2012 bullion quarter sovereign ownership

[9x883]

8 minutes ago, Spyder said:

When is a Brilliant uncirculated coin not a bullion coin. From the RM list they are indicating that only 4559 sovereign were sold and the only way to tell the difference is a piece of paper or COA indicating struck on the day.   

This is the problem. Off the same sausage belt, packaged differently 

[Booky586]

I don't think we will ever get the true mintage quantities from the Royal Mint. Back in April I posted a screenshot, taken from the royal mint website, showing the number of Proof and Brilliant Uncirculated sovereigns issued in 2012 (excluding bullion grade). I'll reload it again below:

Today I visited the same webpage and realised the Royal Mint have now revised the mintage for this year, but only on the Brilliant Uncirculated Quarter Sovereign:

There's a bit of a difference now! What's happened? The official mintage has jumped from 137 to 7,362!

https://www.royalmint.com/discover/uk-coins/mintage-figures/2012-dated-uk-collector-coin-sales/

Edited June 11 by Booky586
Typo

[Spyder]

12 minutes ago, Booky586 said:

I don't think we will ever get the true mintage quantities from the Royal Mint. Back in April I posted a screenshot, taken from the royal mint website, showing the number of Proof and Brilliant Uncirculated sovereigns issued in 2012 (excluding bullion grade). I'll reload it again below:

Today I visited the same webpage and realised the Royal Mint have now revised the mintage for this year, but only on the Brilliant Uncirculated Quarter Sovereign:

There's a bit of a difference now! What's happened? The official mintage has jumped from 137 to 7,362!

https://www.royalmint.com/discover/uk-coins/mintage-figures/2012-dated-uk-collector-coin-sales/

Well, well, that is definitely more than 137.   Again only a piece of paper tells you that one has a Brilliant uncirculated sovereign of 4559 and not the 400k or are now everyone saying that only 4559 sovereign were sold that year.   From the sovereign book, later years has some distinguishing mark to tell but not the 2012. 

[Booky586]

40 minutes ago, Spyder said:

Well, well, that is definitely more than 137.   Again only a piece of paper tells you that one has a Brilliant uncirculated sovereign of 4559 and not the 400k or are now everyone saying that only 4559 sovereign were sold that year.   From the sovereign book, later years has some distinguishing mark to tell but not the 2012. 

Never seen any of the 2012 Brilliant Uncirculated so can't comment but some of the early Brilliant Uncirculated quintuplets are differentiated by a letter U next to the date. The best ones to look out for (in my opinion) are the 2014 and 2015 mule Sovereigns. These came out of the Brilliant Uncirculated issue and SOTD, they have a proof reverse and an uncirculated obverse, definitely worth looking out for. 

[Wampum]

2 hours ago, Booky586 said:

I don't think we will ever get the true mintage quantities from the Royal Mint. Back in April I posted a screenshot, taken from the royal mint website, showing the number of Proof and Brilliant Uncirculated sovereigns issued in 2012 (excluding bullion grade). I'll reload it again below:

Today I visited the same webpage and realised the Royal Mint have now revised the mintage for this year, but only on the Brilliant Uncirculated Quarter Sovereign:

There's a bit of a difference now! What's happened? The official mintage has jumped from 137 to 7,362!

https://www.royalmint.com/discover/uk-coins/mintage-figures/2012-dated-uk-collector-coin-sales/

This looks as if the Royal Mint actually look at what is happening on TSF, and read the comments, as since the inception of this thread till now the Quarter has suddenly jumped by 7225.

We may have a Mole.  

[Booky586]

6 minutes ago, Wampum said:

This looks as if the Royal Mint actually look at what is happening on TSF, and read the comments, as since the inception of this thread till now the Quarter has suddenly jumped by 7225.

We may have a Mole.  

Yes, totally agree!

[arphethean]

Are they still making them?!?!

[9x883]

25 minutes ago, arphethean said:

Are they still making them?!?!

No way!

