Sword

Many thanks for your reply VS!

Am I correct to assume that the "normal" Victorian Maundy sets are also specimens? How close are they to proof standard?

Many thanks for sharing your experience VS! It is really surprising to me that some collectors would pay so much money for a coin that is likely to have been dipped.

Very true and hence I never use a flash to take photos of coins. But for this particular coin, the auction description does state it has "some light hairlines"

the reverse

I too prefer coins to look their age and get suspicious with a blazing white 19th century proof coin. But nevertheless, I still don't understand why that coin was sold for so much. Has someone just pay way over the top on this occasion or do blazing white proof coins with reflective fields always sell for a lot more (for right or wrong reasons)? Just out of interest, I brought this one for £420 + juice a couple of years back. (Probably paid a little too much then and I concede the toning on the reverse is not great looking. But it has no obvious hairlines)

I noticed that in the last LCA, a 1935 raised edge proof crown (described as "nFDC with some light hairlines and retaining full original mint brilliance") realised £850. This seems to a lot of money to me especially with the coin having hairlines. If this coin is toned (and so the mint lustre is less obvious), I think it will only sell for about half that amount. I know I sound very naïve for asking this question but are untoned proof coins a lot more desirable than toned?

Many thanks for your thoughts and advice gents. Yes, it is the CGS variety 07 (Roman I). Looking with a loupe at the places you suggested, I think the bottom right of the curve is slightly double struck. I can just make out a tiny bit of left serif to the letter J (very faint). So I now assume the broken J means broken left serif to J.

1888 photo

I have recently brought two double florins from LCA. The 1887 was described by cgs as a new "variety" with "Broken J in J.EB." The 1888 is just a standard variety. I just can't see what exactly is broken with the J in the 1887. Photos of both coins are shown. Any ideas?

Thanks guys Yes, they are CGS photos (but I brought the coins raw)

One possibility is that the auction house has received another commission bid of the same amount as yours. In this situation, the bid received first has priority.

Won two lots this time. Both under my max bids by £10 and £20.

Many auction houses reserve the right to bid on behalf of the seller up to the reserve price. So if a high reserve have been set, the auctioneer can start at your highest bid (if it is the same or less than the reserve) I guess.

Probably on Monday I think. They have been very prompt with publishing hammer prices in the last few auctions. I am rarely lucky with proxy bids in auctions. The lots I won were usually at my max bids. The few I got below my max bids have issues not apparent from the photos. The descriptions in LCA are generally rather good though. Made two bids this time.

Two of my most colourfully toned coins.

The coin is currently being offered on Ebay for $4495 and the item is in the US. http://www.ebay.com/itm/1483-85-England-Silver-Groat-4P-Coin-S-2156-Richard-III-NGC-VF-20-Scarce-AKR-/201075752106 His cheap trick would surely fool no one.

I didn't think it was quite EF either, but my grading experience is decidedly limited. I would like to get a really good unc double florin at some point.

A few years back, cgs offered the option of no photo (for 2 or 3 pounds less) if the value of the coin was less than £200. However, they have removed that option and photograph every coin now. I agree with Dave. There is no point in sending it back to cgs as it is impossible to prove who is at fault. If the photo shows the edge knock, then cgs will say it was like that when you submitted it and it has already been taken into account when the grade of 82 was given. If photo shows no edge knock, then it is just as likely that NGC has caused the damage when taking the coin out of the holder. NGC would of course say it was done by cgs.

No you didn't - you meant holey dollar Try again. Third time lucky. Thanks Rob

I meant holely dollar of course.

Talking about the Land of Aus, I think there is a holy dollar on display too. But I could be wrong and saw the dollar in the British Museum instead.

Yes, it is part of the B of E Building.

I had a spare hour yesterday in London and dropped into the Bank of England Museum. It is a small museum but has some good displays including sets of coins for each monarch (from QEII to W&M) + some hammered coins. The coins were stored in wooden display cases with glass tops which allowed close viewing. Highlights include 1935 gold crown, Charles I Pound, circulated 1839 £5 etc.

I really like Nick's and Mark's examples. This is from the FAQ section of the CGS Forum: "When grading a whole range of attributes are considered. Although a coin may have the appearance of being brilliant uncirculated without any apparent blemishes, if the striking is not exact and deep it could end up with a grade of VF45 something that can frequently occur with early Victorian Bronze pennies yet many dealers and collectors would assume the coin to be uncirculated. That is the point of the CGS service, if a coin is determined to be UNC80 then it will be worth at least the common catalogue value for UNC. When it is higher grade it is likely to be higher value that any catalogue would suggest." Looks like CGS has not always been consistent when it comes to strike.