1972 low echidna now recognized by pcgs

[serial]

Looks like someone got them to recognise this variant at last
http://www.pcgs.com/Pop/ValueView.aspx?s=568955

[stevo1962]

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

[serial]

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

[trout]

Nicely done :good:
Always nice when an Australian veriety is recognised by PCGS at last.

[Goldseeker]

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.

[serial]

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

[nealeffendi]

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:

[Goldseeker]

Point taken but has anyone tried?

[serial]

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

[runway]

2001 $1 Federation upsets/rotated die is a variety that comes to mind that PCGS doesn't accept in a general consignment

[serial]

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

[Fulvio]

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?

[Goldseeker]

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.

[serial]

looks like pcgs are starting to recognise a lot of new varieties
http://www.pcgs.com/pop/valueview.aspx?s=569220

[trout]

Add these as well

http://www.pcgs.com/cert/32909349


http://www.pcgs.com/cert/32909366