935 specimen crown in NGC65, PCGS65 and CGS85. I'm going to challenge my skills if people are still interested by the weekend and picture them. Won't give away which I prefer so maybe a poll??

Lovely bit added in about spectrum colours and thickness of tone. I wonder what MEASURED proof he has of this? Why would not coins stored in the lovely climes of Britannia ever show toning or even originate from tropical hothouses with outrageous humidity like Brazil or Congo, or?? I think the colour adding brings 10x or more greater gain.

I wonder what the true rarity of those are as I had two of the '24s and a single '23 - may have shifted one of the '24s though. Supposedly some were struck on the 5.0 gm modulus with others 5.7 and never weighed mine - all in the name of good (bad) science...