1958 Perth Proof Penny

Basil · January 30, 2017, 10:23:56 AM

This is my 58 Penny Proof,i took a couple of scans whilst i have it out.Not sure if the Die Pairing is scarce or one of the run of the mill ones.
I read an article back in the 1990's,different to the excellent Paul Holland one, that several different Die pairing were used as some Dies were ruined as they experimented with sand blasting techniques.
There appears to be Reeding/Bin marks on the Obverse,i don't know how it was released by the Mint unless it was via the back door.
Comments appreciated as i don't know much about them.

autocoupler · January 31, 2017, 02:12:51 PM

Sorry Basil, I'm no help, but I assume this is the article by Paul Holland you referred to. Had a quick look through, and must take the time to have a closer look at some point. As you say, it's excellent.

http://www.numismatics.org.au/pdfjournal/Vol16/Vol%2016%20Article%201.pdf

gnome · January 31, 2017, 02:22:00 PM

Going back a bit in the ACR, there was a series of aricles on the proofs. Think there were some comparisons. T. Vincent Veyheyen was the author. Maybe awhile longer now, about 2006, November, something on proofs there, unsure of the dates mentioned though.

Mister T · January 31, 2017, 08:56:19 PM

Quote from: 'gnome' pid='104658' dateline='1485834720'Going back a bit in the ACR, there was a series of aricles on the proofs. Think there were some comparisons. T. Vincent Veyheyen was the author. Maybe awhile longer now, about 2006, November, something on proofs there, unsure of the dates mentioned though.

Yeah I remember a few of those articles in the Coin and Banknote magazine - late 2000s I think, with die markers for 1955 and later proofs.
Don't remember the exact issues though.

Basil · February 01, 2017, 08:58:16 AM

Thanks for the replies,i'll work my way thru. the Holland article again.
Strange Coin for a proof,first time i've looked at it with a Microscope,doubling on the 9 and 5,misformed dot after Penny and it looks like its been hit with other Coins in the Bin.
How could this be released as a Premier/Prestige Coin.?

ausjack · February 01, 2017, 10:02:39 AM

When Belly and I went to an auction viewing in sydney I was picking errors out on so many proof coins it was unreal and it is the mint we're talking about so anything is possible Basil and especially where they're concerned :dash1:

Basil · February 01, 2017, 09:27:29 PM

Hi AJ,good to see you posting again,ás i said i don't know much about the Perth Proofs,just a Hobby collector but surprised to see the glitches on this Coin,must have gone out the Mints back door as i can't see a Dealer of the period accepting it.

ausjack · February 01, 2017, 10:10:47 PM

It was probably the front door as there's a lot of impaired proofs getting around and that's why you have to have a really good look at the coins, plus they're getting a bit of age on them now but I like my proofs and they are sort of rare, well low mintage anyway.

trout · February 01, 2017, 10:49:47 PM

Compared to the mintages of the circulating QE2 pre decimals the Proof coins have a tiny mintage on average of about 1500 and I think the 1963 proofs had a mintage of about 5,000 So they are Not exactly Dirt common and yet values of these are not really that high, Which I find to be a bit odd.

A quick look on eBay and these sets can be had from $300-$700 and considering that a 1966 decimal proof set with a mintage of over 18,000 normally sells for $400 upwards does seem a little Odd don't you think?

ausjack · February 02, 2017, 12:33:23 AM

Yes I don't know why pre decimal proofs aren't more highly regarded but then there's a few things that don't make sense.

Basil · February 02, 2017, 09:25:10 AM

Quote from: 'trout' pid='104742' dateline='1485951587'So they are Not exactly Dirt common and yet values of these are not really that high, Which I find to be a bit odd.

Yeah,the sets used to bob up regularly on Ebay USA and usually didn't go for big money.
I did a Google on the 58 Penny Proof and Walter sold one for $200 which for a mintage of a 1000 or so is ridiculous,they were worth more than that 40 year ago.

ausjack · February 02, 2017, 10:40:15 AM

Yeah the arse really fell out of the market a few years ago, just after I bought mine :@ Just means I have to hold onto them a lot longer but that's ok as that was the plane anyway.

It's still a buyers market for proofs, wish I had money

trout · February 02, 2017, 01:34:57 PM

Maybe the newer generations of collectors are concentrating on Decimal coins because after all that is what we are using for money and getting coins out of circulation is always more interesting and cheaper.
This is probably why the interest and values is pretty stagnant where the pre decimal proofs are concerned.
Very many of the younger collectors don't have that "Connection" with pre decimals that us old farts do and maybe their interest just isn't there yet.
I say yet because in most cases every collector broadens their interest eventually and for the decimal collectors the pre decimals is probably the way this will happen.
For Me it was the other way around, I started off only collecting pre decimals before I bothered with decimal coins :angel:

ausjack · February 02, 2017, 01:59:30 PM

Who you callin "old fart" as decimal was here a bit before my time

But I like pre decimal, maybe because I like history

autocoupler · February 02, 2017, 02:31:52 PM

Yeah, I reckon history is certainly a reason to collect the Proclamation series, so anyone want to sell me a Johanna cheap :shok::grin: