PCGS

[ozjohn]

Noticed this one on Ebay and thought of pointing it out on Ebay's Worst. Although the price is over the top the problem with this coin is  the grading by PCGS. The coin is graded at PR 66 which is generous but the real issue is the cleaning that is apparent on the obverse

.https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1927-GREAT-BRITAIN-FLORIN-PROOF-PCGS-PR66-GEORGE-V-BRITISH-SILVER-SUPERB/324172643210?hash=item4b7a31fb8a:g:kIcAAOSwLlleXiHH

 

 

 

[oldcopper]

1 hour ago, ozjohn said:

Noticed this one on Ebay and thought of pointing it out on Ebay's Worst. Although the price is over the top the problem with this coin is  the grading by PCGS. The coin is graded at PR 66 which is generous but the real issue is the cleaning that is apparent on the obverse

.https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1927-GREAT-BRITAIN-FLORIN-PROOF-PCGS-PR66-GEORGE-V-BRITISH-SILVER-SUPERB/324172643210?hash=item4b7a31fb8a:g:kIcAAOSwLlleXiHH

Yes - and looks like an attempt to minimize the spot between OMN and REX.

 

 

 

[JLS]

7 hours ago, ozjohn said:

Noticed this one on Ebay and thought of pointing it out on Ebay's Worst. Although the price is over the top the problem with this coin is  the grading by PCGS. The coin is graded at PR 66 which is generous but the real issue is the cleaning that is apparent on the obverse

.https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1927-GREAT-BRITAIN-FLORIN-PROOF-PCGS-PR66-GEORGE-V-BRITISH-SILVER-SUPERB/324172643210?hash=item4b7a31fb8a:g:kIcAAOSwLlleXiHH

 

 

 

There's even a nick on George's ear !

I'm not sure if the hairlines are bad enough to warrant a details grade but no way is this a PR66 coin...

[Bronze & Copper Collector]

The issue in instances as this, would be more with the TPG than with the seller. Especially when the seller says to buy the coin and not the slab.

I would NOT put it in Ebays Worst.

I believe it was PROPERLY placed in the TPG section by the original poster.

Just my tuppence worth....

[JLS]

2 hours ago, Bronze & Copper Collector said:

The issue in instances as this, would be more with the TPG than with the seller. Especially when the seller says to buy the coin and not the slab.

I would NOT put it in Ebays Worst.

I believe it was PROPERLY placed in the TPG section by the original poster.

Just my tuppence worth....

Yes, agreed. 

The price is pretty high, but it's eBay. Assuming the seller would take 60-70% of the listing price as a best offer, it seems pretty reasonable supposing the coin was a super-choice 1927 proof florin. 

The seller's based in the USA, and won't have had the opportunity to handle that many of these issues compared to a UK dealer or even experienced collector. 

Plus. the best 1927 coins I've seen have been in the original set, not sold individually. Sets tend to get broken up for profit when they are unsaleable due to problems with individual coins...

Grading is all relative. There are 20th century Austrian coins I can think of where that level of hairlines etc. would still result in a really choice coin due to poor production and typical cleaning etc. I agree that it's been hairlined by cleaning, but this is often market acceptable with proof coins as long as the eye appeal is OK. The problem is that the PCGS grader seems to be totally unfamiliar with the issue, and how commonplace coins in this sort of grade are.

 

[1949threepence]

Quite obviously been cleaned. The marks are clearly visible.

Might be acceptable to some, but definitely not to me. Poor TP Grading.  

[VickySilver]

At first I was inclined to agree but have looked at this piece some more. It actually might be a 66, and here's why:

- the striations about the bust in the field are likely hairlines from die prep

- the apparent abrasions in around hair, neck, brow, cheekbone which used to bother me with these later silver larger denominations florin, HC, and crown

are actually in many instances planchet defects that were not fully struck out (planchets/flans are usually only very crudely finished and replete with many marks, abrasions, gouges, etc.) . There was an excellent recent writeup of this, but sadly I can not remember where it was & then I got to thinking and appreciate the veracity of it.

