Paulus

The date run:

I have pared down my collection areas recently, one of my current passions is Charles I halfcrowns. I most recently acquired this difficult 1645 Oxford example, so that I now have at least 1 half-decent example of each year for that mint (1642-46).

I'm ploughing all my retirement investment funds into NFTs personally, clearly the way to go

Very nice Will. I'm also collecting Kempson's Coventry buildings (along with Bath and Birmingham), I don't have an example of that one yet. Here's my little collection of Coventry buildings so far

Increasingly liking this one, my best example of a George II young head roses halfcrown type

Sounds like a bum issue to me, return it

My vote is thick

In this instance MS 70 is a cleaning product https://www.amazon.com/MS-70-oz-Coin-Cleaner-Bottle/dp/B000YQBZPE

There is ever increasing evidence imo that due to hype, blind acceptance of TPG grades, record prices being realised, and laziness, greed has become a big factor in our hobby

Thanks David! I guess that could be it, but I still have my doubts!

Did you want one with elephant below?

This was slabbed with a yellow label stating 'Altered UNC' You could ask LCGS not to slab rejected coins. LCGS has now stopped their slabbing/grading service and the database appears to be unavailable.

Certainly, in fact I have decided that is the case! But I decided eventually to share, it will be the first that Rob has heard of it too!

Thanks for the opinions so far chaps, much appreciated! I did think they could have meant some kind of tooling, but I can't spot any (not an expert in that anyway), and I'm not sure what the point would be? It's a solid GEF to my eyes and I don't believe there's a scarce variety someone is trying to mimic?

Can anyone spot anything 'wrong' with this florin? I bought it from @Rob over 4 years ago, and it remains my nicest example of a gothic florin. At the time I was prone to sending some of my nicer coins to CGS (as was) for grading, attribution, etc. I'm not after another debate about the rights and wrongs of slabbing, or the goods and bads of CGS. It was rejected as 'altered' (no further explanation was forthcoming), but I'm damned if I can find anything awry with it!