Another disappointment from Royal Mint

[Charliemouse]

I received a 2oz proof silver "6 Decades of 007 - 1970's" last weekend, about 2 months after ordering it.  Unfortunately, it had a lot of small impacts and fine scratches, just visible to the naked eye.

These are microscope shots.  I didn't open the capsule; the out-of-focus marks are on the capsule rather than the coin, but it's easy to tell the difference.

The microscope obviously makes them look worse than with the naked eye, or even a loupe, but I still would expect better.  There's no way I'd grade it - I'd expect to get 67-68 at best.

I kept the capsule closed so there's no way they could say I caused the marks.

I assume I am not being over sensitive in wanting to return this.

 

[James32]

Certainly not oversensitive. Return. 

[NGMD]

I’d just return it for a replacement.

If you complain in any shape or form, they’re not listening. They have some very nice designs but Quality control is atrocious n top of the Milking issues.

I’m at a 50% yield with RM Proofs. A sad reality with them, if this was a private company, they’d be some serious shake ups.

[PhilOdgny]

I've only ever bought one proof coin brand new and I returned it because it was damaged.  What is the point of paying proof prices for bullion quality?  I'd return it for a full refund including any delivery and return charges then buy a bullion one instead.  But that's just me 😂

[Orpster]

You can return regardless, covered under distance selling, I have returned more to them than I have kept in the past few years.  It got that frustrating I stopped buying silver from them at the start of 2023 and sold the partial sets I had  

[SiCole]

Back she goes. When your paying £200+ for £35 of metal it needs to be almost perfect.

[stefffana]

4 hours ago, Charliemouse said:

I received a 2oz proof silver "6 Decades of 007 - 1970's" last weekend, about 2 months after ordering it.  Unfortunately, it had a lot of small impacts and fine scratches, just visible to the naked eye.

These are microscope shots.  I didn't open the capsule; the out-of-focus marks are on the capsule rather than the coin, but it's easy to tell the difference.

The microscope obviously makes them look worse than with the naked eye, or even a loupe, but I still would expect better.  There's no way I'd grade it - I'd expect to get 67-68 at best.

I kept the capsule closed so there's no way they could say I caused the marks.

I assume I am not being over sensitive in wanting to return this.

 

You, all the perfectionists, are pushing too hard your expectations! 

On NGC grading standards, a PF70 is judged under x 5 magnification.

In your picture I can only guess, but I think it is at last 20 times more than NGC standards.

What do you expect? To see a shiny perfect mirror surface with extra sharp lines on letters if you look closer and closer? 

Have a look at microscope your coin and definitely should be sent back, it's hideous!

Jeeeez!

[sovereignsteve]

16 minutes ago, stefffana said:

You, all the perfectionists, are pushing too hard your expectations! 

On NGC grading standards, a PF70 is judged under x 5 magnification.

In your picture I can only guess, but I think it is at last 20 times more than NGC standards.

What do you expect? To see a shiny perfect mirror surface with extra sharp lines on letters if you look closer and closer? 

Most of those scratches seen on the 2 oz coin will be visible with the naked eye

[stefffana]

3 minutes ago, sovereignsteve said:

Most of those scratches seen on the 2 oz coin will be visible with the naked eye

I really dont think these are scratched. 

Can be dust, microfibre from gloves...

 

[James32]

13 minutes ago, stefffana said:

I really dont think these are scratched. 

Can be dust, microfibre from gloves...

 

I'm sure he's given it a blow

[Spyder]

I would never buy a proof direct from the Mint. Wait and buy in the secondary market. You get to see the coin you are buying. If one is lucky could even be cheaper.

[Charliemouse]

12 hours ago, NGMD said:

I’d just return it for a replacement.

If you complain in any shape or form, they’re not listening. They have some very nice designs but Quality control is atrocious n top of the Milking issues.

I’m at a 50% yield with RM Proofs. A sad reality with them, if this was a private company, they’d be some serious shake ups.

Agreed. I'm not bothering to complain. But they do ask why you return it and for a description, which I give.  I am a believer in feedback.

11 hours ago, Orpster said:

You can return regardless, covered under distance selling

I know I can return. Just whether I should (which has been answered thanks).

10 hours ago, SiCole said:

Back she goes. When your paying £200+ for £35 of metal it needs to be almost perfect.

Strong agree.

8 hours ago, stefffana said:

You, all the perfectionists, are pushing too hard your expectations! 

On NGC grading standards, a PF70 is judged under x 5 magnification.

In your picture I can only guess, but I think it is at last 20 times more than NGC standards.

What do you expect? To see a shiny perfect mirror surface with extra sharp lines on letters if you look closer and closer?

Big difference between perfection and visible scratches. As I stated, these are visible to the naked eye, especially the 'bullet hole' that looks like an extra full stop.

I have kept most things from RM, and when graded, they were all 69 or 70. I am not a perfectionist, otherwise I would return everything. But I will return things that I can see flaws in with my own eyes, when I bought them new.

I don't use the microscope to look for flaws. I used it here to share pictures. Otherwise you wouldn't know what I was talking about.

