2019 Piedfort Sovereign and Five Sovereign

[Oldun]

Next will be a two and  half sovereign piece....you just know it........these new marketing folks at the RM will stoop to any new gimmick...

[Zhorro]

2 minutes ago, Oldun said:

Next will be a two and  half sovereign piece....you just know it........these new marketing folks at the RM will stoop to any new gimmick...

Now actually, this is quite an interesting idea!  I had not thought of this - you have probably just given an idea to the marketing department!

[goldmember44]

500 mintage plus matt finish makes this year's one different and special -- provided that next year we don't see a matt again. The BU 5sov piece is nothing new, it's a tradition for many years now. If I had the money I'd pick one up.

[sovereignsteve]

I am worried about a 5sov matt piece. The problem is the finish; it doesn't appear to be a simple matt surface produced by the bringing together of two matt components during striking, ie planchette and die. Rather is looks like some kind of contrived coating. On close inspection under magnification, it appears to have a granular surface and we have already seen many surface imperfections in the current issues. Lose a bit of surface and you are left with shiny metal underneath.

How is that going to look when transferred to the larger surface of a £5 piece? We shall see.

[Zhorro]

7 minutes ago, sovereignsteve said:

I am worried about a 5sov matt piece. The problem is the finish; it doesn't appear to be a simple matt surface produced by the bringing together of two matt components during striking, ie planchette and die. Rather is looks like some kind of contrived coating. On close inspection under magnification, it appears to have a granular surface and we have already seen many surface imperfections in the current issues. Lose a bit of surface and you are left with shiny metal underneath.

How is that going to look when transferred to the larger surface of a £5 piece? We shall see.

I think you can have problems with any coin.  The Royal Mint has had quality control problems with even some regular proof sovereigns.  Let's hope that CC can weed out any rough ones!

[westminstrel]

57 minutes ago, Zhorro said:

I totally agree with what you are saying about the Royal Mint's issue policy.  And then we had the winning of the cricket world cup last week and they could not be bothered to do anything special for it!

Anyway getting back to the Matt Quintuple Sovereign, I think it looks interesting, it's a first in terms of the quintuples, and it is a low mintage.  So, fell for it and I've ordered one from CC.

 

At this point I am going to stay away from these releases as a matter of principle. 

[kimchi]

Very pleased to see a no-gimmick Piedfort but that mintage seems very ambitious and not particularly exclusive...I don't know if they even sold that many Sapphire privys....it's going to be an 'interesting' one in future depending on the series going forward but they haven't even half-tempted me to buy one.

[westminstrel]

The problem is the series hasn’t had time to properly become a “regular” series yet - it’s just been one special edition after another. 

[goldmember44]

It seems that one of these days, the release of a "normal" sovereign (such as 2019 proof) would be the exception rather than the rule, hence collectable. 

[xthomasx]

42 minutes ago, westminstrel said:

At this point I am going to stay away from these releases as a matter of principle. 

Me too, for now at least. The matt 5 Sov is interesting but too expensive. About the Piedfort, I will occasionally check how fast they sell and will then make up my mind. In general, I am satisfied with one Piedfort, which I achieved last year. I wasn't fast enough in 2017...

[Elements]

3 hours ago, sovereignsteve said:

I am worried about a 5sov matt piece. The problem is the finish; it doesn't appear to be a simple matt surface produced by the bringing together of two matt components during striking, ie planchette and die. Rather is looks like some kind of contrived coating. On close inspection under magnification, it appears to have a granular surface and we have already seen many surface imperfections in the current issues. Lose a bit of surface and you are left with shiny metal underneath.

How is that going to look when transferred to the larger surface of a £5 piece? We shall see.

Seems an odd way to make them to have a coating of some kind and I don’t think they used matt planchettes back in 1902. I had a discussion with a dealer recently about the 1902 production. Apparently they were made by acid etching, a recently developed method originating in Belgium in the 1890s, so the mint must have been keen to try it out but it didn’t prove popular. Even so a solution etch will be uniform and even and not leave spots behind or liable to fall off like a coating.

Edit: the above was from a conversation: just did a tiny amount of my own research and found this

http://www.cruzis-coins.com/sovs/1902GB.html

they quote some references and say acid and later sand blasting was used but don’t say whether it was sand blasting after struck coins or the planchettes. Be interesting to read more if anyone has any links. Also would be interesting to compare 1902 acid etch vs sand blast if 2 such production processes were used

[Kman]

5sov matt proof is interesting, but for £2000 there's stuff id enjoy way more with better upside potential 

Only for the real collectors 

piedfort sov is meh and mintage is very large

[sovereignsteve]

50 minutes ago, Elements said:

Seems an odd way to make them to have a coating of some kind and I don’t think they used matt planchettes back in 1902. I had a discussion with a dealer recently about the 1902 production. Apparently they were made by acid etching, a recently developed method originating in Belgium in the 1890s, so the mint must have been keen to try it out but it didn’t prove popular. Even so a solution etch will be uniform and even and not leave spots behind or liable to fall off like a coating.

