Gillick Sovs 1957 vs 1959

[dicker]

Hi All

I like Gillicks quite a lot.

Can anyone help me with why;

1957 - Mintage 2million

1959 - Mintage 1.38mlion

Yet sometimes people tell me the ‘57 is rarer, and I sometimes see it at a premium to the 59.

Thoughts?

Best

Dicker

[CaptCaveMan]

I'm assuming this is since the passing of QEII and the popularity of the Gillicks has shot up.

The 1957, being the first Sov of her reign and the subtle difference of the milled edge with 169 grains rather than the standard 108, as such some may see this as rarer.

[GoldDiggerDave]

394 1957's graded v's 219 1959's in the NGC population  almost 80% more 1957's in NGC pop.

113 1957's graded v's 200 1959's in the PCGS population almost 77% more 1959's in the PCGS pop 

507 1957 and only 419 1959 in the combined reports so the 1959 is the scarcer of the two in this example. 

 

 

[Spyder]

I have always said it that the 59 is the one to have over the 57 if you only had one.  I tend to sell spares of any other Gillick apart from the 59.

What I do not get is why some common Gillicks being priced higher then other common Gillicks in similar condition.

[Britannia47]

The ‘Marsh’ ratings have not changed in over 42 years - Simple mintage figures/ratings may not be important or tell the whole story.

Marsh 1980 Version used C=Common, N= Normal (Not scarce or common), S=Scarce etc. Marsh/Hill 2017 shows the same.

I understand the Gillicks were minted as bullion and partly used to pay off foreign debt initially. I have a couple of 1958s with the highest of all mintage numbers at 8.7 million, but the following year 1959 (C) only 1.38 million were minted. Did demand suddenly change? 

Today,  there has been an understandable increase in popularity for Gillicks. Perhaps availability is declining?
Some time ago the RM was selling 1957 sovereigns from their historic section for £750!  I believe the RM has always been envious of the secondary market and is trying to grab a slice while it can, thus the high initial prices for everything….

 

[pricha]

The popularity could also be something to do with people think the make great birthday presents for others born in this era ?  

[dicker]

Thank all.  Interesting observations and thanks.  

[sovereignsteve]

In my experience the 59 is definitiely rarer than the 57.
Up until recently with the sudden rise in popularity of the 57 and the commensurate rise in price, they seemed pretty common and I regarded them in the same league as all the other years apart from the 59, which I diligently hoarded.

[Spyder]

11 minutes ago, sovereignsteve said:

In my experience the 59 is definitiely rarer than the 57.
Up until recently with the sudden rise in popularity of the 57 and the commensurate rise in price, they seemed pretty common and I regarded them in the same league as all the other years apart from the 59, which I diligently hoarded.

Totally agree.  Eventually latecomers will notice this too.

[GoldDiggerDave]

I've currently got a some lovely 58's and 59's in the the NGC at the moment.  

[Booky586]

On 03/04/2023 at 01:46, GoldDiggerDave said:

I've currently got a some lovely 58's and 59's in the the NGC at the moment.  

Nice photos Dave, they really show off the qualities of the Gillick Head sovereigns. You've got a quality strike with a lovely satin finish, unlike modern bullion.

Looking at the NGC and PCGS populations for both 57 and 59 on balance I can't see alot of difference, but high grades of 1962 might get overlooked. 

[Britannia47]

Room for 2 more ‘58s? 😘… quality all day long!

[modofantasma]

On 02/04/2023 at 09:49, dicker said:

Yet sometimes people tell me the ‘57 is rarer, and I sometimes see it at a premium to the 59.

So the 1965 Seabys catalogue has EF 1957s a lower price than the 1959. But in the 1968 edition they were both at a 20% premium over the others 🧐

[modofantasma]

Anyone who bought back then fancy doubling their money? Send me a message 🤣

[refero]

i m sorry to ruin the party.... but i really dont understand this madness about gillicks. They are normal bullion sovereign. If we sum the 10 years as a whole we get to more than 45 million !! of pieces... fortyfive millions! of coins that never circulated. 99% of them are in Mint state.

a couple of days ago, a 1957 in MS66 (NGC) at Coin Cabinet fetched 1700 gbp hammer (this is 2000 euros); for that amount you can actually buy 4.5 "normal gillicks". NGC declares 26-27 MS66 slabbed 1957. and with PCGS i guess we get to 50ish coins with that grading. Not really a rarity imho....

And considering the current rush in sending these bullion to slab... i bet within an year there will be dozens of brand new MS66 pieces around....

do you understand guys that with such behaviour we are feeding this insane market? We cant then cry for current prices.. gillicks are gillicks. BULLION rounded pieces of gold. we are creating artificially a numismatic value to something that it's not numismatic

Edited April 6, 2023 by refero

[CazLikesCoins]

1 hour ago, refero said:

i m sorry to ruin the party.... but i really dont understand this madness about gillicks. They are normal bullion sovereign. If we sum the 10 years as a whole we get to more than 45 million !! of pieces... fortyfive millions! of coins that never circulated. 99% of them are in Mint state.

a couple of days ago, a 1957 in MS66 (NGC) at Coin Cabinet fetched 1700 gbp hammer (this is 2000 euros); for that amount you can actually buy 4.5 "normal gillicks". NGC declares 26-27 MS66 slabbed 1957. and with PCGS i guess we get to 50ish coins with that grading. Not really a rarity imho....

TAnd considering the current rush in sending these bullion to slab... i bet within an year there will be dozens of brand new MS66 pieces around....

do you understand guys that with such behaviour we are feeding this insane market? We cant then cry for current prices.. gillicks are gillicks. BULLION rounded pieces of gold. we are creating artificially a numismatic value to something that it's not numismatic

There's a magic to Gillicks that may be invisible to anyone not born in that era. They signify a bygone time and a purity of nostalgia greater than even the gold within. They are a mark of every year a person has survived alongside that quarter ounce of gold whether gifted from birth or picked up along life's highway and to hold one, minted the same year as you were, well it's like staring into a time machine.

I have a birthday Gillick. And it's in better shape than me. It has less dents, scrubs up better, and will probably still be around long after I've kicked the bucket. 

In my next life I want to be a Gillick and have a nice and easy time just being admired in someones collection. True I might end up in a box for years on end but that's what I've got to look forward to anyway when I snuff it so what's the difference?

[Britannia47]

The reason why the RM started minting Sovereigns again in 1957 was to protect the Royal Mints’ and the Countries prestige  and commercial interests, from the vast number of Sovereign counterfeits appearing in the early 50s. Countries in the Middle East, such as Syria and Greece were still using the Sovereign as currency. 

The stated 45 million minted as an argument is flawed, as none of these passed into circulation in this country, but many were exported to meet demands abroad. Collectors/bullion investors would have bought the rest no doubt.

Ironically most of these sovereign counterfeits came from ITALY and were made by an Italian Jose Bertha Zdravko, who was the founder of the main counterfeit factory in Milan.

Anyway for those who don’t like Mrs Mary Gillick’s Sovereigns here is a cheap non PM alternative hopefully not fake😀

1 hour ago, refero said:

i m sorry to ruin the party.... but i really dont understand this madness about gillicks. They are normal bullion sovereign. If we sum the 10 years as a whole we get to more than 45 million !! of pieces... fortyfive millions! of coins that never circulated. 99% of them are in Mint state.

a couple of days ago, a 1957 in MS66 (NGC) at Coin Cabinet fetched 1700 gbp hammer (this is 2000 euros); for that amount you can actually buy 4.5 "normal gillicks". NGC declares 26-27 MS66 slabbed 1957. and with PCGS i guess we get to 50ish coins with that grading. Not really a rarity imho....

