Jump to content
  • The above Banner is a Sponsored Banner.

    Upgrade to Premium Membership to remove this Banner & All Google Ads. For full list of Premium Member benefits Click HERE.

paulmerton

Silver Premium Member
  • Posts

    3,615
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3
  • Trading Feedback

    100%
  • Country

    United Kingdom

Posts posted by paulmerton

  1. Just now, BullionBuyerUK said:

    So far, that's 1, 6, 7, and 8 all on this forum. Perhaps we should start a "pieces of 8" secret group!  

    And 5.

    I suspect most of the sales were a result of me posting it on here! One of them may have already been sold in the US auctions, not sure.

    If you look at what happened with the pig privy britannias (which were also produced for a pension fund), I wouldn't be surprised if these gold tenths are already worth somewhere in the region of 700-1000.

  2. 5 minutes ago, cjbcomm said:

    Not certain what they released in 2022 but be useful to check out. The 1/10th and 1/2 were interesting as the GS doesn't appear to have been released at any time in these denominations. 1 Oz were only proofs previously I think and plenty of 1/4's.

    Will try and find out what exactly they issued in 2022 and keep an eye out for a 1/10th in the future if anyone sells

    It would be nice to know what happened to the others, if there are any. With the unreleased Roosevelt and Churchill coins, it's known that all minted were sold to a US pension fund and haven't been available on the open market since. Could be the same for these gold standards.

  3. 48 minutes ago, oddball said:

    i saw pauls post and just took a a punt.it seemed good value. think i owe him a beer. 

    Very rude of them to not send me #1 when I ordered first and then helped them sell out :D

    On a serious note though, I don't think a #1 is worth any more than the others in the context of the Trial of the Pyx (I consider myself non biased as I also have a #1 (different coin obviously!)). There are at most 10 of each coin and the numbering is arbitrary (merely to uniquely identify them) and doesn't relate to order of mintage - all of the coins were mixed in the same paper envelope at some point.

    On the other hand, I still regret not just buying them all myself 🤣

  4. 19 minutes ago, James32 said:

    Especially as it was there discount code that caused ( in their opinion) an imbalance of total. Add in the fact items were still above spot, then there's no way it falls on buyers. ROYAL MINT can get knotted.

    Did this one even need a discount code? I thought it was automatic on any 2+ items.

  5. 8 minutes ago, westminstrel said:

    I recall the COAs of the SotD Sovereigns were actually hand signed in ball point pen. 

    Yes, the platty joobs SOTD sovereigns were hand signed by Gavin Elliott, who was the head of production at the time.

    The SYO ones were hand signed by Graeme Smith, who was the Queen's Assay Master.

    Last year's SYO BU Britannias were hand signed by Anne Jessopp (I think).

    The logistics of the trial coins being sent off to America to get graded probably made it tricky to do real hand signed one.

  6. This is the first time the Trial of the Pyx coins have been sold pre-slabbed, thus introducing us to bizarre new grading terms such as "Brilliant Proof".

    But one thing that has niggled me throughout this launch is that each coin says it's housed in a display holder which features a handwritten signature by Anne Jessopp:

    image.png.2e7cd6c6e50a1a9a45b9a307bb35eafa.png

    I know many of us here are big fans of her, so I can see the appeal of this selling point.

    However, all of the capsules clearly say that it's a facsimile signature:

    image.png.c08e063d9e6817a86aca074fcd7e6d40.png

    There is another signature on the back of the packaging it comes in, but that is also printed.

    I guess the signatures must have been hand written at some point, but it feels like they're pushing the boundaries of truth here!

     

  7. 1 minute ago, Esjayc said:

    1982 half sovereign. Not sure what may have caused this 'smooth' impression, near the '1' in the date...?

    Looking carefully, it's also visible on part of the ground, near the broken spear of St George.

    The obverse looks normal, and it's not an ex-mount/ex-jewellery.

    Any thoughts?

    IMG_8349.jpg

    IMG_8350.jpg

    IMG_8351.jpg

    IMG_8352.jpg

    It could plausibly be a strike-though error.

×
×
  • Create New...

Cookies & terms of service

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. By continuing to use this site you consent to the use of cookies and to our Privacy Policy & Terms of Use