Sword

Other forum members can decide for themselves who has been out of order. Everyone is capable of reaching his own conclusion. I will leave it at that.

In all honesty Pete. I wasn't annoyed with CGS when I typed the posts above. What is the point of being annoyed at a defunt company? But I did find some of what you said out of order and patronizing.

I am entitled to comment on the grading services I have paid for. No criticisms can be given for that. I am entitled to say what I suspect has happened and I have gave my reasons. If an organisation don't want people to criticise them, then do a GOOD JOB. Sorry, CGS can't because they have already ceased trading. I know you think it is "unfair" that there are many more negative comments than positive. But everyone is entitled to have their say providing they are not libeling anyone.

Slab 3: crack on reverse

Slab 2: scratches and crack. Unfortunately, the photos don't show the scratches so clearly.

I am somewhat disappointed with your post and think you defence of CGS is slavish. "You mention nothing can be 100% proven and yes i agree so dont feel its fair for you or anyone else to just have a go at someone on a public forum whoever it may be." A forum only works if members give their opinions. We give our reasons for our opinions. It is up to other members and the public to decide if the reasons given are convincing and valid. "Who can we have a go at today as i am pissed off ,have a brew , type some crap in a computer and forget about it and let the person or company pick up the pieces from the damage that may be caused." I do find it somewhat offensive to say what other people have said is c**p just because you don't agree with them. A review or comment can only cause "damage" to a company if the the readers find the reasons for the negative review convincing. The effect of an unsubstantiated comment has about the effect of shooting an elephant with a pea shooter. I wrote: "I strongly suspect the carbon spot was caused by mishandling when the coin was slabbed. It has been problem free for ca 70 years and a spot developing after slabbing is too much of a coincidence. Mike expressed the same view with VickySilver's crown. Obviously, nothing can be 100% proven of course." Why do I suspect the carbon spot was caused by mishandling when the coin was slabbed? Because I believe the slabbing process of CGS was SLOPPY. My reasons: I have slabbed a total of 13 coins with CGS over the years before they ceased trading. One slab had a foreign object which looks like a bit of plastic trapped inside. Another slab was very badly scratched and had a crack on the reverse. The CGS person didn't push the coin enough into the washer first time and so the the back cover cracked slightly when it was put on. A third slab have the same type of crack. The other 9 slabs were fine. For one coin, I had to wait for three months before they told me the coin was too big to be slabbed. If 3 slabs out of 12 have problems, then CGS was unsatisfactory by my standards. Slab 1: Foreign object

Pete, I am not saying such things happen regularly. But let's face it, there is probably some risk (however small) when submitting a coin to any TPG company for grading. As we can see from the videos and from people seeing coins being graded first hand, the graders don't wear gloves for a start. I don't really want to get into any lengthy arguments over CGS again but will give one reply to your post: I have graded 13 coins with them before they became LCGS and before I discovered quadrums. One slab had a foreign object which looks like a bit of plastic trapped inside. It does look fairly harmless but irritating all the same. Another slab was very badly scratched and had a crack on the reverse. The CGS person didn't push the coin enough into the washer first time and so the the back cover cracked slightly when it was put on. A third slab have the same type of crack. The other 10 slabs are fine. I have always avoided buying slabbed coins because sellers often want more money for them. I have brought just 3 low-value CGS coins and one being this 1937 crown. The CGS photo which I used when deciding to purchase: The photo I took of the coin. Because the coin is low value, no great harm was done. It might be a mistake to use CGS photos when making a purchase. But I wonder if London Coins would care to comment on that? Then again people do actually pay TPGs for taking photos of their coins for later use.

I don't think the chemistry is quite like that. I think you are saying that two different metals need to be separated for corrosion to happen. However, a pure metal (iron being the one everyone knows about) corrodes or rusts in the presence of air and water. (The very boring details are: O2(aq) + 2H2O(l) + 4e- → 4OH-(aq) E = 0.4V can be the half equation for cathode for example. Since Cu2+ + 2e- → Cu has E = 0.34V which is smaller, Cu is oxidised to Cu2+ )

Pete, I didn't blame Lockdales in my post. I merely implied that I strongly suspect the carbon spot was caused by mishandling when the the was slabbed. It has been problem free for ca 70 years and a spot developing after slabbing is too much of a coincidence. Mike expressed the same view with VickySilver's crown. Obviously, nothing can be 100% proven of course.

I was about to say it might be just an honest mistake. Then I spotted this coin he is selling described as "Beautiful Toned Proof" Then again, beauty is in the eye of the beholder ...

I have brought a CGS slabbed 1937 proof crown from Lockdales using the CGS photos years ago. When I have got it, there's a carbon spot by the King's nose which is not visible in the CGS photo. The thought crossed my mind alright.