And considering the current rush in sending these bullion to slab... i bet within an year there will be dozens of brand new MS66 pieces around....

do you understand guys that with such behaviour we are feeding this insane market? We cant then cry for current prices.. gillicks are gillicks. BULLION rounded pieces of gold. we are creating artificially a numismatic value to something that it's not numismatic

 

[MonkeysUncle]

1 hour ago, CazLikesCoins said:

...minted the same year as you were...

This getting minted sounds a trifle painful! 🤕

[MonkeysUncle]

1 hour ago, CazLikesCoins said:

I have a birthday Gillick. And it's in better shape than me. It has less dents, scrubs up better, and will probably still be around long after I've kicked the bucket. 

None of my vintage sadly 😪

I did think of a Krug but the premium a certain Blackpool based dealer wants on the one they have is on the BBP scale!

[CazLikesCoins]

16 minutes ago, MonkeysUncle said:

None of my vintage sadly 😪

I did think of a Krug but the premium a certain Blackpool based dealer wants on the one they have is on the BBP scale!

Krugs are lovely. Maybe a wanted ad? I think I've seen them on here now and again. 

Edited April 6, 2023 by CazLikesCoins

[MonkeysUncle]

1 minute ago, CazLikesCoins said:

Krugs are lovely. Maybe a wanted ad? I think I've them on here now and again. 

I think that is a good plan 😀

Maybe in a month or two... I've gone a bit mental on silver buying this last fortnight. Pesky forum members luring me like Sirens with their £25 an ounce shiny shiny crack cocaine. 🤪

[CazLikesCoins]

1 minute ago, MonkeysUncle said:

I think that is a good plan 😀

Maybe in a month or two... I've gone a bit mental on silver buying this last fortnight. Pesky forum members luring me like Sirens with their £25 an ounce shiny shiny crack cocaine. 🤪

I went a bit mad on sovereigns during my first month. I had to stop when I caught myself rolling the carpets up to buy another sov 😅  

I'm not quite ready to sell gold to buy gold to maintain the high but I can feel the urge to do it on here lol.

[SidS]

4 hours ago, modofantasma said:

So the 1965 Seabys catalogue has EF 1957s a lower price than the 1959. But in the 1968 edition they were both at a 20% premium over the others 🧐

I'm stunned that the 1954, 1956 and 1959 UNC half crowns were still streets ahead of their contemporaries even then.

[refero]

i m not sure britannia and cazlikescoins got the meaning of my message... had no intention to deny the beauty and the magic of this particular coin. I myself love the idea of having (1980) a birthday sovereign...

the point is about the crazyness we are now experiencing about standard sovereigns like gillicks. I dont see any difference between today (2023) and few years ago, when these coins were considered just as bullion ones (i dont consider the passing of Queen Elizabeth II THE factor behind this insane raise in prices) and i dont get the point in paying silly prices for top pop grading when there are dozens and dozens of top pop and these figures are updated almost daily...

 

[dicker]

2 hours ago, refero said:

i m not sure britannia and cazlikescoins got the meaning of my message... had no intention to deny the beauty and the magic of this particular coin. I myself love the idea of having (1980) a birthday sovereign...

the point is about the crazyness we are now experiencing about standard sovereigns like gillicks. I dont see any difference between today (2023) and few years ago, when these coins were considered just as bullion ones (i dont consider the passing of Queen Elizabeth II THE factor behind this insane raise in prices) and i dont get the point in paying silly prices for top pop grading when there are dozens and dozens of top pop and these figures are updated almost daily...

 

Gillicks are an attractive coin and used to be very well priced over spot.  I think the only crazy prices are slabbed ones.

There has been a bump in price over spot for loose Gillicks but it’s not silly.

Part of the price rise may well be people buying batches and then grading the best ones.  I don’t grade (apart from errors that so want confirmed) but suspect this is partially to blame.  

As per my previous comments on Gillicks, I am sure there will be examples of MS68-70 out there - Inknow some disagree but I am convinced.  Some people are out there grading to see if they can get into that band.  
 

Why do I think this?  Statistically I think it makes sense (think the bell curve) and I also suspect (but don’t know) that there would have been a number struck for presentation and or approval.