Sword

Your English shilling could well be UNC but it is best to avoid coins with this type of discolouration. The grade is not the only consideration and eye appeal is also very important. I think my Scottish shilling is UNC (completely lustrous). Likewise, the 1936 shilling is also UNC in my view.

Welcome to the forum. I too started with collecting shillings when I first took up the hobby as a teenager. It's a very good series for the type collector. Books are very helpful to learn grading but there is no substitute for experience. It is all too easy for beginners to overgrade. My suggestion is to start off with cheaper coins (like George VI) but in UNC condition. Once you have seen a few coins in top condition, you will know what UNC truly means: absolutely no wear and no loss of luster on high points. Some George V unc shillings are economical too. Edward VII, Victoria old head and Victoria Jubilee Head are still affordable but things will get expensive before that. Also bear in mind that the age of milled coins should not affect the grade. One mistake I made in my early days of collecting was thinking that better grade = better details. But the loss of detail could be due to weak striking (which doesn't technically affect the grade). The lion's noise on the reverse of Edward VII and earlier George V shillings are usually rather flat due to weak striking. Happy collecting.

I missed that also 🙂 DNW is a well respected auction house. But I think many of us here would agree that the provenance of "Nick's collection" would bear more weight. I didn't bid because I thought (and it turned out quite correctly) that the lots I like are more then I can afford.

It's a indeed a very sad incident and I have a great deal of sympathy to the current owner. But the coin is so obviously a fake. It is simply very risky to spend thousands of pounds on the words of a stranger.

I don't think I can be certain even with a better photo. One need to see if there are hairlines and what the luster is like in that area. I would simply ask the seller and see what type of answer you get. Asking about a potential issue can't do any harm even if you want to buy afterwards.

I agree it is possible that area had been wiped in the past.

16 weeks wait to get a replacement base pad with enough holes. Not exactly speedy.

Even an error in the packaging can only make the set more interesting and there is no reason to return it.

The only "coloured" coin I do like is the 1990 Isle of Man penny black crown. It won three awards at the time:

The serifs on the letters "S" certainly do look different. It's a real shame that someone has removed the possible identification marks on the obverse. It could have given really interesting information.

It is rather unusual that the pattern was struck using worn reverse die. Hence the flatness on St George's chest and helmet. I remember reading somewhere that the 1951 crown was struck using a left over die from the Victorian era with the date altered. Might be someone experimented with a worn old die as an experiment and then a previously unused one was employed for striking the real thing?

Haven't heard of it before. Am I alone in thinking that St George's face looks like that of a middle age lady?

It's the Royal Mint unfortunately...https://www.royalmint.com/our-coins/events/mr-men-little-miss/

Possibly. But my young nephew would be very upset if I brought him that coin instead of a toy he wanted.

Not you I think, and definitely not I. A fair number were brought by investors hoping for a quick profit I would imagine. Coins reusing historical designs always have greater chance of becoming wanted at least in the short term. The mint is quite clever not to do this too often or it will lose the effect.

Not everyone buying coins are numismatists. They include impulse buyers, investors, misguided investors, souvenir buyers, present purchasers and one-off buyers. The offerings from the Royal Mint are rarely aimed at numismatists these days, but at the other groups. Their mission is to simply to make money (banknotes rather than well-designed coins). It's easier for numismatists to just ignore the souvenir coin market.

Just his surname on coins I think.

But seriously, it is the norm these days with the Royal Mint. Wallace & Gromit, Paddington, Snowman, Winnie the Pooh ... Described as "uncirculated" and they can never be circulated...

"That's not fair! We weren't allowed to put our full names on our designs!"

That's why I really like your example. Well struck fringe and hair band make a big difference to eye appeal. Nice toning and clean fields. The deeper marks (one base of neck and hair) are out of the way and not distracting. The strike is a little weak on the top of the crown on the reverse but this is relatively insignificant. For me, its a definite keeper as it would cost a fortune to upgrade to something significantly better.

This specimen was described as "cut on cheek and other light surface marks, otherwise nearly extremely fine". Sold in 2020 for £360 which went cheap I think. Lower estimate was £500. Finally, this specimen was described as "some surface marks, otherwise good very fine, reverse better". Sold for £300 in 2017.

The next example is described as " few surface marks, otherwise extremely fine or better", sold for £1200 in Sept 2017.

As Eric has pointed out, the weakness of strike does complicate grading of Young Head. For me, eye appeal for this series is as important as grading. Just out of interest, I have been to the DNW website and look at some examples. Then again no auction house's grading is always right or consistent. The example below was graded as GEF, sold for £1350 in 2013 and so would be much much more expensive today. A very impressive specimen.

Is this just a case with some US collectors chasing the highest PCGS grades and paying over the top for the "finest known"? Would the price be a lot less if it say PF66 on the plastic rather than 67?

To be fair, no grade is given on the slab. Someone starting a new grading company. Interesting. Not yet taking any paid business though.