Nordle11
-
Posts
2,852 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
66
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Downloads
Store
Gallery
Articles
Posts posted by Nordle11
-
-
I would also agree that the die was fixed in the wrong place and didn't rotate during strikes, but when they start with new dies they'll run a few samples first to make sure this sort of thing doesn't happen, I can't see them putting in a new die pair, pressing go and just walking away. Could be that the worker picked up the first few, saw it was wrong, corrected the dies, then just chucked the couple he picked up into the pile with the rest of the 'good' ones because that seems to be the extent of 'quality control' at the RM.
Maybe he was being altruistic, knowing collectors like this sort of thing?
-
37 minutes ago, Sleepy said:
Looking at CCGB 2016 about the 1954 penny it states that one was found in change and is now in the BM, and another was sold by Rasmussen for £37,500 in 2006. So it may be that the Empire 1963 and Spink 1991 are different coins and that would explain the different toning. Don't know where Chris gets his info from so he might have some more.
I think this has been put to bed now, there's only one 1954 (that we know of) and all pictures we've seen here are of the same coin, as evidenced by the scratch by the forehead, scratch across the trident and the dent by the E.
-
Thank you for copying them all into one, that makes for much easier comparing
so I reckon it's the way the picture is taken, scan or photo. The scans are taking the lustre out of it. The scratch by the head does it for me, although hard to see in your photo, can you see it with the photo in hand?
-
1
-
-
Just now, 1949threepence said:
The indentation on the E is present on all three - my pic not being good enough to show the scratch. So it's definitely the same coin. Odds against those identical flaws being present on two coins being astronomical.
But how do you expain the loss of lustre, Matt?
Wouldn't the scan do that? Which one are we looking at that has lustre (sorry I'm out of the loop atm)
-
I see Bernie already mentioned the scratch, surely cased closed?
-
For reference.
-
1
-
-
Sorry guys but that's the same coin. Scratch by Britannia's forehead/helmet plume confirms it.
-
What a nice surprise! Thank you for sharing that Mike.
-
1
-
-
I have never bought and, unless ridiculously rare and only known to be available in very low grades, never will buy anything without seeing a picture first. The only exception to the rule is one coin from yourself, but that is because I trusted your judgement and know you have a good eye for good coins, having bought plenty from you before.. Pictures really seal the deal for me, I've had to stop buying so much from Guy because I just can't browse his collection so feely anymore.
-
14 minutes ago, PWA 1967 said:
What is the buisness opportunity ?
The people in the Uk just want nice coins at a sensible price .
Its not rocket science and if that means they pay 5% more they wont lose any sleep.
I.e. dealer says Unc £100......Slabber says unc £105.
Take your pick
For me, I don't pay much attention to what the seller says a coin is, I want to see the pictures first before I decide and I'll decide if it's good enough or not... but, I can't on the CGS slabbed coin (obviously the seller can download and send you the picture but it's a little bit time consuming asking for individual pictures all the time). Maybe they're both UNC and both CGS 80, but one has a much weaker strike than the other.. you don't know until you see it. That and everyone is a little different, I don't particularly go for toned coins, whereas a nice chocolatey covering does it for some people. Both UNC though..
-
Jesus christ I need to check for post updates before submitting my own
-
1 minute ago, mhcoins said:
LCGS / CGS isnt really a third party impartical grading company, it is london coins grading mainly their own and their customers coins.
That's what Jaggy was getting at with his comment about having presence outside of LCA for slabbing
-
2 minutes ago, PWA 1967 said:
I think you will find Jaggy the number of UK users on this forum who have looked at that or are bothered is ..........Zero.
LOL hadn't seen this while typing, make that one
-
1 minute ago, jaggy said:
Yes, agreeing.
NGC have an online 'registry' with 'custom' sets and 'competitive' sets where collectors and/or dealers can showcase their coins. From what I have seen of it, some of them clearly use that as an online marketplace.
Yes I've seen and used that before, it's very handy and for rainy days it makes good browsing. This is the sort of thing I think they would work well in if they could offer it for free, that and verification for non-paying members. Don't they also have NGC approved dealers too?
-
I'll assume agreeing, in which case, yes, keeping it free for the buyers to browse potential purchases will keep the sellers slabbing and registering. They wouldn't do bad to create a central location where many sellers come together and buyers can browse their wares through their collections.
-
4 minutes ago, jaggy said:
It is coin buyers that drive the business. If buyers demand authentication, grading and slabbing and are willing to pay a premium for that then sellers - both individuals and dealers - are effectively forced to play along. You make it easy for the buyers and you make your money from sellers.
For some reason I can't read this one way or the other, are you agreeing or disagreeing? Long day, sorry
-
16 minutes ago, jaggy said:
I have come to the conclusion that third party grading is here to stay and that the market, even in the UK, is gradually beginning to demand that.
Like I said above, nothing wrong with CGS trying to get into that market. I just think that they have done a rather poor job of so doing. The big two have a dominant market presence in the USA and not just with Heritage. The good dealers provide the certificate number so that the buyer can independently validate that the coin is what it is. At some point, they will expand into the UK and that will kill CGS if they have not established a robust market presence outside of London Coins.
If I were running CGS, I would do three things right away. The first is that I would adopt the US numerical grading system so that there is no confusion for the buyer. The second is that I would make certificate lookup free so that a buyer can independently check the authenticity of a coin. And the third is that I would reduce prices for submissions in order to build market share. That of course will take some capital investment which they may or may not have.
Cannot agree more with that statement, it's a bit difficult to break into a market while effectively shutting yourself out to non-paying members. The business they will get from making that service free will absolutely counter the loss they take from having their members use it to sell their own coins (which is why I assume they made this a chargeable service).
I found the lookup excellent and used it almost daily, but due to the change to paid only service (sans any information/notice) and some questionable practices at LCA that I've seen over the years, I don't want to pay for the service out of principal.
-
bloody hell they're estimating 23,5 hours delivery time
-
9 minutes ago, azda said:
Yes you're right Matt, they do like their slabs, maybe the number on it was the reason
Well, it's at the airport now, i'm tracking it on the fedex site, my jaw dropped when he said 24hrs, it was no 10 euros postage though
I bet
Interested to know if it arrives in 24 hours, or at least close to that.
-
24 hours is nuts, I can just about get that from mainland Spain to.. mainland Spain
.
American collectors always prefer the slabs though, right? Maybe they were considering it before and then the slab helped them over the edge..
-
Maybe they set up they're magnifying glass above it to check and left it in the sun accidentally
-
-
1 minute ago, Nick said:
It must be an easy mistake to make. Same office, same people, same job...
PS. Loving your signature tag line Matt.
Haha thanks. I was considering another level - "There are only 10 types of people in this world - those who understand binary, those who don't and those who just realised this joke is in base 3."
Get it?
-
1
-
-
Remember I'm only talking about the company change, I'm not on about the grades they supply, the consistency in grading, the photo quality, the people who use the service or anything else, I'm talking about the fact that they handled this change of name and fees in a very bad and sloppy way, giving little to no information to anyone who regularly uses them and changing their minds 3 to 4 times (while I assume some people have paid different fees, depending when they signed up after the change) about what they want to charge.
There's one thing to say 'We are a grading company', and another to say 'Our graded coins will get more money if you put them in our specific auction, where we will take a fee for grading and then a fee for selling'. Even the most venerated of people still have friends
1851 D over D farthing ? big price
in Confirmed unlisted Varieties.
Posted
I think some of us here were speaking about the practice before, I would do this in the instance that the starting bid is not 99p, so if the start price is 14.99 or something, put a couple of bids on (15, 15.10, 15.20) and when people are glancing, they'll see 3/4 bids and at 14.99. At a glance that seems like a few interested parties already, and even if it puts just one person off from looking then it's done the job.
However 99p starts it's obvious that it's the same person putting multiple bids down.