[Midasfrog]

4 hours ago, Spyder said:

Well, well, that is definitely more than 137.   Again only a piece of paper tells you that one has a Brilliant uncirculated sovereign of 4559 and not the 400k or are now everyone saying that only 4559 sovereign were sold that year.   From the sovereign book, later years has some distinguishing mark to tell but not the 2012. 

I think the BU sovereigns are struck an extra time compared with the standard bullion which is struck once, so there should be a difference in the look and finish to fields .

[9x883]

8 minutes ago, Midasfrog said:

I think the BU sovereigns are struck an extra time compared with the standard bullion which is struck once, so there should be a difference in the look and finish to fields .

Perhaps. Hard to tell. The single sov struck on the day looks identical to the standard bullion sovereigns and those are supposed to be BU. 

[GoodAsGold]

4 hours ago, Wampum said:

This looks as if the Royal Mint actually look at what is happening on TSF, and read the comments, as since the inception of this thread till now the Quarter has suddenly jumped by 7225.

We may have a Mole.  

Moles are thought to be seriously shortsighted. Obviously works in QC when not prying on the expertise on TSF.

[GoodAsGold]

7 hours ago, Booky586 said:

I don't think we will ever get the true mintage quantities from the Royal Mint. Back in April I posted a screenshot, taken from the royal mint website, showing the number of Proof and Brilliant Uncirculated sovereigns issued in 2012 (excluding bullion grade). I'll reload it again below:

Today I visited the same webpage and realised the Royal Mint have now revised the mintage for this year, but only on the Brilliant Uncirculated Quarter Sovereign:

There's a bit of a difference now! What's happened? The official mintage has jumped from 137 to 7,362!

https://www.royalmint.com/discover/uk-coins/mintage-figures/2012-dated-uk-collector-coin-sales/

A great spot Booky. I think the original 137 figure is possibly human error when you see that the BU half sov figure immediately above it is 2137. Maybe something went wrong when cutting and pasting. Sure there’s a difference of 2,000 but both figures end 137.

[9x883]

7 hours ago, GoodAsGold said:

A great spot Booky. I think the original 137 figure is possibly human error when you see that the BU half sov figure immediately above it is 2137. Maybe something went wrong when cutting and pasting. Sure there’s a difference of 2,000 but both figures end 137.

Great observation @GoodAsGold  , how could anyone not notice 137 is an extremely low mintage when entering the data 😱😱😱😱😱

I still think the double had extremely low mintage. They only came in the three coin set @Wampumkindly found the RM ad

again limited presentation only 60, however RM figures state 119 BU sets!!!!😪

Edited June 12 by 9x883

[GoodAsGold]

On 29/03/2024 at 20:12, Wampum said:

I found the file for the 2012 BU Set, sorry for the quality, it's a scan of a scan, the figures for the Half Sovereign are interesting   

I only discovered this thread yesterday, hence my late contributions to some of the posts.

The above mintage figures seems to me to be another classic case of human error by the Royal Mint. Whilst the MCM for a brilliant uncirculated (BU) double is reasonable yet still open to question quite rightfully by @9x883, the unlimited amount of BU full sovs and halves are clearly wrong in my opinion. If forum users assume (or have assumed previously) that BU stands for bullion (rather than Brilliant Uncirculated) then isn’t it fair to reason that whoever was tasked with producing the above mintages (such as a RM employee with very limited experience of coins) could have made the same assumption and got the BU figures totally wrong?

It’s been rightfully mentioned that the BU coins come in boxes, yet there’s no way they’d have unlimited boxes for the full sov and 250,000 boxes for the halves. Any rubbish listed by the RM appears to be taken as gospel (as per the 137 bullion quarters) and people have blindly used the same figures in their own publications without giving it any thought. Furthermore, the “unlimited” amount of full sovs seems to me to be their best description to get around disclosing their true amount of bullion sovs as discussed in their answer to the FOI request.

 

[9x883]

I only discovered this thread yesterday, hence my late contributions to some of the posts.

Never too late to join the party😂

The above mintage figures seems to me to be another classic case of human error by the Royal Mint.

