NGC Sovereigns Check, Anything with a premium?

[Xeros]

Got these NGC graded sovereigns a while back, I'm by no means a sovereign expert so I'm curious if theres anything here that would have or hold a premium

They were bought on eBay from the same seller for not much more than what a ungraded sovereign would cost, just I don't really want to keep them slabbed if they are just BU coins 😆

I'm sure we have some sovereign wizards here that can point out anything special, if there is something

[SilverRich]

I'd be smashing them all out tbh. None of them are really graded to what someone would really pay a premium for over a bullion. 

I do like slabbed coins though, they just take up too much space so are reserved for "good" graded ones. 

Year/mintage wise, I couldn't comment as it's giving me neckache looking at them sideways. 

[Xeros]

3 minutes ago, SilverRich said:

I'd be smashing them all out tbh. None of them are really graded to what someone would really pay a premium for over a bullion. 

I do like slabbed coins though, they just take up too much space so are reserved for "good" graded ones. 

Year/mintage wise, I couldn't comment as it's giving me neckache looking at them sideways. 

Yeah, exactly why I wanted to take them out just didn't know if i was devaluing any of them by doing so, they just don't fit into my collection very well with my other slabbed coins. 

 

[SilverRich]

1 minute ago, Xeros said:

Yeah, exactly why I wanted to take them out just didn't know if i was devaluing any of them by doing so, they just don't fit into my collection very well with my other slabbed coins. 

 

Before you grab the hammer, just wait for one of the sovereign aficionado's to comment just in case. 😄 I'm more proof/modern in my "knowledge". 

[Xeros]

Just now, SilverRich said:

Before you grab the hammer, just wait for one of the sovereign aficionado's to comment just in case. 😄 I'm more proof/modern in my "knowledge". 

Was looking forward to some destruction 😄

[goluckystayhappy]

Why do people pay to get bullion sovereigns slabbed?

[James32]

28 minutes ago, goluckystayhappy said:

Why do people pay to get bullion sovereigns slabbed?

Authentication of older coins

Price increase if a really good grade.

 

[Petra]

At a push the MS61 is probably the only one worth keeping in a slab?🤔🤔

[pricha]

The 1958 recently sold on the forum shows ,  having them slabbed but nothing outstanding seems to actually hold back the selling price. Like people who collect Slabbed coins want MS minimum so won't touch anything less, while stackers don't like slabbed coins full stop.  It's as if they haven't realised the slab can be broken quite easily. And some sellers think because its in a NGC holder there should be a premium regardless. I myself have bought lower grade coins or with details and tap tap with the hammer, a nice bullion coin at a decent price . Sometimes a bargain can be had. 

[Mysstree]

3 hours ago, goluckystayhappy said:

Why do people pay to get bullion sovereigns slabbed?

Gillicks 57 - 68 are only available as bullion.

[pricha]

ps the 1958 was a ms 63 and i was very tempted but i would have broken that one out as Gillicks really need to be ms 65 for a silly price .

[Mysstree]

7 minutes ago, pricha said:

ps the 1958 was a ms 63 and i was very tempted but i would have broken that one out as Gillicks really need to be ms 65 for a silly price .

1958 is the highest mintage of the Gillicks, was tempted to break it out (sold the ms63) but already had a raw one. 59 being the lowest mintage can be hard to come by, all the ones i have seen so far (dealers) have been rough apart from Chards. 57 mintage is only slightly higher yet most of those i have seen have been decent.

[LawrenceChard]

39 minutes ago, Mysstree said:

Gillicks 57 - 68 are only available as bullion.

That's not entirely accurate.

In fact there are at least two inaccuracies.

Some specimen versions were issued, but they are very rare, and valuable.

Proofs probably also exist of some dates, most likely 1957.

I am not sure the Royal Mint called them bullion coins at the time, probably circulation coins, but I could be wrong.

