1949threepence

On the same topic of the new software version, what's with this "warning points" I can see on my profile ? Not seen that before.

Could it be that the type/size of avatar allowed under the old format, is not compatible with the new ? Don't know, just a possible thought.

I think much depends on how you define "micro variety" Stuart. For me personally the difference to standard has to be either plainly visible to the naked eye, or such a notorious rarity, that although you need a magnifier to see it properly, doesn't matter so much........ .....and I'm still stuck in the nineteenth century.....

They don't crop up very often, and then only in grades from Fair up to GF. If you found a Fair example for £50 you'd be doing well, but try to avoid paying much over £99. As for F or better examples, those go for far more - you're looking at a couple of hundred minimum, maybe £300 or thereabouts. Bottom line - they go for what someone is prepared to pay. Never seen one above fine ~ although the one posted by David RJ a few weeks ago came pretty close to VF.

Yes. I also remember leafing through a CM from back then and someone was offering a BU 1932 and 1934 halfcrown pair for a little shy of £200. You'd probably just about get that now, but as you say - 8 weeks wages back then! ..........and yet somebody must have bought them, otherwise they'd never have commanded such high prices for the time. I wonder where some of those coins are now. Salted away forever in private collections, probably.

I'm guessing cud, Declan.

That could indeed prove to be a most interesting comparison, Bob.

I received an e mail from CGS yesterday, which looked quite interesting, as it contains what they consider to be a grade for grade direct comnparison between theirs, the traditional system we still mostly use, and the Sheldon system. In future they intend to only use the numerical grade number in future, without the letter prefix. They say this will avoid confusion. They also mention that their grading system will be consistent over time, without the upward drift that has been apparent over the years, such as a VF 30 years ago, now being widely touted as an EF. I'm sure Bill has already mentioned all this, but here it is again. I apologise if someone else has already copied and pasted this same e mail elsewhere. Anyway, what do you think ? Any comments ? Oh dear, that table didn't come out too well did it. Try again !!! 100 FDC MS70 99 FDC MS70 98 FDC MS70 97 FDC MS70 96 FDC MS69 95 FDC MS68 - 69 94 AFDC MS68 93 AFDC MS67 - 68 92 AFDC MS67 91 AFDC MS66 - 67 90 NFDC MS66 88 BU - NFDC MS65 - 66 85 Choice UNC - BU MS65 82 Choice UNC MS64 - 65 80 UNC MS63 - 64 78 UNC MS63 - 64 75 UNC or near so MS62 - 63 70 AU MS60 - 61 65 GEF MS60 - 61 60 EF AU58 - MS60 55 NEF AU55 50 GVF AU55 45 GVF AU53 40 VF AU50 35 NVF EF45 30 GF EF40 25 GF F35 20 F F30 15 NF 10 VG 8 VG 5 Good 4 Fair 3 2 1 Sorry, still a bit wonky, but at least readable, just !!!

The ones which caught my eye are from the August 1969 edition of Coin Monthly. They are a BU 1958 threepence being offered by Geoffrey Young for £10.00, and an 1865 5/3 penny in BU being offered by the Mayfair Coin Co for £1000. Both those amounts seem extraordinary, given what a pound was worth then.

Me too. And if everyone thought like us, it really wouldn't matter how CGS grade coins - people would buy purely on what the coin looks like. Precisely, Peck.

The only reason I might consider getting a coin slabbed, is if I was considering selling it. Otherwise I don't need any official confirmation ot grade. I buy what I like the look of, regardless of exact grade.

Well that's interesting chaps, because the latter specimen is from the much vaunted Edinburgh collection (although clearly one of the less spectacular items), was graded at "A/Unc toned" and priced at £1250.00. Somebody must have bought it for at least relatively near the asking price, as it's no longer on sale. Personally, I don't think it's either as good or as nice as the earlier one still on sale now. Incidentally, I agree with lower EF for the latter, and about GEF for the former, although no trace of lustre on either.

