Poll
Question:
Seperate or the same?
Option 1: . addslashes($options[$i]) . "
votes: 11
Option 2: . addslashes($options[$i]) . "
votes: 0
Proof:
(https://coinphotos.net/326253/0/16777215/800x800.jpg)
(https://coinphotos.net/326253/1/16777215/800x800.jpg)
Specimen:
(https://coinphotos.net/272330/0/16777215/800x800.jpg)
(https://coinphotos.net/272330/1/16777215/800x800.jpg)
Should these be considered different coin types?
Mint reports show that 311 proofs were produced and 733 specimen strikes were produced but at the moment they all get classified as proofs. Considering they were different enough for the mint to differentiate them, would you support them being collected as separate coin types?
I know a few pre-decimal proof collectors who've expressed an interest in having well matched sets (i.e. they want proofs and not specimens in their sets).
It should be noted that both proof and specimen strikes were produced for all 1955 and 1956 Melbourne proofs though I'm still doing research on those.
Well if I was given my druthers, I'druther have the specimen. :winkextra:
I personally like the proofs better, they're a deeper strike with a more intense finish. I'm still researching this but the sixpence have noticeably less strike depth on the specimens than the proofs.
The 1955 specimens are more common but the 1956 specimens are rarer.
The two coins DO look to be a completely different strike and they should be recognised as 2 different coin types, But If you are going to try to get PCGS to differentiate between the Proofs and Specimens and attribute them accordingly I wish you the Best of Luck Mate :angel:
I think this will be a pretty easy case, got a copy of a Melbourne mint report which shows the mint actually called them proof and specimen strikes respectively and had different mintages of each.
I think two separate types, especially with the Mint info available.
Quote from: 'wwwww' pid='110177' dateline='1500530954'I think this will be a pretty easy case, got a copy of a Melbourne mint report which shows the mint actually called them proof and specimen strikes respectively and had different mintages of each.
So what about the 97 coins already graded as PR by PCGS that is nearly a third of the proof mintage, Surely there would be a decent smattering of specimen coins amongst that lot?
IF PCGS start to attribute the specimen coins as they grade them from now on then many collectors would be reluctant to send in their wrongly attributed Proofs for regrading to SP as the proofs being a lower mintage the specimens already attributed as Proofs would attract a higher premium graded as PR instead of SP :angel:
Yep that is a problem but it's one PCGS has dealt with on many occasions. Mechanical errors are simply dealt with by reslabbing them at no cost. Most of the PR 1955 coins would be specimens, the proofs are significantly rarer. In fact the MS68 1955 3d is a specimen.
HeHe
"Mechanical errors" are a polite way of PCGS describing a "Stuff Up" :)
I agree that PCGS would most likely be willing to re-slab the errant coins without charge But would collectors be willing to have their coins "Downgraded" in value and take advantage of the PCGS offer?
I imagine that some will get re-slabbed but with the majority of these that are already in a genuine PR slab this is highly doubtful.
Not only would the coin loose some of it's value in a SP slab there is also the "Pain in the Arse" factor of sending the coins to PCGS and the inevitable wait with NO guarantee that the exact same numerical grade will be applied, There is also the risk of loss and damage to consider.
If it doesn't make the numerical grade it is covered by their guarantee, you'll be reimbursed. I see what you mean by some people being unwilling to resubmit but we can see from US market that they do eventually get resubmitted.
Nice work Walter. My 3D 1955 is a proof and 1956 is a specimen. 6D' s I can not check as they dont have PCGS photos. I would assume if this is the case, proofs(true) should be more valuable.
The 1956 specimens are rarer, I'll post up the mintages when I'm at my PC. They're up on the Blue Sheet for 3d and 6d already.
