kimchi

Weren't there two - and no-one came forward to having got one? I seem to recall Chards at the time being very keen for someone to do so, but alas we never heard from the lucky recipients.

If 'half a sovereign' is OK (and I think we are agreed it is) how would you insert 'proof' into the phrase?

I think that you are right I'd just add that 'half a sov' in Victorian times, (it was revisting Sherlock Holmes that alerted me to the fact it was correct common parlance in the 1890s), may not actually mean a half sovereign, but a sum equivalent to - in the same way that while I would say I owe someone a tenner, I may in fact e.g. give them two fivers instead. I just found it interesting because you picked up @ant1882 on 'half proof sov' (when I think anyone would know what was meant), and I wondered what people at the time would have called them, and if that 'slip' would have been 'acceptable'

Lawrence, what do you think about the contemporary use of the phrase 'half a sovereign' when sovereigns were circulating currency? For example, 'I'll give you half a sovereign for it'.

I thought the reverse design had already been announced in The Gazette as The King's Arms?

I thought they would go to £675 myself (as crazy as even that sounds to me, as I roll it around my bonce) but wouldn't be surprised at £695 at all. Good news for all the recent most desirable QEIIs of course (though I'd argue that is most of them). Shocking how they can (and do) change 'past, sold out' prices to make it look like new releases are no different.

It worked loads of times for MJ!

Gloves off for poured silver - play with it in the hand until it gets warm and enjoy the thrill of it!

A few questions if you don't mind helping please Do you need to video the parceling up and sending etc, just in case? I know you have years of experience on feebay, so what do you do if you spot a potential dodgy transaction? For example, if a winner on an auction rings alarm bells - just cancel it?

There will be good money to be made initially from flipping I am sure, but I am too lazy for that 🤣

Whatever nonsense they pull with other coins, above all else, they will want the first Charles Sov to be a huge success. I don't expect too much mucking around with mintages (there will after all be huge demand), but I do expect them to be very expensive. Personally I'm out already - not interested. I will just sit back and watch my QEII collection appreciate in value, that's enough for me

How much???

Shocking.

Perhaps it's just me, but I would prefer to have 'dirty Bertie's' beard than Willy's.

Ah that's fine, thanks - all understood You obviously don't get the same google results as I do - but then you do know it's tailored to your own search history, etc (and what your 'smartphone' eavesdrops on)? The images I pulled out (no pun intended!) would make @HerefordBullyun blush (possibly - but then, maybe, his recommendations that is why I got them in the first place - ? ).

No idea why that would be...

It'll be interesting to see if Brian Jones is on it (I'd be surprised if Jagger would allow it). Absolutely there will be imvho! Pink Floyd too. They need to reinvigorate a waning series, and surely The Beatles have been the 'main attraction' everyone expected for the start!

I am not sure why you responded 'laugh' at my previous comment @LawrenceChard Thanks Lawrence, that's what I thought I don't think I implied that he'd have to continue wearing it though, or it would be on his portrait on coinage (?). I have said for years on here that he would not be 'pictured' crowned. I meant it only as a genuine question about the ritual and ceremony compared to the coin design. On a lighter note, I'm also now very confused what a 'Coronatiom' is. I did google it to try to find out but only got a page full of some very rude pictures, which I am sure wasn't what you meant

I thought I'd read that Charles will be coronated with the 'Edward (the first) crown' which was made for Charles II upon the Restoration in 1661. If so, am I confusing heraldry with ritual?

Excellent points @westminstrel and @foinikas! There will be a range of views on this of course, and no 'right' or 'wrong' (though there will be a 'majority' move, which is an interesting topic I think in itself) You have helped clarify things for me (it's good to talk!) as to where I think I presently stand. I was a collector of recent modern QEII proof and (certain) DPLs e.g. SotD. And I think that is what collectors will now concentrate on. The Sovereign under Charles could continue for another twenty or so years, and that is too deep for my pockets, plus I have no stress going forward if I consolidate my collection now @refero has also made some excellent points from a different perspective, if I do get anything I am currently inclined to only the 'main Sovereigns' next year. While all eyes are on that, I think it's an excellent time to look for added value in all the different QEII Sovs (and there are many 'sleepers' imo - for now! - we have been lucky enough to have).

I'm with you (even thinking about stopping collecting modern Sovs now). I was planning on getting the first year of Charles before I finished my collection, but this puts me in a quandary, as I'll also feel I have to buy the following year for the first St George. I'd rather not buy tbh, but... The two heralds back to back make perfect sense and will be an incredible 'twinset' and a bit of a banker imo. The worry there is all the variations and whatnot the Mint will pull

I might be wrong (if so please correct me) but I think I paid over £600 (£630?) from the Mint when they 'stealth dropped' the second lot (albeit it only a few) for the 2022. I wouldn't be surprised at that price, but I don't think I'll be buying myself.

I agree somewhat with this, and it was a beyond 'cheeky' move by the Mint, but I'm very glad to have it, it's one of my favourite bullion coins. Probably it should have been marketed a bit differently - the Completer is a lame marketing tagline. I'd have simply called it The Queen's Beasts (not sure what else it could be called?) and released it as a separate (but obviously complementary) product. I can see why but it sucks there is no 1/4 gold. Bit of a slap in the face, that (again only because of the marketing).

One is a merciless predator, a vicious and deadly efficient killing machine, who would eat a small child for breakfast. The other one grew up singing Hakuna Matata

Lovely work as always!