100%, another RM blunder 

Whilst the MCM for a brilliant uncirculated (BU) double is reasonable yet still open to question quite rightfully by @9x883, the unlimited amount of BU full sovs and halves are clearly wrong in my opinion. If forum users assume (or have assumed previously) that BU stands for bullion (rather than Brilliant Uncirculated) then isn’t it fair to reason that whoever was tasked with producing the above mintages (such as a RM employee with very limited experience of coins) could have made the same assumption and got the BU figures totally wrong?

Completely agree, great observation. I initially thought BU meant bullion!

It’s been rightfully mentioned that the BU coins come in boxes, yet there’s no way they’d have unlimited boxes for the full sov and 250,000 boxes for the halves. Any rubbish listed by the RM appears to be taken as gospel (as per the 137 bullion quarters) and people have blindly used the same figures in their own publications without giving it any thought.

Yes, not good practice at all. Definitely appears to be the case

Furthermore, the “unlimited” amount of full sovs seems to me to be their best description to get around disclosing their true amount of bullion sovs as discussed in their answer to the FOI request.

Yes, like a greasy politician. I guess, we'll never get to the bottom of this. 😕

[GoodAsGold]

On 06/06/2024 at 17:44, arphethean said:

This will pop up for sale shortly.

 

Back then the RM only advised avoid handling the coin as fingerprints impair its quality. I would imagine now that to cover themselves they’d also mention not to actually give the coin to a baby in case it puts it in its mouth!

[GoodAsGold]

On 05/06/2024 at 21:45, 9x883 said:

Still none the wiser on all this, looked on RM today

1/4 sovs 7362 mintage, but this figure includes bullion + BU but on this year BU=Bullion? Struck on the day sovs look like normal bullion sovs to me!🤔🤔🤔🤔

You would have to hope that there is a difference between the SOTD 2012s and the normal bullion ones. No doubt that the SOTD issues came in boxes (maybe only cardboard ones as opposed to wooden ones) and cost more than bullion coins. I know you have/had different versions of the 2012 such as the £2 proof as well as the bullion sov I bought from you at the weekend, so I consider you to have plenty of knowledge about the 2012 versions.

Personally I got into the whole thing just after the 2017 releases and I know that in 2017 the RM released 3 SOTD versions. The first was on 6 Feb 2017 marking 65 years since Princess Elizabeth was proclaimed Queen on the death of her father. That SOTD was described as a Brilliant Uncirculated hand held triple strike (not bullion) and it had a narrow ribbing on a reeded edge. Mintage of 750.

The 2nd 2017 SOTD on 1 Jul 2017 was a Brilliant Uncirculated sov with a plain edge. Mintage of 1817 to celebrate 200 years of the modern sov.

The 3rd 2017 SOTD on 20 Nov 2017 celebrated the platinum wedding anniversary of the then Princess Elizabeth to Philip Mountbatten on 20 Nov 1947. This had the same mintage of 750 Brilliant Uncirculated sovs as the first SOTD of the year but these coins had a wider ribbing on a reeded edge than the first SOTD ones, so there was a difference between the SOTDs (I’ve never owned any of those SOTDs to compare them though).

The bottom line is I wonder if there was also any sort of true difference between the SOTD and bullion 2012 sovs? I’m guessing that the SOTD 2012s don’t have plain edges to differentiate them from the bullion coins, but maybe there’s a difference in the number of serrations on the rim? Anyone up for counting them? 😆

[Thelonerangershorse]

23 hours ago, Wampum said:

This looks as if the Royal Mint actually look at what is happening on TSF, and read the comments, as since the inception of this thread till now the Quarter has suddenly jumped by 7225.

We may have a Mole.  

Not inconceivable, we have a frog and a mouse.

[Booky586]

3 minutes ago, Thelonerangershorse said:

Not inconceivable, we have a frog and a mouse.

And a horse too, Silver

Edited June 12 by Booky586

[James32]

1 minute ago, Booky586 said:

And a horse too, Silver

@silverhorse?

