Downies are correct.

MS65 is gem unc. Always was.

Most coins seen at public auction or in dealer's books and described as FDC grade as MS or PR 65-67; the remainder lower.

Quote from: 'interest' pid='83022' dateline='1450738509'

Quote from: 'trout' pid='82976' dateline='1450648490'Here is another.
Seller is calling a 2005 proof MOR a "Mule"

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Rare-2006-proof-set-with-the-1-Mule/121839289669?_trksid=p2047675.c100012.m1985&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20140107090229%26meid%3D0048ccd54ff94f5e8adce417bccf9671%26pid%3D100012%26rk%3D3%26rkt%3D10%26sd%3D321941922350

There was a huge amount of discussion back in 2006 regarding wether this should be called a mule or not.
As far as my recollection goes those of us who had a set of these wanted to call it a mule & those without a set did not believe it was a mule.
I think it still goes that way some will say yes it's a mule while others will say no it's not.
The beat goes on.
P.S I sold my set to a gentleman up in the Northern Territory for $5,000 (thank you Sir) so you can now call it what you want.

Not quite. I have a set with a  2005 MOR proof dollar and I do not consider it a mule; just an example of a coin that is rare in proof

Quote from: 'nealeffendi' pid='82818' dateline='1450249677'

Quote from: 'autocoupler' pid='82784' dateline='1450171438'

Quote from: 'nealeffendi' pid='82775' dateline='1450150984'Here here (I second that).
The major varieties penny set shouldn't be limited to what is/isn't included. It could be whatever penny for each year/mint takes your fancy. For example I have several 1925 pennies and I might choose a spur 1925 over a Q 1925 or a thin leg 1925.

I'm thinking the major varieties emu666 is referring to would be the known obverse and reverse die combinations and mint mark rarities. Maybe there is a case for some of the other well known varieties to be included, but I don't like the idea of an open ended list for varieties if it meant all manner of cracks and cuds etc were included, it would become a dogs breakfast. IMHO leave those for Ian McConnelly's book.

Is it possible for someone at the pointy end of this subject to describe what a list of major varieties would look like.

Dr Paul Holland published a good list of what the die pairings are for the penny. Ditto the (late) Jon Saxton (go to Triton.VG to see his effort).
PCGS has already included non die pair varieties (like the 1925 thin leg.).

The problem is that PCGS are not using the good work that Paul and Jon did, instead using they are using a  system that formerly was only recognised in the Strand Arcade.
I would urge anyone who is bothered by this to contact PCGS also.

Yes I did and they arrived yesterday. The quality is excellent and the best are MS68.:blush:

PCGS have been contacted about the population report and the die designations.
We have also suggested that there be a (normal) penny set and a "penny with major varieties" set.

Yes trout, the sets are quite ordinary
Went to Downies; looked through 150 or so sets
Selected best 26
Broke them open; sent 10 best of each denomination to PCGS
50c are ordinary; don't think any will better MS66
5c often weakly struck; on many coins could see marks on the planchet that hadn't filled in during the strike. Still some were good
obverse of 20c were generally beautiful; reverses very bagmarked as if they had the obverse and reverse dies around the other way from normal

1919, 1920 unsubstantiated assignment of mints
1922 bizarre designation (Mod rev???)
1931 unnecessarily complicated descriptions of reverse dies
http://www.pcgs.com/pop/detail.aspx?c=5031

George VI and QEII reverse die identifications at variance with the established designation scheme (1957Y reverse Fp: what is reverse Fp??).
http://www.pcgs.com/pop/detail.aspx?c=5032
http://www.pcgs.com/pop/detail.aspx?c=5033

Extremely disappointing

---

Not to mention the mess this has made of the set registry:
http://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/publishedset.aspx?s=118292
http://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/publishedset.aspx?s=120231&ac=1

Executing a criminal lowers both the executioner and the state down to the same level as the criminal.