Quote6D' s I can not check as they dont have PCGS photos
You could always just Look at the coins, you shouldn't need a trueview image to tell your eyes what they are looking at :angel:
interesting..
at a quick glance at mine
3d 1955 is a proof 66, 1956 a sp67
6d 1955 - no photo, 1956 proof 67
at this stage i am not doing anything about this .. its just wait and see
Quote from: 'trout' pid='110183' dateline='1500538637'HeHe
I agree that PCGS would most likely be willing to re-slab the errant coins without charge
But do they:huh: Look at all the pre decimals in slabs that were previously a single type and now have been recognised as different types. I have several long denticle '53 florins and a '52P penny variety that are in older slabs and they now appear in the set registry as the common variety:@ So will PCGS reslab them with the correct attribution gratis?:laughingneqw: Same with your/mine:yahoo: prooflike '27 Canberra; did they accept (and fail) to correctly add the PL designation without charge?
QuoteSame with your/mine prooflike '27 Canberra; did they accept (and fail) to correctly add the PL designation without charge?
No they didn't and I am still Pissed about that :dash1:
If it was a Canadian silver dollar or a Morgan it would get a PL designation in a heartbeat.
Quote from: 'wwwww' pid='110188' dateline='1500544921'The 1956 specimens are rarer, I'll post up the mintages when I'm at my PC. They're up on the Blue Sheet for 3d and 6d already.
Cool, thanks Walter.
Quote from: 'trout' pid='110189' dateline='1500544993'Quote6D' s I can not check as they dont have PCGS photos
You could always just Look at the coins, you shouldn't need a trueview image to tell your eyes what they are looking at :angel:
Not when the coin is 50kms away in a bank vault.. :angel: Did you really think I am that stupid mate :idea:
QuoteDo you think I am that stupid?
Not at all But you Must have had a good look at the coins "In Hand" before you entombed them at the bank Mate :angel:
1956 SP penny
https://numisbid.com.au/Browse/NumisBid_Auction_@45/Pre-Decimal_Proof_Coins/Australia_Elizabeth_II_1956_Proof_Penny_NGC_PF_65_RD_18
and 1956 PR penny
https://numisbid.com.au/Browse/NumisBid_Auction_@44/Pre-Decimal_Proof_Coins/Australia_Elizabeth_II_1956_Proof_Penny_PCGS_PR65RD_27
Quote from: 'trout' pid='110194' dateline='1500547683'QuoteDo you think I am that stupid?
Not at all But you Must have had a good look at the coins "In Hand" before you entombed them at the bank Mate :angel:
My memory is not that good mate... :yahoo:
All is Good Mate just stirring the pot here :)
So just how many of the pre decimal proof mintages also had a specimen mintage for the same year and in which denominations ?
Does anyone have this data?
With all the new additions to the set registries I have doubts that PCGS or NGC will regrade all of these different coins "Gratis".
These guys are in it for the money , Not the Kudos and grading coins for Free is Not the greatest of business plans :angel:
(https://coinphotos.net/545633/0/16777215/800x800.jpg)
This is from Verheyan's research, it's possible specimens were struck in later years too. They are mentioned in mint correspondance but there don't appear to be separate mintage figures.
Sorry for the photo being on an angle, working from my phone here.
Thanks for that Walter :good:
I fixed you image for you :)
(http://www.australian-coins.net/gallery/albums/userpics/10019/800x800.jpg)
Looking forward to seeing further info and pics on this, just finished off completing my silver 56 proof set, very recently.
Quote from: 'trout' pid='110183' dateline='1500538637'I agree that PCGS would most likely be willing to re-slab the errant coins without charge But would collectors be willing to have their coins "Downgraded" in value and take advantage of the PCGS offer?
I imagine that some will get re-slabbed but with the majority of these that are already in a genuine PR slab this is highly doubtful.
Not only would the coin loose some of it's value in a SP slab there is also the "Pain in the Arse" factor of sending the coins to PCGS and the inevitable wait with NO guarantee that the exact same numerical grade will be applied, There is also the risk of loss and damage to consider.
Yes, PCGS will reholder mechanical errors without charge. Select the "Other" section on the form and send the coins. If you ask diplomatically, they may even send you some PCGS coupons for use with grading in the future to cover your cost of getting the mechanical errors coins over to them. They will not downgrade your coins.
Many coins will be sent back to be corrected eventually because SP collectors will not buy a specimen in a PR holder (won't fit in a theoretical Set Registry set) and PR collectors will not want an SP in a proof holder (they'd want proofs, especially if they are rarer).
Quote from: 'drakesterling' pid='110387' dateline='1501131693'If you ask diplomatically, they may even send you some PCGS coupons for use with grading in the future to cover your cost of getting the mechanical errors coins over to them. They will not downgrade your coins.
I guess I'm not diplomatic enough, they just send me a cheque which costs more to deposit than is worth.
Not very nice for the collector who buys a pr slabbed coin only to find out later its only a specimen. Would PCGS fully reimburse the collector for grading postage and insurance. They should also stepup to the plate and offer a free grading...
Quote from: 'serenitystan' pid='110493' dateline='1501546362'Not very nice for the collector who buys a pr slabbed coin only to find out later its only a specimen. Would PCGS fully reimburse the collector for grading postage and insurance. They should also stepup to the plate and offer a free grading...
This is one of those rare instances that would not be covered by their guarantee, I suspect. If they do eventually recognise the PR and SP types, it would be considered a change in "numismatic convention". You can read more about it here, under heading: "Changes in a coin's numismatic status."
https://www.pcgs.com/guarantee
Eric
Thanks Drakesterling. Have just finished reading the PCGS Guarantee of grade and Authenticity. They have just about covered there arse for all there mistakes. There is so much dishonesty and bullshit in people today.
Quote from: 'serenitystan' pid='110498' dateline='1501552179'Thanks Drakesterling. Have just finished reading the PCGS Guarantee of grade and Authenticity. They have just about covered there arse for all there mistakes. There is so much dishonesty and bullshit in people today.
It is a legal document, so there are a lot of provisions and exceptions, and yes, many of them protect PCGS from human error. The grading guarantee specifically protects collectors against PCGS making mistakes with grading and authentication only. It is not meant to be used to cover typos, spelling errors, description errors on the certificates, or changes in the market conditions. In fact, I suspect a lot of the "bullshit" in these long-winded terms and conditions are to protect companies against frivolous claims, as well. Bullshit goes both ways.
Protection against grading and authentication. Has anyone on this site resubmitted a slab they believed was undergraded. Received the slab back with a higher grade and refunded grading fee,postage and insurance? I bet not....
Yes, PCGS paid me out on a coin that was graded but had graffiti pin scratches on it. The amount they reimburse is at their discretion, but we were very happy with their payout. They did take a long time to get back to me, though, which would be my only complaint.
Quote from: 'drakesterling' pid='110499' dateline='1501552550'Quote from: 'serenitystan' pid='110498' dateline='1501552179'Thanks Drakesterling. Have just finished reading the PCGS Guarantee of grade and Authenticity. They have just about covered there arse for all there mistakes. There is so much dishonesty and bullshit in people today.
It is a legal document, so there are a lot of provisions and exceptions, and yes, many of them protect PCGS from human error. The grading guarantee specifically protects collectors against PCGS making mistakes with grading and authentication only. It is not meant to be used to cover typos, spelling errors, description errors on the certificates, or changes in the market conditions. In fact, I suspect a lot of the "bullshit" in these long-winded terms and conditions are to protect companies against frivolous claims, as well. Bullshit goes both ways.
Description errors are a real concern. The numerical grading system of slabbing was set up to facilitate the selling of coins sight unseen. Now if you buy a coin that way and the description is wrong who pays the difference? I've noted many so called No Dot 1920 pennies in both PCGS and NGC slabs that are CBL and priced at a stiff level that is multiples of their fair value. People who buy them will find out years from now that they have a common Dot Below.
Also the level of compo may be paltry even if they admit to a mistake; for example they value a MS64 '37 crown at USD250 (about $300) and presumably that would be the max compensation if they realized it was a fake, if it was just a matter of getting the grading really wrong the compo would be even less. In the real world (the coin market) a drop of even a single point of overgrading can drop a coins value by 90% (or more, this year I've picked up a number of '64 threepences in MS67 for around $30 but have been outbid at $450 for MS68).
Still, the raw coin market is the Wild West compared to PCGS.
The system is not perfect, as you say nealeffendi, but it's about finding the best system rather than a perfect one, and the coin market was definitely the Wild West before PCGS came along! So anything is a step up from that.
Yes. PCGS + NGC have leveled the playing field. I have a catalogue from a auction house that states...NOTE: We do not accept responsibility for items that do not come up to Buyer expectations on PCGS grading. NO refunds will be issued as a result of this...TOMBSTONE AUCTIONS..
Quote from: 'drakesterling' pid='110507' dateline='1501600684'The system is not perfect, as you say nealeffendi, but it's about finding the best system rather than a perfect one, and the coin market was definitely the Wild West before PCGS came along! So anything is a step up from that.
:agreed:
I doubt that there will Ever be a "Perfect" system with Any collectable because there will always be the unscrupulous element in the market But PCGS and NGC have made a huge difference to the integrity of the coin market.
There are still some dealers and sellers that still continue to deal in cleaned and overgraded coins But with the PCGS and NGC graded coins at least collectors now have a far greater chance of getting Exactly what they pay for.
We have to remember as well that regardless of how important Australian coins are to us they only form a Tiny percentage of the TPG's business and until they have been educated about our various coin varieties they will continue to make mistakes with attribution.
NO PCGS and NGC are Not "Perfect" But they are a quantum leap from the shady dealers from the not so distant past :ok:
Quote from: 'serenitystan' pid='110498' dateline='1501552179'Thanks Drakesterling. Have just finished reading the PCGS Guarantee of grade and Authenticity. They have just about covered there arse for all there mistakes. There is so much dishonesty and bullshit in people today.
PCGS having full discretion on the compensation amount is sufficient to "cover their arse" in every case but as Eric said in practice they do pay out well - it's in their interests to buy in coins they make mistakes on. Everyone I've talked to who has submitted a guarantee submission has said the same thing, the payout was fair but it took way too long.
Quote from: 'wwwww' pid='110522' dateline='1501657209'Quote from: 'serenitystan' pid='110498' dateline='1501552179'Thanks Drakesterling. Have just finished reading the PCGS Guarantee of grade and Authenticity. They have just about covered there arse for all there mistakes. There is so much dishonesty and bullshit in people today.
PCGS having full discretion on the compensation amount is sufficient to "cover their arse" in every case but as Eric said in practice they do pay out well - it's in their interests to buy in coins they make mistakes on. Everyone I've talked to who has submitted a guarantee submission has said the same thing, the payout was fair but it took way too long.
That's fine. Nothing you can do from here in Australia. Its not like you can take them to a small claims court. Still a 100% payout would be better than a well or fair payment.:yahoo:
Tombstone Auctions. I know exactly whom you're referring to.
Here is my 1956 3D graded as a proof. It looks more like a specimen to me.
PCGS grades them all as proofs at the moment.
Quote from: 'wwwww' pid='110999' dateline='1503627628'PCGS grades them all as proofs at the moment.
Why an I Not surprised about that :angel:
Quote from: 'wwwww' pid='110999' dateline='1503627628'PCGS grades them all as proofs at the moment.
Thanks Walter, If and when PCGS start grading them as SP and PR, I will get these coins regarded.
QuoteThanks Walter, If and when PCGS start grading them as SP and PR, I will get these coins regarded.
Working out which coins are Specimen and which are Proofs from this Era is Not an easy task and the financial risks for PCGS are quite large IF they get the attribution wrong.
Also there is the problem of All the coins already graded and attributed as Proofs that are in fact Specimens that would need to be re graded correctly.
There is also the problem with collectors that have had their 1956 Specimen coins that are in the PR slabs that would be very reluctant to have re graded and devalued by doing so.
The difference between the Modern Wedding Set Specimens and the Circulation strikes from the same years are Very Very Easy to distinguish between and at the moment there isn't that much of a difference in the values as there is with the 1955 and 1956 coins and PCGS "Refuses" to attribute these correctly at this time, So I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for PCGS to do a turn around with these pre decimal Specimens.