TeaTime

Why would they even add a buyer’s premium?
I have limited knowledge and experience of auctions, but my understanding was always that a buyer’s premium is added because 100% of it goes to the auction house, while the consignor of the auctioned item gets the hammer price.
Since in this case the consignor and auction house are both The Royal Mint (I assume), I don’t understand the need for the buyer’s premium.

I really don't know if it was minted as a proof (though i suspect not)- it appears to have a little too much abrasion on the fields though - generally proof coins are a little more treasured than circulating ones and don't often get lost down the settee !
To me the example matt1r posted has more appeal eye and appears to be more natural. I would go for the grey toned coin every time.

I really don't know if it was minted as a proof (though i suspect not)- it appears to have a little too much abrasion on the fields though - generally proof coins are a little more treasured than circulating ones and don't often get lost down the settee !
To me the example matt1r posted has more appeal eye and appears to be more natural. I would go for the grey toned coin every time.

Hello forum,
Recently I came across a seller who is offering a Victoria Gothic Silver Crown.
Seeing as I don't have much experience, I would like you to help me determine whether or not this piece is authentic.
I am uploading the photos for you to examine the coin.

Yes I would say it’s a bit strong price wise too, as as said above while it has lovely detail there’s are lots of minor scratches on the fields which would suggest past cleaning. For comparison (I know it’s far more toned and far nicer IMO but that will vary person to person) the below example was sold for £100

Book price on an uncirculated shilling of 1826 is around £200. EF is around £60.
It's difficult to tell from the photos but i will assume it has been cleaned - a 200 year old silver coin should be a lot darker in it's natural state. That may bother you or it may not - most older coins have had a clean in the past (There also apears to be cleaning solution visible in the lettering of 'defensor').
I would grade it somewhere around EF (but cleaned) - there appears to be minimal wear but the fields show a lot of marks/scratches.
Although it's a coin with good eye-appeal, for the same money you could get a Charles II crown in GF or a George III in EF.... or a run of late George V in Unc.
I would expect the dealer to have paid around £40 for it.
 

Book price on an uncirculated shilling of 1826 is around £200. EF is around £60.
It's difficult to tell from the photos but i will assume it has been cleaned - a 200 year old silver coin should be a lot darker in it's natural state. That may bother you or it may not - most older coins have had a clean in the past (There also apears to be cleaning solution visible in the lettering of 'defensor').
I would grade it somewhere around EF (but cleaned) - there appears to be minimal wear but the fields show a lot of marks/scratches.
Although it's a coin with good eye-appeal, for the same money you could get a Charles II crown in GF or a George III in EF.... or a run of late George V in Unc.
I would expect the dealer to have paid around £40 for it.
 

Employees are not necessarily obsessively interested in the subject matter of the companies they work for, and I find that often impacts the quality of their output.
 
 
 
 
 

Join me on Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/karlhorst.rimmenugge.1

Historic silver coins are what i would keep 'til last if i was forced to liquidate.
Gold and platinum would be the first to go followed by silver bars and then the silver coins. Silver rounds next and, finally, the historic stuff. This is based on the amount of pleasure i derive from each of the catagories coupled with ease of selling.
Actually the order in which i would liquidate is in direct inverse proportion to the effort that was involved in purchasing. Something i really hadn't thought of before....

Historic silver coins are what i would keep 'til last if i was forced to liquidate.
Gold and platinum would be the first to go followed by silver bars and then the silver coins. Silver rounds next and, finally, the historic stuff. This is based on the amount of pleasure i derive from each of the catagories coupled with ease of selling.
Actually the order in which i would liquidate is in direct inverse proportion to the effort that was involved in purchasing. Something i really hadn't thought of before....

There is this one, kind of a silver sovereign. 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty_pounds_(British_coin)

This could signal the end of 'professionally' graded coins as a means to speculate. Historically a 'perfect' coin was considered the holy grail and rarely (sometimes never) obtainable. Nowadays people have come to expect perfection for anything released by a mint. The term 'proof' has always been used as a description of the way the coin is struck - not as a guarantee of a perfect coin. A proof coin is (supposedly) the best that a mint can achieve at that time, under those conditions - nothing more.
The true value of slabbing is in identifying genuines coins - something i imagine the whole business was based upon. The use of grading companies as a tool for speculators has made the whole business, for me, appear a bit grubby.
Each to their own obviously, but it has always left me scratching my head at people who will pay huge premiums for a 70 graded coin over a 68/69 graded coin. Take them out of the slab and i would defy the majority of people to distinguish between them. Yet are paying hundreds or thousands of pounds for two digits printed on a slip of paper.....
When is a '70' not a '70' ?- could be the next day.
 