8 hours ago, sovereignsteve said:

Most of those scratches seen on the 2 oz coin will be visible with the naked eye

Yes.

8 hours ago, stefffana said:

I really dont think these are scratched. 

Can be dust, microfibre from gloves...

 

They are scratches or some other fault in the surface. They are not dust.

8 hours ago, Spyder said:

I would never buy a proof direct from the Mint. Wait and buy in the secondary market. You get to see the coin you are buying. If one is lucky could even be cheaper.

You hardly ever get to see the coin in enough detail, and seller descriptions are often insufficient (to be generous).

I generally only buy directly from RM coins that are not going to come up very often, or that are obviously going to be very desirable.

[Charliemouse]

12 hours ago, PhilOdgny said:

I've only ever bought one proof coin brand new and I returned it because it was damaged.  What is the point of paying proof prices for bullion quality?  I'd return it for a full refund including any delivery and return charges then buy a bullion one instead.  But that's just me 😂

I was going to buy the bullion versions as well. 🤣

Although I didn't know they were doing them for these until I'd started on the proofs.

[stefffana]

2 minutes ago, Charliemouse said:

Agreed. I'm not bothering to complain. But they do ask why you return it and for a description, which I give.  I am a believer in feedback.

I know I can return. Just whether I should (which has been answered thanks).

Strong agree.

Big difference between perfection and visible scratches. As I stated, these are visible to the naked eye, especially the 'bullet hole' that looks like an extra full stop.

I have kept most things from RM, and when graded, they were all 69 or 70. I am not a perfectionist, otherwise I would return everything. But I will return things that I can see flaws in with my own eyes, when I bought them new.

I don't use the microscope to look for flaws. I used it here to share pictures. Otherwise you wouldn't know what I was talking about.

Yes.

They are scratches or some other fault in the surface. They are not dust.

You hardly ever get to see the coin in enough detail, and seller descriptions are often insufficient (to be generous).

I generally only buy directly from RM coins that are not going to come up very often, or that are obviously going to be very desirable.

👌

I have never had any issues with my purchases so far.

A good polish with Goddards cloth and any tiny scratch can be removed from my coins spoons.

Just sayin'...😊

[Agaupl]

I always wonder about these coins that either take along time to arrive or reappear on the mint store after a sell out, whether they are previously returned coins or not? Does anyone know? 

[stefffana]

6 minutes ago, Agaupl said:

I always wonder about these coins that either take along time to arrive or reappear on the mint store after a sell out, whether they are previously returned coins or not? Does anyone know? 

Yes.

[paulmerton]

Just think, it could be worse!

I got so fed up with not just issues like these (most of them much worse to be fair), but also the way they dealt with it - replacing coins with even worse ones, insisting I returned entire sets that contained one bad coin and then sending back a different set with 2-3 bad coins in it, and finally doubling down and insisting multiple times that a proof sovereign with a scratch visible at arm's length was perfectly acceptable and that they would not replace it! And that was after taking it to the top.

I ended up having an IRL meeting with their head of production, sales, quality etc near the end of last year. They agreed that the scratched sovereign did not meet their standards.

I'd made a YouTube video about some of the poor quality sets I'd received, and I was surprised to find that they had made everyone in the factory watch it. I had high hopes after that meeting - they really seemed to care about their products, acknowledged that they'd let me down, and wanted me to give them another chance. I made it clear that 10% off my next order wasn't going to cut the mustard this time, so they arranged to send me a 2023 silver proof definitive set for free.

Considering the circumstances of everything that had led up to this free gift, you'd have thought they'd have actually checked it was acceptable quality before sending it to me...

[paulmerton]

1 hour ago, Charliemouse said:

They are scratches or some other fault in the surface. They are not dust.

These squiggles are fibres struck through into the coin I believe. Improperly cleaned dies.

[SovereignBull]

Received today! Unbelievably poor quality! 
 

arrived in a card envelope with no plastic cover. The card isn’t sealed properly and is peeling away from the edge! For £100 for 1/40th oz I expect everything to be superb, it isn’t!

[James32]

3 minutes ago, SovereignBull said:

Received today! Unbelievably poor quality! 
 

arrived in a card envelope with no plastic cover. The card isn’t sealed properly and is peeling away from the edge! For £100 for 1/40th oz I expect everything to be superb, it isn’t!

At £4k an ounce, not great.

[stefffana]

6 minutes ago, James32 said:

At £4k an ounce, not great.

Salt on wounds!😂😂😂

[SovereignBull]

Just now, stefffana said:

Salt on wounds!😂😂😂

It’s going back for a refund! I knew the gold would be tiny but the packaging is of lower quality than a blister card!

[paulmerton]

1 minute ago, stefffana said:

Salt on wounds!😂😂😂

Reminds me of someone famous

[Petra]

35 minutes ago, James32 said:

At £4k an ounce, not great.

ooh! I nearly bought one just now… glad I didn’t!😮😮🤔

[SovereignBull]

Just cancelled the Brit/Lib 1/40th! If the Chinese dragon is an indication of the packaging quality for the 1/40th series I don’t wanna be a part of it!