numinautilus

In @1817Karl and @Jaconet's pics I can see a clear like break if I look carefully, but the horse hair overlap it. So it seems that it's a manufacturing flaw, and the horse hairs on mine are too short to overlap the glossy divide. The Royal Mint video was very illuminating. You guys are more experienced than me on this. Does a flaw like this devalue it? I paid 25% over spot for my copy, is it worth bringing it up with the dealer? Part of me says it's the way it's made but the other part of me says it's a huge flaw. It's also not the exact coin they photographed on their site. I've taken a few more shots. One through a loupe, and another with the capsule lid off.

Thanks for the replies @Allgoldcoins @richatthecroft. Looks like you've got two different coins in your photo library - the far side pelvis looks different in your two pics. In the first photo we can see the same line break, but the horse's hair overlaps it so it isn't as obvious. It looks like on mine the hair was left short. So another question if the coin is genuine. Will such a manufacturing error take away from its value, had the error not been present or as obvious?

So I picked up a 1988 proof double sov the other day from a dealer well known and mentioned here on this forum. While inspecting it I noticed that the hair on the horse underneath St George's left hand isn't finished with the gloss section right up to the design. There seems to be a break and a hard line divide before the gloss and the hair, labelled with the green arrow in the photo. Is this normal on double sovereign proof designs from these years or in general? I haven't been able to find another example of this quirk in other photos on the internet. Could this be a dreaded fake? I know it's tiny but I can't unsee it. Will appreciate people's input.