[9x883]

Hi @GoodAsGold

You would have to hope that there is a difference between the SOTD 2012s and the normal bullion ones. No doubt that the SOTD issues came in boxes (maybe only cardboard ones as opposed to wooden ones) and cost more than bullion coins. I know you have/had different versions of the 2012 such as the £2 proof as well as the bullion sov I bought from you at the weekend, so I consider you to have plenty of knowledge about the 2012 versions.

2012 is my limit of sovereign variations, pretty new to sovs in general tbh. I've got a graded SOTD, I cannot tell the difference and they don't grade any better than the bullion sovs despite being brilliant uncirculated .

The CoA states unlimited mintage, so I imagine just a standard bullion sov in a capsule with box and CoA. 

Personally I got into the whole thing just after the 2017 releases and I know that in 2017 the RM released 3 SOTD versions. The first was on 6 Feb 2017 marking 65 years since Princess Elizabeth was proclaimed Queen on the death of her father. That SOTD was described as a Brilliant Uncirculated hand held triple strike (not bullion) and it had a narrow ribbing on a reeded edge. Mintage of 750.

The 2nd 2017 SOTD on 1 Jul 2017 was a Brilliant Uncirculated sov with a plain edge. Mintage of 1817 to celebrate 200 years of the modern sov.

The 3rd 2017 SOTD on 20 Nov 2017 celebrated the platinum wedding anniversary of the then Princess Elizabeth to Philip Mountbatten on 20 Nov 1947. This had the same mintage of 750 Brilliant Uncirculated sovs as the first SOTD of the year but these coins had a wider ribbing on a reeded edge than the first SOTD ones, so there was a difference between the SOTDs (I’ve never owned any of those SOTDs to compare them though).

You certainly know the 2017s! I've seen the plain edge kicking about in slabs, quite desirable I believe. Out of my lane, @NGMDknows these coins well, sorry bud, you need to join in the madness here!😂

The bottom line is I wonder if there was also any sort of true difference between the SOTD and bullion 2012 sovs? I’m guessing that the SOTD 2012s don’t have plain edges to differentiate them from the bullion coins, but maybe there’s a difference in the number of serrations on the rim? Anyone up for counting them? 😆 

Zero difference. Biggest scam ever! Who even knows if they were struck on the day!!!!!!! I very much doubt it😕

 

Edited June 12 by 9x883

[GoodAsGold]

3 hours ago, 9x883 said:

Hi @GoodAsGold

You would have to hope that there is a difference between the SOTD 2012s and the normal bullion ones. No doubt that the SOTD issues came in boxes (maybe only cardboard ones as opposed to wooden ones) and cost more than bullion coins. I know you have/had different versions of the 2012 such as the £2 proof as well as the bullion sov I bought from you at the weekend, so I consider you to have plenty of knowledge about the 2012 versions.

2012 is my limit of sovereign variations, pretty new to sovs in general tbh. I've got a graded SOTD, I cannot tell the difference and they don't grade any better than the bullion sovs despite being brilliant uncirculated .

The CoA states unlimited mintage, so I imagine just a standard bullion sov in a capsule with box and CoA. 

Personally I got into the whole thing just after the 2017 releases and I know that in 2017 the RM released 3 SOTD versions. The first was on 6 Feb 2017 marking 65 years since Princess Elizabeth was proclaimed Queen on the death of her father. That SOTD was described as a Brilliant Uncirculated hand held triple strike (not bullion) and it had a narrow ribbing on a reeded edge. Mintage of 750.

The 2nd 2017 SOTD on 1 Jul 2017 was a Brilliant Uncirculated sov with a plain edge. Mintage of 1817 to celebrate 200 years of the modern sov.

The 3rd 2017 SOTD on 20 Nov 2017 celebrated the platinum wedding anniversary of the then Princess Elizabeth to Philip Mountbatten on 20 Nov 1947. This had the same mintage of 750 Brilliant Uncirculated sovs as the first SOTD of the year but these coins had a wider ribbing on a reeded edge than the first SOTD ones, so there was a difference between the SOTDs (I’ve never owned any of those SOTDs to compare them though).

