Britannia47

Re dents and scratches I'm sure everyone would take care of their coins regardless of 24 or 22ct in the same way that their QBs have been cared for over the last 5 years. My proof and bullion QBs have! My latest suggestion, as an alternative to 24ct would be to add some bl...dy silver to the alloy. Look on the RM website - their sovereigns actually look PINK. I rest my case. Thought I would make a point with my 1817 and the 2017 photo re colour diffs.

I bought my first proof sovereign in 1997. I was disappointed in the colour. I didn't look like a gold coin. Even today sovereigns use all copper alloy, making the coin look reddish. Is it time for an all-gold version of the sovereign? Here are my reasons for suggesting 'Yes!' and I do understand that Tradition is a hard opponent of the argument. Alloy was added to the sovereign to make it durable in circulation - we all know that, so no need for it now. The RM has to source or refine 91.7 gold just for the sovereign. The Brits changed to 9999 gold and introduced the 9999 QBs as well - both very successfully. In the U.S. the 9999 buffalo was born, but kept the 22ct Eagle.  The Krugerrand resisted 9999 gold. I believe the demand for world wide coinage has been shrinking, perhaps quickened by Covid19 lockdowns and use of cards. Thus the RM may be looking at the collectors and bullion markets to make up future shortfalls. A 9999 sovereign could be a world beater. Would it be a QB 1/4 spec coin or a larger 7.98g coin. I don't know. Why not call it 'The New Sovereign!'  I hear silent shouts of "absolutely not!" already, but feel entitled to this opinion after 24 years collecting sovereigns... Please be nice!

Re dents and scratches I'm sure everyone would take care of their coins regardless of 24 or 22ct in the same way that their QBs have been cared for over the last 5 years. My proof and bullion QBs have! My latest suggestion, as an alternative to 24ct would be to add some bl...dy silver to the alloy. Look on the RM website - their sovereigns actually look PINK. I rest my case. Thought I would make a point with my 1817 and the 2017 photo re colour diffs.

Just a quick photo comparison of the first 1987 & the basic 2017.....
 

I've managed to collect all the special one year only Britannia designs in bullion (no bullion gold Britannia's were release in 2005 so I got the proof) so thought I'd chime in with my experience. Think supply and demand pays a huge role in this. As time goes on coins disappear into peoples collections, get melted down, forgotten in peoples attics that have sadly passed etc. It seems there are also some designs that are easier to find than other for example the 2011 is always available, I'm sure I'd be able to find one today with an online dealer. I believe I saw somewhere that it's one of the higher bullion mintage years. If you enjoy the hunt you can get lucky. I found the 2001 Britannia and the Lion with a retailer at 4% over spot which was a result. I haven't seen another one since. The 2001 and the 2018 oriental border were 2 of the the hardest to fine however the hardest barring none was the 2017 privy trident. As @richatthecroft pointed out there were only 7030 of these minted and it took months of posts on this forum and Facebook groups for someone to connect me with someone in a Facebook group I wasn't in myself to find it. The premium was probably the largest I paid but surprisingly wasn't as high as I thought it would be given the difficulty in finding
Over time I think the Philip Nathan special one year only designs (1997, 2001, 2003 and 2005) will become more sought after and continue to command large premiums in both bullion and proof, my personal favourite is the 2001. As @SilverMike said we are still early with grading in the UK (though it doesn't seem it) and there isn't many early Britannia's graded vs the more recent ones. When it comes to proof Britannia's @Clockpuncher is your man
PS - the 2007 and 2008 are in the wrong order but couldn't be bothered to take another pic 😆)

2 more pics;  this time the 1997 and 2007 Proofs (10th & 20th anniversary) Note the colour difference. 1997 is more yellow than the 2007 which is also lighter than the earlier red gold offerings. Clearly silver has been added to the alloy to achieve this, and makes these 22ct coins more attractive IMO. 
 

2 more pics;  this time the 1997 and 2007 Proofs (10th & 20th anniversary) Note the colour difference. 1997 is more yellow than the 2007 which is also lighter than the earlier red gold offerings. Clearly silver has been added to the alloy to achieve this, and makes these 22ct coins more attractive IMO. 
 