Quote from: 'trout' pid='71491' dateline='1430204984'

QuoteI sent the first set over to PCGS not knowing what the coins would be graded as. It was a 2008 set. The 5c and $2 were graded as MS68, the others MS69. I gave the set to a friend of mine as a present because she liked the 50c so much and I thought the set should stay together.

That was a very generous and thoughtful thing to do Mate :good:
I am curious though as your grading skills are renowned and respected by Many (Me included), Didn't you notice that these coins were rather different to the coins you normally look at?
I can remember when I first had these "In Hand" I had a WTF moment.

I knew they were different. I'd always liked the wedding set coins.
As I said, I sent them over to see what they'd do with them.
I didn't know whether they'd come back as SP, PR or MS.

Quote from: 'trout' pid='71473' dateline='1430192499'I imagine that when the first of these coins were graded by PCGS they would have fetched some rather high prices at auctions because of the higher grades achieved over the normal Mint set Circulation coins.

I sent the first set over to PCGS not knowing what the coins would be graded as. It was a 2008 set. The 5c and $2 were graded as MS68, the others MS69. I gave the set to a friend of mine as a present because she liked the 50c so much and I thought the set should stay together.

WHAT DOES IT SAY ON THE BOX FROM THE MINT?


HOW ABOUT YOU QUOTE THAT RATHER THAN QUOTES FROM  BOOKS AND WEBSITES?

---

DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA OF THE TROUBLE YOU WOULD CAUSE IF YOU STARTED TO GET WEDDING SET COINS GRADED AS ANYTHING OTHER THAN MS NOW?

THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF THEM ALREADY GRADED, MANY IN REGISTRY SETS.

SO

LEAVE IT ALONE TROUT AND SHOW SOME CONSIDERATION TO OTHER PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


AND STOP POSTING THE SAME STUFF ON EVERY FORUM YOU CAN FIND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote from: 'trout' pid='71246' dateline='1429918461'...............
As soon as I get that 2014 $2 roll I will be opening it up to see if there are any MS66 or better coins in there.
MS65 is the top of the pops at the moment and the leftovers always make nice little pressies :yahoo:

Good luck Jim me boy.
Those 25 were coins I sent over at work in a bulk submission with minimum grade MS65. They were cherry picked out of about 30 rolls (i.e. 750 coins).
If you get an MS66 out of your roll you'll certainly be beating the odds.

Quote from: 'trout' pid='71175' dateline='1429831843'All I know is we never see these special issue $2 coins here in the West, They always get distributed on the Eastern seaboard and the only way to acquire a decent example of these is to pay through the nose on eBay.
I will wait a year and when the dust settles I will get the coins I want at a realistic price :ok:

I had plenty of the 2013 and 2014 issues at one stage. You should have told me you were looking for one and I would have sent you one

Quote from: 'trout' pid='71113' dateline='1429739483'Does anyone else have a problem having to pay the extra $5 per coin for the "Secure Plus" imaging at PCGS ?
A large percentage of these images are either Crap or simply are not there (Mechanical Error) :dodgy:

with a Modern submission you can opt out of these But anything before 1965 you HAVE to pay the extra $5 per coin for this IMHO Shoddy service.
I have just had to shell out an extra $170 USD, Which works out to be over $200 Just to ensure that my coins will be graded in a particular submission :dash1:

I have totally given up emailing PCGS to rectify these images because it happens all too often and I would much prefer NOT to have to pay extra for an unwanted and second rate service.

End of Rant...........
I feel SOOOOO much better now

---------------------- NO ------------------------

They are their rules and there are good reasons for those rules.
These are related to Chinese fake coins in fake PCGS slabs - this is a serious problem.
 If you don't like it, don't use their service.

Quote from: 'Mister T' pid='70891' dateline='1429314344'Ah okay.
Should 1999 be type 3b?

No; it's the same size as 2001 small head and 2002 onwards