You certainly know the 2017s! I've seen the plain edge kicking about in slabs, quite desirable I believe. Out of my lane, @NGMDknows these coins well, sorry bud, you need to join in the madness here!😂

The bottom line is I wonder if there was also any sort of true difference between the SOTD and bullion 2012 sovs? I’m guessing that the SOTD 2012s don’t have plain edges to differentiate them from the bullion coins, but maybe there’s a difference in the number of serrations on the rim? Anyone up for counting them? 😆 

Zero difference. Biggest scam ever! Who even knows if they were struck on the day!!!!!!! I very much doubt it😕

 

Hi @9x883,

Thanks for your reply and insight on the 2012 sovs. I’m surprised the RM got away with the SOTD scam back then but the COA mintage clearly backs up your own suspicions as well. They seem to have learnt their lesson by 2017. It’s a bit of a shame that the beauty of subsequent plain edge varieties are somewhat hidden away within their slabs. If I ever want one then I’d be tempted to keep it ungraded so the plain edge remains visible in its original capsule.

This 2012 thread has indeed come a long way ever since the RM first implied that there were only 137 bullion quarter sovs!

[Wampum]

On 12/06/2024 at 13:18, GoodAsGold said:

I only discovered this thread yesterday, hence my late contributions to some of the posts.

The above mintage figures seems to me to be another classic case of human error by the Royal Mint. Whilst the MCM for a brilliant uncirculated (BU) double is reasonable yet still open to question quite rightfully by @9x883, the unlimited amount of BU full sovs and halves are clearly wrong in my opinion. If forum users assume (or have assumed previously) that BU stands for bullion (rather than Brilliant Uncirculated) then isn’t it fair to reason that whoever was tasked with producing the above mintages (such as a RM employee with very limited experience of coins) could have made the same assumption and got the BU figures totally wrong?

It’s been rightfully mentioned that the BU coins come in boxes, yet there’s no way they’d have unlimited boxes for the full sov and 250,000 boxes for the halves. Any rubbish listed by the RM appears to be taken as gospel (as per the 137 bullion quarters) and people have blindly used the same figures in their own publications without giving it any thought. Furthermore, the “unlimited” amount of full sovs seems to me to be their best description to get around disclosing their true amount of bullion sovs as discussed in their answer to the FOI request.

 

These are the figures for the 2012 range in the Spink 2024 year book, also mentions your SOTD @9x883 there should have been 2012 looks to have been 1990 however in the total above that @Booky586 posted it showed a figure of 4559 BU Sov's,

which does not include the SOTD Sovs' struck!!

Another thing, that it states is that the 119 (UGS01 --AKA -- PGS66)set which somehow is made up from the 60 doubles that where struck is different to PCGS12.

PCGS12 is the code for the three coin BU SOTD Set of 60 which the mintage figures for the Sovereign and half have been omited.   

[9x883]

15 minutes ago, Wampum said:

These are the figures for the 2012 range in the Spink 2024 year book, also mentions your SOTD @9x883 there should have been 2012 looks to have been 1990 however in the total above that @Booky586 posted it showed a figure of 4559 BU Sov's,

which does not include the SOTD Sovs' struck!!

Another thing, that it states is that the 119 (UGS01 --AKA -- PGS66)set which somehow is made up from the 60 doubles that where struck is different to PCGS12.

PCGS12 is the code for the three coin BU SOTD Set of 60 which the mintage figures for the Sovereign and half have been omited.   

Amazing, but I'm confused 😕 😅, so 60 coins for the double? Why don't the figures match!!!!!? 119 is for a different set?

Edited June 13 by 9x883

[Wampum]

6 minutes ago, 9x883 said:

Amazing, but I'm confused 😕 😅, so 60 coins for the double? Why don't the figures match!!!!!? 119 is for a different set?

I think so, but look at the BU sovereign SC8 4559 produced however none Authorised. Also the figures for SC8 are different on both charts.

Edited June 13 by Wampum