Looks like someone got them to recognise this variant at last :)
http://www.pcgs.com/Pop/ValueView.aspx?s=568955
Quote from: 'serial' pid='81321' dateline='1446639495'Looks like someone got them to recognise this variant at last :)
http://www.pcgs.com/Pop/ValueView.aspx?s=568955
I wonder who that someone was . Good work
Quote from: 'stevo1962' pid='81323' dateline='1446642357'Quote from: 'serial' pid='81321' dateline='1446639495'Looks like someone got them to recognise this variant at last :)
http://www.pcgs.com/Pop/ValueView.aspx?s=568955
I wonder who that someone was . Good work
Thanks steve just a pity it was just a ms63
Nicely done :good:
Always nice when an Australian veriety is recognised by PCGS at last.
Can I suggest that a letter or something be sent to the RAM, that's if they minted these coins with a scan of the high and low positions and them on their opions and if it is a positive reply, why the position was changed.
The reply with either then support or clash with peoples observations etc.
problem with that goldseeker is that RAM has a reputation of not really being transparent with this information or keeping good records.
they still haven't verified the reason behind the incuse 50 despite this variant being clearly different.
with regards to the 72 low echidna I think the most interesting thing about it is that they are almost entirely found in mint sets only
Quote from: 'serial' pid='81345' dateline='1446693283'problem with that goldseeker is that RAM has a reputation of not really being transparent with this information or keeping good records.
they still haven't verified the reason behind the incuse 50 despite this variant being clearly different.
with regards to the 72 low echidna I think the most interesting thing about it is that they are almost entirely found in mint sets only
So were there 8,256,000 mint sets for that year? That is what PCGS lists as the mintage for this variety:dodgy:
Point taken but has anyone tried?
Quote from: 'nealeffendi' pid='81347' dateline='1446693908'Quote from: 'serial' pid='81345' dateline='1446693283'problem with that goldseeker is that RAM has a reputation of not really being transparent with this information or keeping good records.
they still haven't verified the reason behind the incuse 50 despite this variant being clearly different.
with regards to the 72 low echidna I think the most interesting thing about it is that they are almost entirely found in mint sets only
So were there 8,256,000 mint sets for that year? That is what PCGS lists as the mintage for this variety:dodgy:
I think you are not looking at things the right way. PCGS is finally starting to recognise the varieties in Australian coinage wether it be a 25 penny broken n, incuse 50,no sd 2 cent, big head 1999 10 cent or low echidna it is a good thing. Don't sweat the details when we are finally starting to get some traction
2001 $1 Federation upsets/rotated die is a variety that comes to mind that PCGS doesn't accept in a general consignment :(
Quote from: 'runway' pid='81352' dateline='1446721014'2001 $1 Federation upsets/rotated die is a variety that comes to mind that PCGS doesn't accept in a general consignment :(
Well if you feel it should be you can write them in a submission, make your case and see what they say. However I see this as an error rather than a die variant as it is to do with how the coin was struck rather than with what dies
Quote from: 'serial' pid='81356' dateline='1446723158'I see this as an error rather than a die variant as it is to do with how the coin was struck rather than with what dies
Ah, the old Variety/Error/Flaw argument is about to rear its head again, is it?
I think most people accept the mules as varieties, don't they?
If you are referring to the 2000 41 Mule, then I refer to that as an error and not a variety.
That is my opinion and I will stick with it.
looks like pcgs are starting to recognise a lot of new varieties
http://www.pcgs.com/pop/valueview.aspx?s=569220
Add these as well
http://www.pcgs.com/cert/32909349
http://www.pcgs.com/cert/32909366
and this
https://www.pcgs.com/cert/32909351
2001 $1 upsets are not recognised for general consignment
Quote from: 'serial' pid='81345' dateline='1446693283'with regards to the 72 low echidna I think the most interesting thing about it is that they are almost entirely found in mint sets only
Are they? I remember someone posting a break-down of their circulation finds and they seemed to have found both without much trouble.
Oh well, I guess if it's lower then it's all about the base .........
(and since it's Star Wars TV time ....... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RV5WqRnFejI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RV5WqRnFejI))
As I said before runway. The rotated dies are a striking error rather than a die variety. But if you think Pcgs should recognise them as a variety then your welcome to write to them and send coins for submission. Just don't be upset if they don't recognise them.
Have you got a link Mr T? As I havent seen that and I have never found a low echidna in circulation myself
Quote from: 'serial' pid='81404' dateline='1446883026'As I said before runway. The rotated dies are a striking error rather than a die variety. But if you think Pcgs should recognise them as a variety then your welcome to write to them and send coins for submission. Just don't be upset if they don't recognise them.
Have you got a link Mr T? As I havent seen that and I have never found a low echidna in circulation myself
I don't intend to send any rotated die coins to PCGS at this stage,yeah I realise they wouldn't grade them unfortunately for what they are
Quote from: 'serial' pid='81404' dateline='1446883026'As I said before runway. The rotated dies are a striking error rather than a die variety. But if you think Pcgs should recognise them as a variety then your welcome to write to them and send coins for submission. Just don't be upset if they don't recognise them.
Have you got a link Mr T? As I havent seen that and I have never found a low echidna in circulation myself
I was going from http://www.thesandpit.net/5c_survey/2014_5c_survey.html which was linked in https://www.australian-coins.net/showthread.php?tid=3598&highlight=1987+high+echidna
Maybe my interpretation was wrong but the way I read it was that both were found in circulation but mint sets were low only.
Quote from: 'serial' pid='81356' dateline='1446723158'Quote from: 'runway' pid='81352' dateline='1446721014'2001 $1 Federation upsets/rotated die is a variety that comes to mind that PCGS doesn't accept in a general consignment :(
Well if you feel it should be you can write them in a submission, make your case and see what they say. However I see this as an error rather than a die variant as it is to do with how the coin was struck rather than with what dies
How can I do this?
Who in Australia is a PCGS authorised dealer who can send coins to PCGS on my behalf?
QuoteWho in Australia is a PCGS authorised dealer who can send coins to PCGS on my behalf?
Anyone with a membership with PCGS can do this for you Mate :ok:
Quote from: 'trout' pid='81576' dateline='1447503525'QuoteWho in Australia is a PCGS authorised dealer who can send coins to PCGS on my behalf?
Anyone with a membership with PCGS can do this for you Mate :ok:
Ok,do they all charge same for submissions?
Who do you use Trout?
QuoteWho do you use Trout?
I send my own submissions in, it's a bit of a pain in the arse with the paperwork and the labelling But it can be a lot of fun and rewarding in the end :good:
I just got the results back for a 1953 Melbourne Penny, It is a "reverse D" .
You will have to excuse my ignorance but what on earth is a Reverse "D" ??
Quote from: 'trout' pid='81680' dateline='1447962273'.... but what on earth is a Reverse "D" ??
Possibly the first of these .... http://www.triton.vg/P53.html (http://www.triton.vg/P53.html)
Thanks Uni :good: