ozjohn

If you don't like an alternative view don't read it! Judging by the amount of posts on this matter I would think there are more dissatisfied customers of CGS than satisfied ones. Are you connected in some way to CGS as you seem to be quick to defend them?

Take your point that pictures can be deceptive Here's a proof 1911 HC (ungraded) I have which in life is shiny with little toning. Still not impress with CGS however.

This one won CGS 75 in the CGS lottery. It's dated 1911 and similar in condition to the one submitted by Nonmortuus which won CGS 65! Pick a figure and declare all care but no responsibility. My advice forget CGS and if you need a TPG go to the US ones PGS etc.

You make CGS sound like a lottery not a serious TPG which is just about right.

How the 1912 HC achieves a higher grade than the 1919 HC beats me. Too many inconsistencies to comment on them all I never had any coins graded by CGS before the GBP 400 ripoff and even more unlikely to use their services now. However I hold some CGS in my collection but I try to buy the coin rather than what CGS says about it. Also I think the cost of using CGS is tending to push up prices as people who have coins graded to sell them will try to recover their costs in submitting coins to CGS.

This may help https://goldsovereigns.co.uk/fakes.html plenty of info here on fake sovereigns.

Hi Paulus the seller was starling 69. Assuming that's you thanks for the coin it was a reasonable price and a nice grade. I already had one from the short 1911 set I have. This one is for the date run I am trying to collect.

Nice Azda jubilee florins are a very difficult series to collect. Plenty of double florins in the higher grades however the florins are conspicuous by their absence.

Previously you could look the coin up on the old CGS site via its UIN serial # and see the photo CGS took plus their description of the coin thus confirming it has been graded by CGS. Which was one of the useful things CGS used to do in order to support their product now as far as I am aware a service no longer provided.

Also the horse's tail seems to be too far from the rim and the dragon's claws seem to be just claws whereas in the genuine article there are pads on the feet more like a cat rather than a lizard.

Snap. I just received this one today CGS 85 seems they did not reject this one on account of the toning. Pity I cannot check it on London Coins Web site without paying.

EF seems a fair grading for this coin. It shows the usual weak strike in the center of the shield and slight wear on the edge of the drapes with the LHS showing more. Slight wear to the ear and hair on the obverse.

http://wybrit.com/Museum/Florin%20Catalogue_6.htm. Found this site that may be of some use as it shows a selection of George V florins along with their grading according to the author. The 1914 florin shown in Nick's post is by far the best example of this series I have seen and must have been struck early in the die's life.

What is the condition of the milling? The fields of the coin seem to have a fair amount of lustre and the lower lions, harp , and RH lion seem pretty good. The king's head is deeply struck hence the ghosting on the reverse. However on the obverse the ear and beard are weak but the eyebrow seems to be struck which along with the ear is one of the first areas to wear. I think the flattening on the ear and beard are mostly due to a weak strike.

Good luck the mint quality of the florins seems worse than the halfcrown. Just looking at one of my 1912 florins in light of your post and decided it was a little worse than yours flatter ear but the reverse is about the same as yours. One thing that struck me (excuse the pun) was the milling which is almost pristine as is the edge of the milling where it meets the struck faces of the obverse and reverse of the coin which indicates to me that the main problem with higher grades of this series of florins is the strike quality. I have seen plenty of CGS 75 examples of these coins with the lions at 12 o' clock almost non existent flat ear lobes etc. Apart from the 1911 proof the strike quality was poor until 1924 with a bit of an improvement for the 1921 issues.

Many of the 1937/38 crowns appear to have had some signs of circulation in my opinion. No one chucks a relatively high value coin in the back of a draw for prosperity in the middle of a depression! One that hit Australia particularly hard. A friend of mine who's father was a SP bookie asked me to look at a load Australian silver coins this hoard included crowns, shillings, sixpence and three pence some Unc but mostly circulated.

Crowns were issued in Australia for the years 1937 and 1938. Although many were saved at the time a significant amount show signs of been circulated. Having said that they were not very popular as they made holes in pockets due to their size. Earlier British issues circulated during their time as would the double florins.

An early 1940s florin I noticed graded by CGS and given 78 UIN 0024675 which shows wear in the center of the rose. I think the 1940 florin which is the subject of this thread has significantly less wear in the center of the rose. Seems to me once a coin has been third party graded nobody looks at the coin anymore and the grading is taken as gospel. img.php-u=0024674&f=r&s=f.url

I think a lot of patience is required as the only fully struck center I have ever seen on a George VI is on the 1937 proof florin otherwise they mostly seem a little weak in the center of the rose. The later issues, 1944 to 1946, seem to be better struck. As for the CuNi issues I don't know as I do not collect them.

Recently I visited the Royal Australian Mint (RAM)in Canberra where you could observe the coin minting process from public viewing galleries which also house the RAM's museum. Given the treatment of the coins during the minting process ( dropping large amounts blanks and coins from a height, falling onto conveyer belts etc.) it is no supprise coins leave the mint in less than perfect condition, scratches, surface marks and minting errors. It seems to me if the criteria for uncirculated is how the coin left the mint then uncirculated is a very wide spectrum. The coin illustrated was sold as UNC on Ebay to me for GBP 10.00 and probably is if the above definition is accepted. However it would be nice to be able to obtain an example of this coin with out the surface marks these are indeed very rare and hard to come by.

I do not know what peace of mind you get with a 3rd rate company like CGS. Trust your instincts when buying and if it has been graded by a TPG buy the coin not the assigned grade. For grading yourself use the Rotographics book. The whole world has been bamboozled by micro grading telling the difference between MS62 and MS 63 is very much in the subjective area

Never had any issues. Bucks' Coins always seem to offer high quality merchandize.

Thanks.I also have a matte proof florin and crown which I have already posted.

Thanks Paulus your coin ain't too bad either. The picture I posted was scanned using an Epson photo scanner. I found that they looked better when in a capsule because when the coin was scanned when placed directly on the glass plate the highest points appeared more flattened than they were.

My 1902 matte proof halfcrown.