This could signal the end of 'professionally' graded coins as a means to speculate. Historically a 'perfect' coin was considered the holy grail and rarely (sometimes never) obtainable. Nowadays people have come to expect perfection for anything released by a mint. The term 'proof' has always been used as a description of the way the coin is struck - not as a guarantee of a perfect coin. A proof coin is (supposedly) the best that a mint can achieve at that time, under those conditions - nothing more.
The true value of slabbing is in identifying genuines coins - something i imagine the whole business was based upon. The use of grading companies as a tool for speculators has made the whole business, for me, appear a bit grubby.
Each to their own obviously, but it has always left me scratching my head at people who will pay huge premiums for a 70 graded coin over a 68/69 graded coin. Take them out of the slab and i would defy the majority of people to distinguish between them. Yet are paying hundreds or thousands of pounds for two digits printed on a slip of paper.....
When is a '70' not a '70' ?- could be the next day.
 

Again, each to their own but i am pretty confident i can grade a coin as 'poor' without the need to pay someone else to do it for me 😁
What do professional graders base their opinions on ? Photographic and written descriptions of historic coins.  All of that information is available to anyone for a few pence. As for lowering a grade because of milk spots - where is the justification for doing so ? Eye appeal is completely subjective.
I don't begrudge grading companies making a living but i don't understand the mentality of anyone basing their enjoyment of a coin on someone else's opinion. 

This could signal the end of 'professionally' graded coins as a means to speculate. Historically a 'perfect' coin was considered the holy grail and rarely (sometimes never) obtainable. Nowadays people have come to expect perfection for anything released by a mint. The term 'proof' has always been used as a description of the way the coin is struck - not as a guarantee of a perfect coin. A proof coin is (supposedly) the best that a mint can achieve at that time, under those conditions - nothing more.
The true value of slabbing is in identifying genuines coins - something i imagine the whole business was based upon. The use of grading companies as a tool for speculators has made the whole business, for me, appear a bit grubby.
Each to their own obviously, but it has always left me scratching my head at people who will pay huge premiums for a 70 graded coin over a 68/69 graded coin. Take them out of the slab and i would defy the majority of people to distinguish between them. Yet are paying hundreds or thousands of pounds for two digits printed on a slip of paper.....
When is a '70' not a '70' ?- could be the next day.
 

This could signal the end of 'professionally' graded coins as a means to speculate. Historically a 'perfect' coin was considered the holy grail and rarely (sometimes never) obtainable. Nowadays people have come to expect perfection for anything released by a mint. The term 'proof' has always been used as a description of the way the coin is struck - not as a guarantee of a perfect coin. A proof coin is (supposedly) the best that a mint can achieve at that time, under those conditions - nothing more.
The true value of slabbing is in identifying genuines coins - something i imagine the whole business was based upon. The use of grading companies as a tool for speculators has made the whole business, for me, appear a bit grubby.
Each to their own obviously, but it has always left me scratching my head at people who will pay huge premiums for a 70 graded coin over a 68/69 graded coin. Take them out of the slab and i would defy the majority of people to distinguish between them. Yet are paying hundreds or thousands of pounds for two digits printed on a slip of paper.....
When is a '70' not a '70' ?- could be the next day.
 

This could signal the end of 'professionally' graded coins as a means to speculate. Historically a 'perfect' coin was considered the holy grail and rarely (sometimes never) obtainable. Nowadays people have come to expect perfection for anything released by a mint. The term 'proof' has always been used as a description of the way the coin is struck - not as a guarantee of a perfect coin. A proof coin is (supposedly) the best that a mint can achieve at that time, under those conditions - nothing more.
The true value of slabbing is in identifying genuines coins - something i imagine the whole business was based upon. The use of grading companies as a tool for speculators has made the whole business, for me, appear a bit grubby.
Each to their own obviously, but it has always left me scratching my head at people who will pay huge premiums for a 70 graded coin over a 68/69 graded coin. Take them out of the slab and i would defy the majority of people to distinguish between them. Yet are paying hundreds or thousands of pounds for two digits printed on a slip of paper.....
When is a '70' not a '70' ?- could be the next day.
 