2 more pics;  this time the 1997 and 2007 Proofs (10th & 20th anniversary) Note the colour difference. 1997 is more yellow than the 2007 which is also lighter than the earlier red gold offerings. Clearly silver has been added to the alloy to achieve this, and makes these 22ct coins more attractive IMO. 
 

Just a quick photo comparison of the first 1987 & the basic 2017.....
 

Most of my gold collection, excluding silver,  platinum, and numismatic...
 

I am convinced both coins are 999.9 genuine. The photos can be misleading, with the refraction of light and shadow at different angles creating the illusion that the coins are different, especially with the intricate patterns/swirls on the fields. I have just checked 2 of my 2021 1oz Brits. from different dealers bought several months apart. One appeared slightly more yellow than the other, and both kept in plastic. Have you considered natural, but temporary discolouration which could be removed with a drop of  'Fairy Liquid' ? After use both of mine were immediately restored to the same colour. All 'pure' gold should look the same, but if the surface is unclean etc there may be perceived differences. Gold looks like Gold because basically it absorbs blue and violet in the spectrum, and reflects yellow and red, thus that lovely GOLD colour! ........

Fairly rare I think....
 

Thanks. I started collecting gold in 1997, and was attracted to virtually everything; sovereigns, proof sets, and bullion. However, I never gave much thought to premiums etc, I simply paid the going price for whatever I fancied! Probably passed the 1 kilo mark in 2017, have now stopped collecting, but still enjoy looking and following the latest on the Forum. Being an old style collector I have never bought anything as an investment, but of course would make a  substantial profit if sold. Terms such as flipping, stacking and 'exit strategies' were completely alien to me! I have never sold a single gold coin. Inadvertently, the medium to long term, if it was an investment, has worked for me without even noticing it.
By buying what you like, you might be surprised in a few years.....!
Cheers,

Hi Boys!
Being as old as the Kalashnikov Rifle I am quitting whilst ahead. The latest offerings from the RM don't excite me anymore and neither does the price of gold. Only 2 sovereign types eluded me - an Edward VII Ottawa branch and the 1855/56 'Australia' James Wyon. My collection was never part of my investment plan, but is now, as a pension supplement should I need it.  Only my 2 2021 Britannias are worth less but am too impatient to wait 'til they recover (not enough years left) Apologies to the dog - I am being buried at sea with all my gold! Enjoy your collections.

Most of my gold collection, excluding silver,  platinum, and numismatic...
 

Most of my gold collection, excluding silver,  platinum, and numismatic...
 

Most of my gold collection, excluding silver,  platinum, and numismatic...
 

Most of my gold collection, excluding silver,  platinum, and numismatic...
 

Most of my gold collection, excluding silver,  platinum, and numismatic...
 

Most of my gold collection, excluding silver,  platinum, and numismatic...
 

What's all the fuss about?!  It's difficult to have any sympathy with anyone who believes this is a real sovereign, as no attempt has been made to make it look real, IMO. However, the obverse image of Queen Victoria with the long nose is remarkably similar to  Marsh 360/361; the Sydney 1855/56 'Australia' sovereign engraved by James Wyon. This design was pretty awful as well, and 'failed to meet with approval'  In 1857 it was redesigned by James' cousin Leonard Wyon. O.K. there's a bit of sour grapes here as I don't have one in my collection! 
Not sure I blame eBay entirely for this one.

Most of my gold collection, excluding silver,  platinum, and numismatic...
 

Most of my gold collection, excluding silver,  platinum, and numismatic...
 

All U.K. proof sets, Sovereigns, Britannias and QBs are issued 'reverse' side up. That seems to be the norm. The 'obverse'  is often seen as the boring side with the Queens head! The 1989 sovereign was the exception, whereby both sides were designed by Bernard Sindall, instead of Maklouf.  Enjoy.
B47

Most of my gold collection, excluding silver,  platinum, and numismatic...