Sword

The first two wreath crowns were sold by London Coins but were not graded by CGS. The auction descriptions did mention verdigris. I think well-established verd on 0.5 silver must eventually pit the surface.

George V coins with Verd Even a "green spot" on a sterling silver coin is much more likely to something else than verd I think.

Although I agree that verd on sterling silver coins must be very rare indeed, it can sometimes be found on 0.5 silver coins. In fact, it is one thing I particular look out for when buying post 1919 George V. Uneven metal mix causing verd has also crossed my mind as a theoretical possibility. I am not saying it really happens but just as a possibility. As I understand it, uneven metal mix is not that uncommon with bronze coinage and this results in streaky toning.

1915

I have seen a George V halfcrown I would like to buy but it is flat around the harp. Would you say this is post mint damage or done during the minting process? Thanks.

If I have to guess, I would say it is possible that the coin was dipped into something and some residue was left afterwards. It certainly has a lot of luster and I am rather fond of this design

This highlights the point that desirability is not dependent solely on technical grading.

Thanks Peck. I think general weakness in that area of the reverse does make the series more interesting. It is a nice (long term) challenge to find an UNC example fully struck on both sides. Yes, I do prefer my example to this one. This is the type of coin I would not consider buying regardless of its technical grade. It is very difficult to say if the flat ear and end of mustache is due to wear or weak striking. The reverse has a lot of weaknesses too.

Do you have the cert number?

I think the question is how much does weak strike affect the grade. In the traditional strict grading, I think it would be a great deal. I think Peck once made the point that in Spink, the definition of Fine for milled coinage is "a coin that exhibits considerable wear to the raised surfaces of the design, either through circulation, or damage perhaps due to faulty striking." Nowadays, many people are happy to call a weak strike coin UNC if it is lustrous and the loss of details is not due to wear. One can argue that weak strike is part of the minting process and does not affect the grade. I have taken a stronger interest in George V coins lately and have decided not to get involve in these sort of arguments. Hence, I just won't buy a weak strike coin if I can help it. So for me I would certainly prefer your second coin. This is my example of 1917 crown. I brought it quite recently from Colin Cooke. Like yours, there is slight weakness at the top left of the shield which has almost merged with the crown. I did debate with myself if I should wait for a better struck example. However, I decided that since most 1917 are weak in that area and I might have to wait quite a long time to get fully struck example.

I am not certain there is any foul play here. After all, she has not asked at any point if anyone is interested in buying and was trying to sell it in an auction house rather than Ebay.

It was never sold by London Coins and so I guess they probably thought it was a fake.

The coin in question. The discussion on PCGS forum can be found here: https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/996983/gold-godless-florin

Don't get your hopes up as it is very unlikely that any of them are actually "rare" and worth anything more than £2 each. The writing on the edge is "right way up" for half the coins minted and "upside down" for the other half. Let's face it, if you can find several "rare" coins in a pot, then you are just as likely to find "rare" coins if you get several bags of £2 from a bank. Do post a photo if you like.

Previously was a bit like the split personality of Gollum and Sméagol Now just a bit like Gollum. Sorry, just can't resist having another poke at them now that they have officially dissolved.

It's more like they have just changed their name by deed poll rather than actual death in any case.

For the record, CGS's death certificate:

I hope it wasn't done by PCGS as they explicitly states that they will never add toning to a coin during their "restoration service".

P70 (I assume PR70) for the 1937 is a typo? Surely no George VI proof can be graded so high?

Collecting commemorative coins should be relatively straight forward. The coins are usually sealed and in mint condition and so you don't have to worry about grading. If the coins are not sealed up, then avoid touching the surfaces with your hand as you will leave finger prints. Ebay should be fine if you do your homework and know what the prices should be. Buying from auctions is another option later on. Remember, the original issue price from the Royal Mint tend to be extremely high compare to what it will sell for later on. Hence, don't overpay. I think most modern commemoratives will not increase significantly (if at all) in value over the years and so I think it is wise to allocate a "hobby budget" rather than an "investment budget" unless you are really sure about resale prices. The values of modern commenoratives are often linked to bullion prices. If you were in the armed forces, then you might one day be interested in getting coins that circulated during the times of major wars / battles. E.g. George V coins minted during WW1, George VI coins during WW2 etc. However, you need to have some understanding of grading when buying currency coins. Buying these coins from trusted dealers is often safer than from ebay until you have some experience. Happy collecting.

sold by dnw and described as "some minor staining on reverse, otherwise about extremely fine with a hint of original colour Sold by Atlas and graded PCGS MS63BN

I think he does read the posts on this forum as the grade was changed and extra photos were posted soon after these issues were mentioned here. No change yet in the price though I just don't think there is any point asking for outrageous prices on ebay. It is just wishful thinking and one would only manage to stink up his reputation making as a result.

The (initial) official CGS policy was to reject coins with even a trace of verdigris. However, later on, they decided to slab and accept rare varieties with even lots of verdigris if the grades are VERY LOW. Why the change of heart? I guess CGS wanted to recognise that such coins can have significant value even with verd. But in reality, I think it was very possible that they bent the rules to accommodate coins being sold at their auctions. The alleged conflict of interest has been mentioned so many times before.

I am just saying it is not possible to lie about the coin being graded as Fine by CGS if the grade of CGS10 is shown on the CGS photo / label.