The grading sounds courtesy of CC too - I wouldn't rate it higher than EF maximum myself It's what known as a "rarity default enhancement", or "sellers privilege" Peck........ ......and yes, I've just made up those BS phrases !!! Just as a matter of interest, how would you grade this one:-

Should have added ~ that's not mine (I wish) it's courtesy of Colin Cooke, who currently has it on sale for £1200 !!!

......and here is an 1864 plain 4 in GEF:-

1/ aUNC 2/ Fair

If I was absolutely forced into that situation, I still honestly wouldn't know. Probably just grab one at random.

No, in all fairness I bought it already slabbed. Anyway, here is a photograph on which you can just see the fingerprint at about 7 o'clock. The image also shows the difficulty of photographing through a slab - the coin is about 1000% better than it appears here! Thanks Derek. Two points here:- a) Even if PGS weren't responsible for the fingerprints, they perhaps should wear light gloves when performing the slabbing process to avoid fingerprints on the surrounding plastic. b ) The photographing of coins through slabs is an important one, as once inside, they are not camera friendly, and you don't get a good image. Quite important, certainly as far as eye appeal is concerned, when it comes to selling. I've not seen a good photo of a slabbed coin yet. Pity a more camera friendly slab can't be developed, or else, as both Peck and I suggested in the CGS thread, that it becmes possible to legitimately remove from a slab, and then be able to re-insert, without loss of official grade status. (If the 1894 was busted out of the slab, it might be possible for a fingerprint expert to say whether the prints on the coin and plastic, were from the same individual) I don't know if anyone has ever watched the NGC corporate video on their website that proudly takes potential customers through their NASA-esque facility. I couldn't help noticing in the video that their graders handle the coins without gloves, albeit very deftly. Hmmm.......however deft, one slip is all it takes for a potential fingerprint in the fields of your BU specimen.

That should be in their shop for a while. It's not difficult to get a really decent, attractive 1863 specimen for a much more modest price, between £100 and £200, typically. £375 is totally unrealistic for such an untidy looking coin.

Indeed. Who knows where London Coins will be in 2057 ~ or for that matter, the rest of us

Certainly better than average on the Heritage site, but still not ideal.

OK, thanks chaps. That's pretty much what I suspected anyway. It's just that I was thumbing through the March 1969 Coin Monthly that Rob kindly sold to me a few weeks ago, and I came across an ad for the Erdington Coin Company's sale of the year, held on Saturday 8th March 1969, at the Acorn Hotel, Erdington, and including a 1933 penny !!! Their commission was just 5% for the seller (10% London Coins), and no mention of a buyer premium. Those were the days.

No, in all fairness I bought it already slabbed. Anyway, here is a photograph on which you can just see the fingerprint at about 7 o'clock. The image also shows the difficulty of photographing through a slab - the coin is about 1000% better than it appears here! Thanks Derek. Two points here:- a) Even if PGS weren't responsible for the fingerprints, they perhaps should wear light gloves when performing the slabbing process to avoid fingerprints on the surrounding plastic. b ) The photographing of coins through slabs is an important one, as once inside, they are not camera friendly, and you don't get a good image. Quite important, certainly as far as eye appeal is concerned, when it comes to selling. I've not seen a good photo of a slabbed coin yet. Pity a more camera friendly slab can't be developed, or else, as both Peck and I suggested in the CGS thread, that it becmes possible to legitimately remove from a slab, and then be able to re-insert, without loss of official grade status. (If the 1894 was busted out of the slab, it might be possible for a fingerprint expert to say whether the prints on the coin and plastic, were from the same individual)

Just wondering. It seems a tad steep to me, and adds a fair slice onto an expensive coin. What do others think ? I may be misguided on this one. Not sure.

I'm assuming you sent the coin off for slabbing, and there were no fingerprints when it left you ? If so, that is down to sheer carelessness. Pretty unforgivable in the circumstances. I wonder what our friend Bill Pugsley would make of this ?