This could signal the end of 'professionally' graded coins as a means to speculate. Historically a 'perfect' coin was considered the holy grail and rarely (sometimes never) obtainable. Nowadays people have come to expect perfection for anything released by a mint. The term 'proof' has always been used as a description of the way the coin is struck - not as a guarantee of a perfect coin. A proof coin is (supposedly) the best that a mint can achieve at that time, under those conditions - nothing more.
The true value of slabbing is in identifying genuines coins - something i imagine the whole business was based upon. The use of grading companies as a tool for speculators has made the whole business, for me, appear a bit grubby.
Each to their own obviously, but it has always left me scratching my head at people who will pay huge premiums for a 70 graded coin over a 68/69 graded coin. Take them out of the slab and i would defy the majority of people to distinguish between them. Yet are paying hundreds or thousands of pounds for two digits printed on a slip of paper.....
When is a '70' not a '70' ?- could be the next day.
 

This could signal the end of 'professionally' graded coins as a means to speculate. Historically a 'perfect' coin was considered the holy grail and rarely (sometimes never) obtainable. Nowadays people have come to expect perfection for anything released by a mint. The term 'proof' has always been used as a description of the way the coin is struck - not as a guarantee of a perfect coin. A proof coin is (supposedly) the best that a mint can achieve at that time, under those conditions - nothing more.
The true value of slabbing is in identifying genuines coins - something i imagine the whole business was based upon. The use of grading companies as a tool for speculators has made the whole business, for me, appear a bit grubby.
Each to their own obviously, but it has always left me scratching my head at people who will pay huge premiums for a 70 graded coin over a 68/69 graded coin. Take them out of the slab and i would defy the majority of people to distinguish between them. Yet are paying hundreds or thousands of pounds for two digits printed on a slip of paper.....
When is a '70' not a '70' ?- could be the next day.
 

This could signal the end of 'professionally' graded coins as a means to speculate. Historically a 'perfect' coin was considered the holy grail and rarely (sometimes never) obtainable. Nowadays people have come to expect perfection for anything released by a mint. The term 'proof' has always been used as a description of the way the coin is struck - not as a guarantee of a perfect coin. A proof coin is (supposedly) the best that a mint can achieve at that time, under those conditions - nothing more.
The true value of slabbing is in identifying genuines coins - something i imagine the whole business was based upon. The use of grading companies as a tool for speculators has made the whole business, for me, appear a bit grubby.
Each to their own obviously, but it has always left me scratching my head at people who will pay huge premiums for a 70 graded coin over a 68/69 graded coin. Take them out of the slab and i would defy the majority of people to distinguish between them. Yet are paying hundreds or thousands of pounds for two digits printed on a slip of paper.....
When is a '70' not a '70' ?- could be the next day.
 

This has opened a real can of worms with NGC for me.
To take the milking alone: they've graded some very highly (it may be the minimum expected, but 69 is still a very good grade) despite the milking. But there is no qualification. It's their subjective opinion about 'eye appeal'. The worst milked ones got the worst grades, but to what extent did they disregard the milking on the better examples? Would any have been 70s otherwise? The (presently) unmilked Yale at 70 suggests very possibly, and a reasonable conclusion is that no milked coin can get a 70 - but it is just guesswork.
If they give a milked coin a 69 (and the photo can be checked on the register) it leaves the secondary market stumped if the milking gets worse. At what point would/should a 69 drop a grade or two? It's all subjective at NGC on this in he first place, so will be between buyers and sellers (and between different buyers and sellers).
This is the problem with modern proof silver, especially from certain Mints, and having it graded. NGC is not helping here by grading milked coins without clarification.
I have a milked MS69 Griffin, I'll have to check the register to see if it was milked when graded.
 

Genuinely Fake Morgan Dollars
By: Jordan Graveline
 
As the oxymoronic title would suggest, this post will be on fake Morgan dollars that have been mistaken for genuine Morgans. I will not be mentioning the hundreds of thousands (maybe millions) of poorly struck, underweight fakes from China, although a post like that could be worthwhile in the future. Instead, I will be focusing on a few examples of Morgans bearing the New Orleans mint mark that were put into circulation with other Morgan dollars and went unnoticed as fakes for decades.
How these Morgan dollars were first noticed dates back to 2005 when a string of Micro 'o' dollars came into the possession of PCGS all at once for grading. An 1896-O, 1900-O, and a 1902-O happened to be sent in all at once either by one person or perhaps several, no one knows for sure. Either way, someone at PCGS knew that these three micro 'o' rarities were all being graded around the same time and that person thought, "wouldn't it be great to examine all three side by side under the microscope?" Well that decision would open the deceived eyes of the numismatic community and change the way we look at counterfeit coins.
Here's what was seen:

What we are looking at here is the reverse of the three Morgan micro 'o' dollars next to the left wing (to us) of the eagle. The marks present on these coins, as noted in the picture, are a result of a counterfeit die being created from a genuine coin. This kind of mark may have gone unnoticed for many more years had it not been for someone down at PCGS deciding to examine all three varieties at once under a microscope. Sadly, these three varieties are not the only fake Morgans that had previously been known to be genuine.
Here is a genuine 1900-O/CC (New Orleans over Carson City mint mark) containing a die crack linking the T-E-D in the word UNITED:

And here are two known varieties (shown below) made from a counterfeit die of the above coin:

The first T-E-D linked picture is of an 1896-O and the second T-E-D linked picture is of a 1901-O. The next two pictures show a close up of the O/CC mint mark as well as the grainy look of the E-D linked together. The lacking of sharp/crisp details on the E-D indicates a secondary or "transfer" die a.k.a. a counterfeit!
All of these examples thus far went unnoticed for a couple reasons. The first reason they went unnoticed is that all these fakes were made using silver. So by weight, they were close enough to fall within the acceptable specs of the U.S. Mint. After testing the silver content itself, some of these coins ranged from 91%-93% silver. The second reason that these went unnoticed is that they were in circulated condition. This could lead some graders to think that a particular mark or nick on the coin was the result of being circulated and therefore miss a mark which resulted from a counterfeit die. Of course, if you have several coins made from the same die at once, then you can compare them together as was the case with PCGS.
Now the question of why were these all mint marked as New Orleans and why actually make a fake using approximately the same amount of silver? The answers I have are more speculative, but with some logic behind it.
To start, it is a known fact that the New Orleans Minting facility spaced their dies slightly further apart to prolong the use of their dies and prevent pre-mature wear. This slight increase in spacing meant that some details are not as sharp or even slightly flat on a freshly minted coin. So producing a fake Morgan with the New Orleans mint mark on it would almost give it a slight "pass" as a genuine for having less than stellar details on the lettering and other finer details, especially if it contained the "correct" amount of silver.
Now the answer to "why make a fake Morgan with real silver?" If you consider that these fakes may have been in circulation for many years, then you must entertain the notion that perhaps these fakes are much older than modern day counterfeits made from other metals. Believe it or not, but at one time silver was cheap. In fact, the amount of silver in a Morgan dollar was once less than half of the face value of the coin itself. Imagine buying enough silver at the cost of one coin, but being able to produce two coins with the silver. You've just doubled your money. Now create a counterfeit die using a genuine coin and make as many fake coins as you like while doubling the amount of money you are able to spend into circulation. At approximately 45 cents per coin, on a Morgan dollar you were actually making even more than double your money with each fake coin made. This notion at least helps me understand why these fakes were made from silver. Combine the previous idea of New Orleans spacing out the dies slightly more and you now have the perfect opportunity to rip off the public with fake coins so close to real, they were mistaken as genuine for a long time.
To finish this post off, there are also fakes which are still made of silver, but they had been caught by means of incorrectly timed details. By that I mean, coins that have the incorrect hub type for the year. I myself only just learned of the different hub types, but in the details are the dates to which those hub types were used and many have the wrong hub type on the reverse. I will leave you with just a few more photos to illustrate this.

So the reverse of this 1896-O is that of hub type C4, which was not used until 1900 at the Philadelphia mint and 1901 at the San Francisco and New Orleans mints. Thus, another fake coin.
Lastly, here is a list showing all the New Orleans coins which were previously thought to be genuine, but are now listed as "privately made". A fancier way of saying "we got fooled for a long time because these fakes were too genuine."
 

All photos and charts sourced from http://moonlightmint.com/VAM_privately_made/00.htm

Newbie to Stacking, Just watched a YouTube Vid from Backyard Bullion and thought I would give this Forum a crack. Crazy times here in Oz atm.

Well, I decided to buy one in order to see how good it was.
My first impression was that it was not a bad attempt.  However on closer inspection:
- as @cylinder99 said, it is high relief (especially the Queen's head),
- when compared to a 1oz gold Britannia, the fake is larger and has a sort of greenish tint when compared to the yellow of the genuine coin,
- even though it is larger, it is underweight.  The genuine Completer should be 31.21 grams but the fake was 25.92 grams in its capsule!  But I am not sure how accurate my scales are, as they are new, but it is certainly underweight.
So, superficially, it is not a bad attempt, but it should not deceive someone with even a little knowledge.