I think the term "carbon spot" probably refers to the appearance of the black spots and not to the chemical composition. i.e. carbon is black and so the spots looks like bits of carbon. Verdigris has never been called carbon spots as far as I am aware simply because it is green. "CGS should rigorously check the surfaces are speck free before sealing the slab. I think they should give a refund for this." Unfortunately, their quality control was rather poor from experience. I have used them to slab a few coins some years ago. One came back with a tiny bit of plastic on the top of the legend. Very irritating. Several slabs were scratched or had minor cracks. With regard to the1935 crown in question, it has been looked after properly for ca 70 years. Then a horrible verd spot suddenly started to develop after the CGS slabbing. I am sure the thought that CGS might have something to do with it has crossed VickySilver's mind.

I imagine the surface of a verd spot is more flaky in nature. The deposit of a tiny speck of the green stuff, can I suppose, provides a new site for another verd spot to form?

I don't know the details but agree with Diaconis that the term "carbon spots" is a misnomer. Both "carbon spots" and verdigris are substances formed in the corrosion processes of copper. Copper compounds such as basic copper chloride, copper carbonate, copper acetate etc are green and hydrated mixtures of such can be called verdigris. Other copper compounds such as sulfides are black. Silver sulfide is also black. Water is important in the corrosion of metals. One reason is that the formation of a copper compound from copper is an oxidation process and involves the loss of electrons. Water allows the movement of electrons. But I am just speaking from a general viewpoint and have never looked into this in detail.

Agreed. But the truth is that even a bronze or copper coin would not develop verd if it has been properly handled and stored. Your 1935 crown has been problem free for ca 70 year. Then presumably a bit of carelessness such as a tiny saliva spot could have started the process off.

Verdigris is damage which occurred after the minting process and so not can't be part of the minting process in my view.

I am sure the verd has developed after slabbing. CGS initially didn't grade coins even with a trace of verd. Then I think they have relaxed that rule for rare coins with very low grades like CGS4

The verd must have developed after the coin has been slabbed.

One way of removing scratches from coin slabs is breaking the slab. (Yes, I anticipated that response already) But anyway, I have brought a retro watch (1950s design) recently and it has acrylic glass instead of the usual sapphire crystal glass. I brought some polywatch for two or three pounds so that I can polish out any scratches. (Very easy to use: you put a little of the paste on the watch glass and polish with a cotton wool pad. Repeat if necessary). I tried it on a CGS slab and it worked quite well. A fairly deep scratch mark has almost disappeared in the process. But I understand that NGC use a harder plastic and might not work as well on their slabs. I have heard that some people have even tried toothpaste to remove scratches.

It's up to £1410 now. Six bidders so far. Five have 100% activity with her and made bids on 14 of her items. Three have feedbacks of 0, 0 and 1 and so all look like doggy bids. The Sixth bidder has a feedback of 201 but he has bidded on 195 items in the last 30 days. Doesn't look very promising either. So I don't think any one legit has fallen for it yet.

It is the same person that was trying to sell a replica 1888 crown. http://www.predecimal.com/forum/topic/2829-ebays-worst-offerings/?page=291&tab=comments#comment-159514 The locations of his items used to be China and Hong Kong. Now it is "multiple locations" in the UK. I don't believe the address he gave (for the very expensive jewelers Moussaieff) could possibly be his real address.

Looks like this could be the "interesting" item: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/V5-1847-MDCCCXLVIl-RARE-SOLID-SILVER-VICTORIA-GOTHIC-CROWN-UNDECIMO/123754724836?hash=item1cd05b3de4:g:2HIAAOSwzL1czC8J Will she be selling genuine 1933 pennies next I wonder?

Yes, "his" address "Moussaieff Hilton , 22 Park lane" rings a bell.

1 to 1000 would work too, as would 1 to 998, 997, 996, ..., 202 however.

The quadrum foam can stretch quite a bit and so can be used with older 50 pence and 20 pence coins with no problems. 20p has 21.40 mm diameter. Therefore use 21mm quadrum will ensure no movement. Older 50p has 30.0mm and so can use 30mm quadrum. Generally round down to the nearest mm to ensure no movement. For example I use 38mm quadrums for 38.6mm crowns. But 0.6mm stretch is more or less the limit. And yes, you should be able to use quadrums for virtually all British coins. Some sort of box is a good idea to store the quadrums. Intercept Q100 is an option. If you prefer to store your quadrums flat, then aluminium or wooden cases are available. https://www.coingallery.co.uk/s6-cargo-coin-case-with-6-quadrum-trays-3527-p.asp