Gillick Head Sovereigns, Worth Grading?

[KevjustKev]

The question is in the title.

Had a look round and most Gillick head sov's seem to get a ms63/64, it's OK but not great. Only two in the NGC census have got a 67, that's it, just two!

I'm a thinking if a grade would end up as a 63/64 it wouldn't add anymore to the value than the cost of grading it's self.

However that slim chance of getting a 67 or a even 68 maybe not worth it in the end.

Type about this for a bit😀

[Foster88]

I think they would be worth grading but only if you were quite certain you’d get MS64 ish or above.

Having said that, have a look at the Coin Cabinet past sales for examples of graded Gillick sovereigns.

Just a few examples below, but these are past sales in general so spot price would have been different for each auction.

So from the sale results, MS65/MS66 is where the jump in price is so they are quite sought after.

So it might be safe to say that an MS67 or above would be a fantastic grade to have.

[GoldDiggerDave]

I like them,  not fantastically commercial yet but a nice coin to get in a high grade loose, then you are subject to the grading lottery.  

[Foster88]

There’s just 3 graded MS67 by PCGS with none higher.

There also seems to be few graded MS66 at 45 in total and MS66+ at 8 in total.

I wonder if there are any out there that would make an MS68 or MS69.

[GoldDiggerDave]

@Foster88 doubt there will be any 69/70’s unless in BU currency sets.

 

 

[dicker]

There are some stunners out there.  The very best I have obtained loose were from Baird.  I ordered a number of Gillicks and all were stunning condition 1959’s.  So I kept buying until they had run out.  Next time I’m at the vault I will get the good ones out and post photos.
 

I have no doubt that there are MS68 - 70 out there waiting to be graded.  

[GoldDiggerDave]

@dicker if you ever need one grading mate I can send it off if you need. 
 

The Gillick’s are well under estimated imo, they are a beautiful sovereign and have a lovely patina  what I’d describe as a satin finish. 
 

 

[dicker]

9 minutes ago, GoldDiggerDave said:

@dicker if you ever need one grading mate I can send it off if you need. 
 

The Gillick’s are well under estimated imo, they are a beautiful sovereign and have a lovely patina  what I’d describe as a satin finish. 
 

 

As always you are a complete gent.  I totally agree on Gillicks.  They are right up there for me as being beautiful coins, well struck, and obtainable for not much money over spot. 
 

I have yet to find any abnormalities with Gillicks but they must exist.  
 

The examples that I have with the best ghost QEII on the reverse are the 1959’s.  Very evident as per one of Mr Chards previous posts.  

[Foster88]

7 hours ago, GoldDiggerDave said:

@Foster88 doubt there will be any 69/70’s unless in BU currency sets.

 

 

Thanks for sharing this, I think I’ve seen this before.

It’s interesting to see how they rolled the gold and then ‘punched’ the sovereigns out one by one. I doubt after watching this that many would grade higher than an MS67.

It should come with a warning, ‘Numastmists, this might be the trailer to a horror film for you, watch at your own discretion’. 😆

The 50’s and the 60’s are before my time but the ‘ring’ or ‘ping’ test they show in the video can’t have done the sovereigns any favours. I know they’re just bullion. ’m going to keep my eye on the NGC and PCGS population reports.

Surely someone out there must have a Gillick sovereign higher than MS67. Maybe you do @dicker 

I too agree with you @GoldDiggerDave that not many appreciate the Gillick sovereigns and dare I say when that time comes, which I hope isn’t for a while. It’s sadly going to happen and the prices will be much more than just above spot price.

[RustyShackleford]

The part that jumped out at me was when the narrator described them as being "fine gold mixed with copper".

[sovereignsteve]

9 hours ago, Foster88 said:

Surely someone out there must have a Gillick sovereign higher than MS67. Maybe you do @dicker

I doubt it. Bullion sovs at that grade are very rare unless kept in mint plastic.

Top class Gillicks are very common, many have been stored untouched since minting and even those wouldn't grade higher than 65

For some reason the obverse always shows some "wear" on the hair and leaves. I would love to see a "specimen" example struck from the bullion obverse dies to see how good they should be. Maybe the majority are just poorly struck.

[KevjustKev]

Maybe I'll have to take some pics. Doubt any would be more than a 63, maybe one a 64, I hope

[refero]

We are talking abut bullion coins guys!!! i dont understand this crazyness about grading 50-60 years-old-coins that have never meant to be numismatic pieces (and will never be imho). How can QEII be bad looking coins? they never circulated....are you seriously willing to spend 700-800 gbp for a "Ms66 or 67" when all of them are in mint state  as well? I hoped this was just a yankee bad attitude ....

i m afraid to say that when folks overpay pieces of gold in coin shape rather than ingot, this is just something that makes dealers richer and richer,

[Foster88]

1 hour ago, refero said:

We are talking abut bullion coins guys!!! i dont understand this crazyness about grading 50-60 years-old-coins that have never meant to be numismatic pieces (and will never be imho).

Many people do choose to grade and buy and sell graded bullion coins.

[GoldDiggerDave]

@refero at what point would you say a bullion sovereign coins becomes a numismatic bullion coin? 

 

[refero]

39 minutes ago, GoldDiggerDave said:

@refero at what point would you say a bullion sovereign coins becomes a numismatic bullion coin? 

i never heard about numismatic bullion coin; i consider "numismatic" and "bullion" two words on parallel lines...i really dont see why i should add some value to something that it is not rare, not difficult to obtain, and not difficult to obtain in MS conditions...

[sovereignsteve]

8 hours ago, refero said:

We are talking abut bullion coins guys!!! i dont understand this crazyness about grading 50-60 years-old-coins that have never meant to be numismatic pieces (and will never be imho). How can QEII be bad looking coins? they never circulated....are you seriously willing to spend 700-800 gbp for a "Ms66 or 67" when all of them are in mint state  as well? I hoped this was just a yankee bad attitude ....

i m afraid to say that when folks overpay pieces of gold in coin shape rather than ingot, this is just something that makes dealers richer and richer,

 

6 hours ago, refero said:

i never heard about numismatic bullion coin; i consider "numismatic" and "bullion" two words on parallel lines...i really dont see why i should add some value to something that it is not rare, not difficult to obtain, and not difficult to obtain in MS conditions...

You'd be surprised how some Gillicks have fared over the years despite not having been circulated as currency.

>99% of sovereigns that are the bedrock and sometimes the obsession of collectors were originally "bullion" or circulating curremcy coins when minted.

Which sovereigns do you regard as "numismatic", as you put it, and were they minted as such?

Numismatic coins from 200 years ago started life as boring bullion/currency coins. People collect all manner of coins and will always want the highest possible quality. Gillick sovereigns are only 50-60 years old but they have started generating a lot of interest from collectors and investors recently. The collectors will want the best quality and most see third party graded coins as the best way to obtain these coins, both as collectors and investors.

"I hoped this was just a yankee bad attitude ...."  Bad taste IMO my friend☹️

[papi1980]

8 hours ago, sovereignsteve said:

Gillick sovereigns are only 50-60 years old but they have started generating a lot of interest from collectors and investors recently. The collectors will want the best quality and most see third party graded coins as the best way to obtain these coins, both as collectors and investors.

Thank you @sovereignsteve, I also agree about Gillicks gaining traction, but personally I find the Machin design more esoteric and beautiful (noted that beauty is the eyes of the beholder

my question to all of you is if you have a choice to get a bullion Gillick or Machin, same price and quality and similar mintage), which one you will choose ?  

 

 

 

[refero]

10 hours ago, sovereignsteve said:

"I hoped this was just a yankee bad attitude ...."  Bad taste IMO my friend☹️

it is a fact that this slab mania started in the US, an obsession that is changing the numismatic word for good. 

People nowadays are just interested in buying the slab, rather than the coin within

[Foster88]

6 hours ago, refero said:

People nowadays are just interested in buying the slab, rather than the coin within

That’s a bit of a narrow minded viewpoint to take.

I don’t generally agree with this, many people buy the coin rather than the slab it’s in.

[GoldDiggerDave]

I can agree with some of the feelings about slabbed coins especially modern proofs it’s either 70 or nothing.  
 

I’ve been saying for years Gillick’s are well under rated and they can prove very difficult to get a high quality example.  
 

 

 

 

 

 

[dicker]

2 hours ago, GoldDiggerDave said:

I can agree with some of the feelings about slabbed coins especially modern proofs it’s either 70 or nothing.  
 

I’ve been saying for years Gillick’s are well under rated and they can prove very difficult to get a high quality example.  
 

 

 

 

 

 

Agreed.  I also think there will definitely be very high grade (MS69) examples. They will be rare but they will be out there. 

[refero]

5 hours ago, Foster88 said:

That’s a bit of a narrow minded viewpoint to take.

I don’t generally agree with this, many people buy the coin rather than the slab it’s in.

i could easily say that your point of view is a pure generalization. When you see in current actions people overpaying a bullion slabbed in ms66 or a proof in pf70 do you honestly think they could spot the difference with a ms65 or a pf69? they are just buying the pastic slab, and that's it. 

 

[refero]

just an example; i managed to get all proof sovs from 1985 to 1997 in pf69 at half of the price pf70's go on. They are just identical.

now, since they realized they have squeezed all they could from the 70's slab, they just invented "first releases", "among first 100 strucked" and other non sense... and people are happy to donate more and more money...

[sovereignsteve]

45 minutes ago, refero said:

i could easily say that your point of view is a pure generalization. When you see in current actions people overpaying a bullion slabbed in ms66 or a proof in pf70 do you honestly think they could spot the difference with a ms65 or a pf69? they are just buying the pastic slab, and that's it. 

 

 

40 minutes ago, refero said:

just an example; i managed to get all proof sovs from 1985 to 1997 in pf69 at half of the price pf70's go on. They are just identical.

now, since they realized they have squeezed all they could from the 70's slab, they just invented "first releases", "among first 100 strucked" and other non sense... and people are happy to donate more and more money...

You make some good points and I would agree with you on many of them.

Where I would differ is your point that people are overpaying for slabbed bullion. That is your opinion and the fact that people are willing to pay that price is proof of it. Coin collecting or anything collecting for that matter is purely and simply market forces; the price is what people will pay. They are paying the price they have to in order to secure the coin in the hope it will retain that premium or ideally surpass it. Whether they are right in their opinion is yet to be decided.