 

[LawrenceChard]

26 minutes ago, Mysstree said:

1958 is the highest mintage of the Gillicks, was tempted to break it out (sold the ms63) but already had a raw one. 59 being the lowest mintage can be hard to come by, all the ones i have seen so far (dealers) have been rough apart from Chards. 57 mintage is only slightly higher yet most of those i have seen have been decent.

Good company there @ChardsCoinandBullionDealer!.

We used to keep over 100 (1957s) in stock.

😎

[LawrenceChard]

5 hours ago, Xeros said:

Got these NGC graded sovereigns a while back, I'm by no means a sovereign expert so I'm curious if theres anything here that would have or hold a premium

They were bought on eBay from the same seller for not much more than what a ungraded sovereign would cost, just I don't really want to keep them slabbed if they are just BU coins 😆

I'm sure we have some sovereign wizards here that can point out anything special, if there is something

 

5 hours ago, SilverRich said:

I'd be smashing them all out tbh. None of them are really graded to what someone would really pay a premium for over a bullion. 

I do like slabbed coins though, they just take up too much space so are reserved for "good" graded ones. 

Year/mintage wise, I couldn't comment as it's giving me neckache looking at them sideways. 

I often wonder why people take sideways photos, then fail to rotate (and often crop) them before posting. It is not user friendly!

😎

[Britannia47]

Time for photos of 2 ‘Gillicks’ to show off their quality, plus an unexplained issue I have re their ‘Yellow-Gold’ colour.

I took the 1957 Sovereign to to be ‘Niton’ tested at a well known London bullion dealer last Friday morning, and surprise-surprise, the alloy was all copper - no silver whatsoever!  It matched the test as shown on Chards alloy chart.

I had previously suggested on another topic that the copper may have degraded over the past 60 years. I put my theory to the ‘tester’  of the coin, who said that copper oxidation may have taken place over time (66 Yrs ) creating a type of patina on the surface. Certainly, copper does suffer from ‘verdigris’ - just look at the Statue of Liberty! 

I brought up this subject because of TRMs decision to produce ‘yellow gold’ sovereigns. 

Anyone else offer an explanation…..?

Either way Gillicks are the best😍! @ChardsCoinandBullionDealer
 

 

Edited yesterday at 08:26 by Britannia47

[Britannia47]

This is the sovereign tested!… @LawrenceChard

Edited yesterday at 10:35 by Britannia47

[LawrenceChard]

13 hours ago, Britannia47 said:

Time for photos of 2 ‘Gillicks’ to show off their quality, plus an unexplained issue I have re their ‘Yellow-Gold’ colour.

I took the 1957 Sovereign to to be ‘Niton’ tested at a well known London bullion dealer last Friday morning, and surprise-surprise, the alloy was all copper - no silver whatsoever!  It matched the test as shown on Chards alloy chart.

I had previously suggested on another topic that the copper may have degraded over the past 60 years. I put my theory to the ‘tester’  of the coin, who said that copper oxidation may have taken place over time (66 Yrs ) creating a type of patina on the surface. Certainly, copper does suffer from ‘verdigris’ - just look at the Statue of Liberty! 

I brought up this subject because of TRMs decision to produce ‘yellow gold’ sovereigns. 

Anyone else offer an explanation…..?

Either way Gillicks are the best😍! @ChardsCoinandBullionDealer
 

 

 

13 hours ago, Britannia47 said:

This is the sovereign tested!… @LawrenceChard

You can see from the Niton display that the "well known London bullion dealer" only tested for 30 seconds. We test as standard for 60 seconds, and some dealers have their machines set to a pathetic 10 seconds.

We also test both sides, which can give different results.

Your reading does not show "the alloy was all copper", 4 ppt of Germanium is a very unusual reading, which should give any competent. experienced tester cause for concern.

Also, the default display only shows up to 4 elements, each to 3 places (ppt). Pressing the "details" button switches to 4 places, and displays more elements. Your dealer clearly did not so this, and probably didn't know, and apparently didn't take much interest in your enquiry.