- technical grade may well be a "66" 

 

However, the aesthetics are not there IMO for these or even other reasons, and so the coin ought to be relegated down a bit by "market grading".

[Rob]

I was thinking both die prep lines and a wipe. e.g. between the date and the crown are a few lines that would be nearly impossible to produce with a wipe, but with the lines on the neck the converse would apply. i.e. it's much easier to produce such a broad section of parallel lines on the coin than to do so on the incuse die detail. Any parallel marks are almost certain to have been done at the same time, so you would somehow have to maintain a constant pressure over a wide area whilst getting into the different angled parts such as the truncation to produce these continuous parallel lines. Not conclusive, but very iffy IMO.

A good test would be to compare with other examples. After all, you have a coin with a low mintage, most of which are in decent grade, so this should be enough to find others with a similar pattern if on the die. A 66 is not critical as a 65, 64 or even a 63 should be ok to see lines on the die. As long as the surfaces are good, this should be doable.

[ozjohn]

6 hours ago, VickySilver said:

At first I was inclined to agree but have looked at this piece some more. It actually might be a 66, and here's why:

- the striations about the bust in the field are likely hairlines from die prep

- the apparent abrasions in around hair, neck, brow, cheekbone which used to bother me with these later silver larger denominations florin, HC, and crown

are actually in many instances planchet defects that were not fully struck out (planchets/flans are usually only very crudely finished and replete with many marks, abrasions, gouges, etc.) . There was an excellent recent writeup of this, but sadly I can not remember where it was & then I got to thinking and appreciate the veracity of it.

- technical grade may well be a "66" 

 

However, the aesthetics are not there IMO for these or even other reasons, and so the coin ought to be relegated down a bit by "market grading".

If you look at  the PCGS photos included with the listing it is obvious the coin has been badly cleaned and IMO should have been noted by PCGS. If a coin like this was listed in the Coin of the Week thread of these forums any number of people would  comment on the regular scratch marks like the coin shown below.

[JLS]

11 hours ago, VickySilver said:

- the apparent abrasions in around hair, neck, brow, cheekbone which used to bother me with these later silver larger denominations florin, HC, and crown are actually in many instances planchet defects that were not fully struck out (planchets/flans are usually only very crudely finished and replete with many marks, abrasions, gouges, etc.) . There was an excellent recent writeup of this, but sadly I can not remember where it was & then I got to thinking and appreciate the veracity of it.

Definitely for the currency issues, and the Wreath crowns, but I've never seen this problem with 1927 proof issues, weren't they struck from polished planchets ? 

It would seem pretty odd for the mint to polish the dies to death but use any old planchets !

[VickySilver]

I have a number of MODEL obverse and reverse patterns of the 1920-37 era, and the MODEL side show VERY POOR planchet prep, and this on matte proof presentation pieces. I may have to dig but will have a look at the non-matte silver proofs possibly later today.

 

 

LOL, John  - possibly a bit unfair to lump the OP coin with your example....I still don't see a lot to object to technically, the worst bit IMO may be an horizontal scratch at the right base of neck.

[ozjohn]

7 hours ago, VickySilver said:

I have a number of MODEL obverse and reverse patterns of the 1920-37 era, and the MODEL side show VERY POOR planchet prep, and this on matte proof presentation pieces. I may have to dig but will have a look at the non-matte silver proofs possibly later today.

 

 

LOL, John  - possibly a bit unfair to lump the OP coin with your example....I still don't see a lot to object to technically, the worst bit IMO may be an horizontal scratch at the right base of neck.

Hi Vicky I've long since upgraded this coin. As it happens with a PCGS MS 63 version which I obtained from Sterling & Curency of Fremantle, West Australia , for a good price. As it happens I brought the coin not the grade. That's the good thing with slabbed coins when the stated grade and the true grade coincide. Which is not always the case as demonstrated by the subject of this thread..

[VickySilver]

Yes, I agree, and about the OP coin as well. You can find another, slabbed or not, that will be nicer. Good.

[markflorida]

Looks like the grader was half a sleep. Obviously cleaned.