Auric1253

I cannot disagree with this, but I have assumed (perhaps wrongly) that the many 1 oz bullion coins issued by various mints must be for silver stackers rather than aimed at the numismatic market, ie for people who take a view on the likely future price of silver rather than collectors. And it seems odd to me to pay the sort of premiums over the value of the silver content which seem to imply a likely (near future) rise in the price of silver of 40 to 100%. However these premiums in the market place will not trouble a stacker if he can safely assume that such premiums will persist. But it makes these 1 oz bullion coins a poor investment if the premium is based on a fad. I agree that not all 1 oz bullion coins are equally aesthetically pleasing (the kooks are nice)- but as a speculation on the future price of silver, it doesn't seem rational to pay so much extra just because the coin is pretty. Is there any historical evidence that the premiums might be a fad? Can any members of this forum remember a time when these 1 oz bullion coins traded at around the silver content value?

It isn't just valuing Kookaburras that seems problematic. All of the comparable 1 oz bullion coins from various mints seem to go for too high a premium over the silver content price. What is going on? Is it that this market is determined by crazy silver bulls, who don't mind paying north of £25 for an ounce of silver, because they are convinced that silver will double in price? Surely one could get better value (ie closer to spot price of contained silver) by buying historic circulation coins at lower grades (eg 80%, 70%, 50% silver) - and there are plenty of those around, mintages were often in the multiple millions.

Very interesting, Skyfiller. Yes, my impression is that with modern bullion sovereigns bought directly from the Royal mint they can easily be overweight (ie weigh more than the official specified weight). However with (for example) Elizabeth ll Young Head coins, that by eye appear uncirculated, I find that their weights are consistent and have never encountered one coming out as overweight. However, returning to my original question about grading - has anybody weighed a coin that they would confidently grade as EF or VF or Fine. and can say how much less than the official weight (in percentage terms) the coin was. Recently was offered a 1817 George lll half sovereign, which I thought was at least Fine grade, and on my scales this came out as 3% underweight. The seller wanted £260 for it and with little experience of such early coins, I couldn't decide if that was a good price.