If you look at this YouTube video:

 

At about 3:20, I demonstrate this very point:

As you can see it shows Au (gold) to 4 places (including 2 decimal places), as 99.99%, with a error probability of 0.34%, whereas the earlier reading only shows to 3 places:

The more detailed reading shows a possible trace ot Titanium was detected. This is extra information which is useful for any thinking person, but probably lost on the average dealer or assistant.

It looks like we will have to do some more tests on one or more 1957 sovereigns, to clear up the "mystery".

While I agree that some of the copper which is exposed at the surface will have reacted with some atmospheric gases, visually evident by toning, this is unlikely to have much noticeable effect on the colour or the XRF reading.

Much of the above makes me wonder what the "well known London bullion dealer" is well known for, it can hardly be for their scientiific or numismatic interest and expertise. Who can it be? (PM if you don't want to name and shame them).

😎

[LawrenceChard]

6 hours ago, LawrenceChard said:

 

You can see from the Niton display that the "well known London bullion dealer" only tested for 30 seconds. We test as standard for 60 seconds, and some dealers have their machines set to a pathetic 10 seconds.

We also test both sides, which can give different results.

Your reading does not show "the alloy was all copper", 4 ppt of Germanium is a very unusual reading, which should give any competent. experienced tester cause for concern.

Also, the default display only shows up to 4 elements, each to 3 places (ppt). Pressing the "details" button switches to 4 places, and displays more elements. Your dealer clearly did not so this, and probably didn't know, and apparently didn't take much interest in your enquiry.

If you look at this YouTube video:

 

At about 3:20, I demonstrate this very point:

As you can see it shows Au (gold) to 4 places (including 2 decimal places), as 99.99%, with a error probability of 0.34%, whereas the earlier reading only shows to 3 places:

The more detailed reading shows a possible trace ot Titanium was detected. This is extra information which is useful for any thinking person, but probably lost on the average dealer or assistant.

It looks like we will have to do some more tests on one or more 1957 sovereigns, to clear up the "mystery".

While I agree that some of the copper which is exposed at the surface will have reacted with some atmospheric gases, visually evident by toning, this is unlikely to have much noticeable effect on the colour or the XRF reading.

Much of the above makes me wonder what the "well known London bullion dealer" is well known for, it can hardly be for their scientiific or numismatic interest and expertise. Who can it be? (PM if you don't want to name and shame them).

😎

I found a few spare minutes today to check a couple of our 1957 sovereigns, and was surprised to find no silver detected, even using 4 places (2 decimal places).
I did not have time to trawl through the entire elements list, so will resume later, probably this week sometime.

😎

[Britannia47]

Apologies to @Xeros for taking this off topic, but one last photo, to show how alloys change colour….

Also, thanks to L.C. 😊

 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 19:00 by Britannia47

[MrStacker]

On 21/10/2024 at 14:38, SilverRich said:

I'd be smashing them all out tbh. None of them are really graded to what someone would really pay a premium for over a bullion. 

I do like slabbed coins though, they just take up too much space so are reserved for "good" graded ones. 

Year/mintage wise, I couldn't comment as it's giving me neckache looking at them sideways. 

Even say MS63-64 slabbed bullion sovereigns? Break em and tube em?

@Britannia47you have a very fine taste sir. Gillicks all the way! 😁

[SilverRich]

7 hours ago, MrStacker said:

Even say MS63-64 slabbed bullion sovereigns? Break em and tube em?

@Britannia47you have a very fine taste sir. Gillicks all the way! 😁

Probably not an ms64 if it was a good coin but the ones above I can't see any premium.

[LawrenceChard]

16 hours ago, Britannia47 said:

Apologies to @Xeros for taking this off topic, but one last photo, to show how alloys change colour….

Also, thanks to L.C. 😊

 

 

 

That's quite a good set of examples, although it is difficult to get accurate colour rendition in any photo, particularly with coins and other shiny, reflective metallic objects, and even more so when there are different "finishes" such as proof, adding to the technical challenges.

If they were slabbed, it would make things even worse, but at least it would bring the thread closer to its original topic.

😎