Edit: the above was from a conversation: just did a tiny amount of my own research and found this

http://www.cruzis-coins.com/sovs/1902GB.html

they quote some references and say acid and later sand blasting was used but don’t say whether it was sand blasting after struck coins or the planchettes. Be interesting to read more if anyone has any links. Also would be interesting to compare 1902 acid etch vs sand blast if 2 such production processes were used

Interesting stuff that's for sure.

It is probably correct that the 1902 issue was experimental seeing as it's unique although there were other very rare matt proofs produced at times, I haven't seen one myself.

They probably used standard proof dies and thus needed to matt them somehow. Clearly they decided against simply using matted planchets, probably because it wouldn't have differentiated them from the business strike sufficiently. I am surprised they just didn't go for sand blasted dies and matted planchets.

 

[gazer]

Interesting this Piedfort Matt coin, even after reading all the posts on it I'm still unsure, should I should I not. Cannot make my mind as to or not. Help will it be collectable? Mind you if in doubt leave it out.

[westminstrel]

24 minutes ago, gazer said:

Interesting this Piedfort Matt coin, even after reading all the posts on it I'm still unsure, should I should I not. Cannot make my mind as to or not. Help will it be collectable? Mind you if in doubt leave it out.

The Piedfort is NOT matte. Just saving you disappointment in case you order it thinking that it is.

[gazer]

2 hours ago, westminstrel said:

The Piedfort is NOT matte. Just saving you disappointment in case you order it thinking that it is.

Thank you I should have been more observant. 👏

[augur]

7 hours ago, westminstrel said:

At this point I am going to stay away from these releases as a matter of principle. 

No pun intended? 😂 

[*tada*]

Can’t resist...😅

Anyone knows where to find mintage history on 5 sov BU? Is 500 among the lowest?

[Fivepoundfred]

I had a 2016 and that was 500 so maybe this is the norm in recent years.

[Kman]

1 hour ago, *tada* said:

Can’t resist...😅

Anyone knows where to find mintage history on 5 sov BU? Is 500 among the lowest?

I think 2018 was 1000 and I think the 2017 garter design was also 1000

[SovTracker]

After collecting Sovereign's for many years I'm just about at the point of no return. 

I am seriously considering giving up buying the new "Proof" issues because I believe that from this point on you will most likely lose money? 

Why? The Mint marketing tactics are profit driven and their attempt to squeeze every penny from collectors is becoming a joke. 

Proof, then Plain Edge, then Privy Mark, Matte why not do a coloured version, Red, White and Blue. 

Regarding the Piedfort, at £870 for half and ounce of Gold is a joke. Yes polished blanks, pressed 6 times but that only takes about a second and poor quality control for a premium product. 

A 2018 NGC graded PF70UCAM  Piedfort sold this MONTH for £703 including shipping, £122 cheaper than at issue!!

You can buy an 1850's MS62 for the same price as the new issue and will have scarcity built in. 

So I'm voting Sovexit - who's with me? 

 

[sovereignsteve]

5 minutes ago, SovTracker said:

A 2018 NGC graded PF70UCAM  Piedfort sold this MONTH for £703 including shipping, £122 cheaper than at issue!!

fair comment but we are at the worst time of the year for selling

[Sovereign]

@SovTracker agree with you on the 2018 piedfort sovereign i had mine on here for sale for £750 over a week with no interest then sold for less .. 

(bought it less then the royal mint issue price anyway)

passing on both of them ..

about the proof sovereign if it’s nothing special will wait and buy a 70 grade at the right price 

atm focusing on the old sovs recently bought 1911 proof sovereign NGC PF65+ Ultra Cameo (hard to find in UC grade) 

will receive it tomorrow 😀

 

[Derv]

2 hours ago, SovTracker said:

After collecting Sovereign's for many years I'm just about at the point of no return. 

I am seriously considering giving up buying the new "Proof" issues because I believe that from this point on you will most likely lose money? 

Why? The Mint marketing tactics are profit driven and their attempt to squeeze every penny from collectors is becoming a joke. 

Proof, then Plain Edge, then Privy Mark, Matte why not do a coloured version, Red, White and Blue. 

Regarding the Piedfort, at £870 for half and ounce of Gold is a joke. Yes polished blanks, pressed 6 times but that only takes about a second and poor quality control for a premium product. 

A 2018 NGC graded PF70UCAM  Piedfort sold this MONTH for £703 including shipping, £122 cheaper than at issue!!

You can buy an 1850's MS62 for the same price as the new issue and will have scarcity built in. 

So I'm voting Sovexit - who's with me? 

 

Well said, I love it 

[westminstrel]

8 hours ago, augur said:

No pun intended? 😂 

Pun? Let me put it plainly then... they’ve driven us almost over the edge. Mark my words - I’ll have better proof by this time next year 😆