ozjohn

The original coin in question which started this thread was a modified effigy florin that does not have the minting problems that make the grading associated with the earlier George V issues difficult. So lets compare apples with apples before going into raptures defending CGS and admit they are a crap TPG.

Nice coins. My grades with reference to Rotographic Grading British Coins; 1817 EF/aEF weak reverse shield 1911 aUNC 1912 EF 1913 EF/aUNC 1916 UNC weak reverse shield 1918 GEF+ 1919 UNC

Seems to describe CGS's MO with George V coins.

Good luck with the grading results. I think you have more confidence in CGS than I have.

That's your opinion pwa 1967 however the strand is TPG Discussions. A fitting place for comments such as mine on the subject of CGS grading as they are a TPG. Which is the whole point of a forum such as this. If you do not agree with my comments then perhaps you could point out the finer points of grading that make the subject coin comply with its stated grade rather than trying to be insulting.

Very interesting especially the collar which should help to distinguish fakes as this is the hardest part to reproduce correctly. One website whose name escapes me shows pictures of the edge of gothic crowns some with weak poorly located lettering also a wide vertical bar where the two halves of the collar meet which could not occur with this collar die. I also think if there were poor strikes in this department they would have been rejected as these coins were proofs.

Sorry I should have made it clearer the two images are of the same coin. I simply ran foul of the max upload of the forum.

Probably the best I have reverse.

Probably the best I have obverse.

Then the RM changed the alloy and the strike quality went from bad to worse until the introduction of the modified effigy coins of 1926. Grading George V silver has always been difficult. I have several halfcrowns I have collected along the way that appear "flat" on the ear, beard, eyebrow etc. and the top of the shield on the reverse and graded accordingly but until you examine the milling which can be pristine you realize you have been mistaken and you realize you have under graded the coin. If you are going for a type collection probably better to buy a 1911 proof.

What you see is normal for KGV halfcrowns of this period. With the example shown I'm not too keen on the scratches between the beard and end of the truncated neck or the small edge knocks at 6 o' clock and 7 o' clock to attract such a high grading.. As to wear if you look on the rim of the coin from about 12 o' clock to 2 o' clock you will see a raised portion of thin metal following the rim of the coin. If there had been any wear I think this portion would have worn quicker than the top of the ear indicating that the flatness on the top of the ear is probably due to the striking rather than wear. As an aside I think the milling of the coin is not given the attention it deserves when grading coins.

The plural form is used for math unless describing a particular matrix. However still doesn't excuse the mess made by the mint in turning these images into coins.

Matrices ? The only one I have heard of are the mathematical type used for solving simultaneous equations. However the pictures show a very detailed portrait of which little survives the minting process especially with George V silver coins. One other issue other than the 1911 proof set that shows much of this detail is the WW1 silver medal.

Very interesting photos of George V dies. It's a pity the finished product bears little resemblance to the original product. The only exception being the 1911 proof set.

My 1902 crown.

Hi Paulus, In the end it comes down to price v quality. They all look to be UNC coins and all UNC Edward coins command big money even dated 1902. I do not have a set but have picked up the crown, halfcrown and florin as matte proof coins over time but the Maundy, sixpence and shilling escape me along with the gold. One thing I have found with coins is as soon as you buy one that you have been looking for more always seem turn up. Then you start to ask yourself is the one better than the one I have just obtained is it cheaper etc. I think, although I know it's hard, you have to know when to stop.

Perfection. Beer o' Clock in Brisbane temperature 28 deg. C. Who can ask for more?

Never taken much notice of IS Wright auctions although I visit their shops when in Sydney or Melbourne. They still seem to have postal bids! Maybe they will move to the 20th centaury sometime in the next 84 years. Have you tried contacting IS Wright? http://www.iswright.com.au/shops.php

Checked out the poor replica 1905 halfcrown on Ebay which went for over GBP 200. Are people out of their minds? I've seen plenty of these on Ebay before that have been passed in at GBP 9.99 which was the listing price. If anyone can't spot this listing as a fake perhaps they should take up another hobby.http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/British-1905-Half-Crown-Coin-/161995770377?hash=item25b7b34a09:g:j0kAAOSwDuJW2Dcm

That was the thing that surprised me was the fact that the expert did not seem to indicate that polishing such an item with metal polish was a bad idea and should not be repeated.

I was watching Antiques Roadshow the other day and a Charles 1 medallion was being appraised. It seemed to be genuine and looked like it was gold on silver. The owner talked about how it was in a very dirty condition and he polished it with metal polish to clean it up. It was very shiny indeed.. No mention was made by the expert on the effect such cleaning would have on the value of the item in fact it seemed not to draw any comment other than it had removed some of the surface metal and would not have to do it again for a long time. As we all know this would be the worst thing that could be done to a coin and it would lose much of its value if polished. Is this true for medallions? Your comments are invited.

The finest was in inverted commas and more a dig at CGS' inconsistent grading.http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1925-George-V-Silver-Florin-Scarce-CGS-75-/252206534010?hash=item3ab8ae4d7a:g:ZPYAAOSwbdpWaIki. I'm not having a go at the seller as that's his business to sell coins. However it does show how the price is elevated once a coin has been graded. Which just goes to show buy the coin not the grading.

Perhaps you may consider a 1927 proof set for some where about GBP 800. More expensive but you get the wreath crown, halfcrown, florin, shilling, sixpence and finally threepence in a presentation case.. A type set for the third George V coinage with the bonus of the rare florin of which only 15000 were minted which was the total number of 1927 florins minted for 1727.

Another of CGS "finest" graded at 75 listed on Ebay a 1925 florin http://www.coingradingservices.co.uk/img.php?u=0034282&f=o&s=f . How this qualifies for this grade I do not know. Wear on the ear, beard and cheekbone with horrible toning on the obverse of which I do not know wasn't rejected on by CGS. However the reverse is better but still with the horrible uneven toning. I don't know about CGS but lustre and eye appeal are part of the PGS grading procedure.

PS I would not submit my coins to CGS if they were the last grading service on earth. They are rubbish entirely devoted to their commercial interests via London Coins. Various people on this forum suggest submitting coins to these people for ascertaining that they are not fakes etc. without any proof as to their expertise in this area. I would treat their pronouncements with caution as I would with their grading.