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.

LawrenceChard

Business - Platinum
  • Posts

    6,090
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20
  • Country

    United Kingdom
  • Trading Feedback

    0%

Everything posted by LawrenceChard

  1. We done for calling it flatware. Technically knives are cutlery, whereas forks and spoons are flatware. 😎
  2. I'm still waiting for gold to go back down to $35! I see from our chart here: https://www.chards.co.uk/platinum-price/ounce/gbp/10-year that there was dip in April 2020, which I remember, but the solid line on the chart only just dips below £600. While the shaded part shows a drop to around £460, this may have been out of hours trading. We were not able to buy any at that sort of price level at the time. Platinum is a relatively thin market compared with gold. So, yes you probably did imagine £400! 😎
  3. You click-baited me there! When I saw "Silver cutlery, goblets", I thought the thread was going to be about Silver cutlery and goblets. Turns out is it about silver plated stuff. It's rather like being offered a Ferrari, but fiinding out it's a Fiat. Here is a pile of hallmarked sterling silver cutlery: Much of if is George III or William IV, but probably not worth much more than its silver content. Most silver plated stuff is likely to be worth very little. Most people seelling any onebay are likely to be asking about 10x what it is worth. Sorry if most of this sounds rather negative, but it is an honest, and probably accurate, opinion. 😎
  4. There seems to be a strong link between die cracks and the first 1 in 1871. I wonder if any of those are from the same die. 😎
  5. You mentioned spoons? If those are teaspoons, I will be taking most of them home. 😎
  6. Yes, dies clashes were frequent on shilelds, some more obvious than others. It will not have helped die longevity! 😎
  7. Interesting 1871 Victoria Shield Sovereign 1 Over 1? Die Number 25 The first "1" in the date has a die crack running from its top right, which is mildly interesting but not too unusual, but at the bottom left there seems to be a mis-placed "1" which has been overstruck. It could be just another die crack, which would be disappointing. I received a message "Lawrence Chard any comments on this? That 2 looks blobby!" Indeed it does, but I think that's all, just a blobby numeral! 😎
  8. Sounds like a good idea, and a great offer. Ask if you can bring your wife or girlfriend along to hold the coins. Does @DrDave also shoot "raw"? 😎
  9. Quite a few people have recently reported concerns about the actual diameter of gold sovereigns, or half sovereigns. It is not something that I have paid particularly close attention to in the past. This is probably because when looking for fakes, there are much more important things to watch out for, and I have always been aware that there is some tolerance. I commented recently that I should check what the stated tolerances are, but meanwhile I would not worry much about yours. Interestingly, I just noticed that Wikipedia incorrectly states the diameter as 20.0 mm: Sovereign (British coin) Diameter 22.0 mm Thickness 1.52 mm Edge Milled (some not intended for circulation have plain edge) Composition .917 gold, .083 copper or other metals The Royal Mint do state it correctly: The Sovereign 2020 Gold Bullion Coin Specification Value Diameter 22.05mm and so do Chards: Sovereign Technical Specifications Diameter (Millimeters) 22.05 Weight (Grams) 7.988 Alloy (Carats) 22 Fineness (millesimal) 916.6 Actual Gold Content (Grams) 7.322 Actual Gold Content (Troy Ounces) 0.2354 Although Wikipedia is often a good source of information, I often find errors there when it comes to coins. 😎
  10. Thanks for the mention.1 That's at least one TSF member who won't be asking about free postage. 😎
  11. Also: https://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Pastresults&auc=171&searchlot=1797&searchtype=2 https://www.svcollector.com/en/sovereigns/1843-victoria-sovereign-narrow-shield-variety-xf45-pcgs.html 😎
  12. Seems like they are getting common: https://www.royalmint.com/our-coins/ranges/historic-coins/historic-sovereigns/1843-Victoria-Gold-Sovereign-narrow-shield-variety/ Graded by PGCS XF45 Price:£18,600.00 😎
  13. He could have more than one 1964 sovereign, or he could be playing aome sort of dodgy game. IMO, it is always including a link to his listing, his ebay page, or both, so members can find it/him, and form their own opinions. Many years age (!5?), we used to sell on ebay, ususlly only things we had many of, so once one auction finished, we listed another one. One buyer, seeing our relist, gave us a negative feedback, accusing us of reselling "his" coin which he had just "won". Possibly because I am using a smaller screen than usual, I misread the OP as 1964 sovereign, I see it is an 1864! Would be more unusual to have more than one of those, for most people at least. 😎
  14. That's a very good interpretation. Sorry, I did the OP too quickly, and also used Doug's filename. Sure it is the new lens which will be making the difference, but we would have been using it with the new camera. 😎
  15. Here the the camera and lens: The lens is the new Canon RF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM, which does macro at 1.4:1, compared with normal 1:1, so our new macro shots will be 40% bigger. It pairs with the camera. Our old or existing kit was Canon 5D with Canon EF 100mm F2. 8L Macro IS lens. We will see more of the differences over the next week or so as we get to do more work with it. 😎 Yes, but see below: 😎
  16. I agree with you. Possibly early strike, and does look prooflike, 😎
  17. We just got a new Canon R5 DSLR camera, and here is a quick pair of comparison shots to highlight an instant difference: This could be interesting for anyone wanting to do high quality coin photography. "Lawrence Chard no chromatic aberration. Wow! I'm hoping the camera didn't remove this when processing the jpg - I doubt it....so 100% results are not in ...just yet..." More to follow 😎
  18. They are not spoons, they are our banqueting goblets!😎
  19. Don't upset @SemolinaPilchard 😎
  20. We do have some .925 hallmarked silver spoons, GIII, WIV, etc 😎
  21. 1919-L London Mint Fake Gold Sovereign - Non Existent Date Mintmark Combination I recently posted a new topic / thread about a genuine 1919-P sovereign which had some interesting features. Yesterday I encountered a 1919-L fake sovereign, which was easy to detect visually as an obvious counterfeit. Obverse: Niton test results: The obverse reading for gold was too low at 90.2%, but the reverse was too high at 93.2% The differential between the two readings is itself significant, as it suggests imperfect mixing of the alloy, which would almost certainly never happen with genuine coins. The silver content was also suspiciously low, as most sovereigns of this period would have about 0.3% to 0.4% silver content. 😎
  22. Is there any detailed information how any of this affected metal prices, which presumably included silvr and gold! 😎
×
×
  • 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