| Author |
 Replies: 18 / Views: 2,809 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
683 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5362 Posts |
Optimist-numismatist You have the country correct.
The coin is genuine. It is not counterfeit.
It is a Hong Kong dollar coin struck in Copper-Nickel. The coin has no visible date or mint mark. It is one of three possible KM types KM #'s 31.1, 31.2 or 35. These issues cover dates from 1960 to 1975. Total mintage for the issue is over 150 million coins. All but the KM # 31.2 (an incorrectly positioned mint mark) are junk box value coins (10 for $1.00 US).
If you look closely at the pictures I posted - there is a clue that no one has mentioned so far.
Any further guesses? comments?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1695 Posts |
Possible weak strike, rather than wear?
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
To be able to be graded it must be able to be determined what year the coin is (I thought this was mentioned before somewhere) I am not sure what country this is from if not a british coin. It generally needs to be able to be identified. AKA country, year, mint, type |
|
Valued Member
Canada
402 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
I kinda feel like that got hit with artificial wear
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5362 Posts |
The thing that everyone has missed so far is that the picture shows the coin in a TPG holder. The holder is PCGS. The coin is graded MS 60.  It is the next Stack's Auction in Hong Kong. I do not know about anyone else but referring to this as an MS60 makes little sense to me. They indicate it is a "Die Adjustment Strike". I thought that class was a misnomer. They are low pressure strikes that should be sorted out and discarded as rejects. I think it is wrong to assign a numerical grade to a dateless common coin even if it is a mint error. To say this is worth in excess of $100 is even worse. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1695 Posts |
Quote:
Possible weak strike, rather than wear? So I was right? Partial credit at least? Thanks for posting this. A fun and informative post! |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5362 Posts |
aristarchus123 Yes you were correct - sorry I did not mention that. You also were the only person to recognize that much of the surface was unstruck, with the appearance of a planchet.
Now after some time to think about it, does anyone think the grade is actually appropriate?
I think it is incorrect. It raises a series of questions in my mind.
First - is this even properly called a coin? No date and only a fractional image does not make it a coin in my opinion. It is a mint error, hardly a coin. It is more of a planchet than a coin.
Second - even if you see it as a coin, does the Sheldon grading scale actually apply? Does the grade give any relevant information about the coin? It apparently never entered circulation because it is MS. But how would you be able to tell if it did circulate? High point wear is out.
This thing should have been retained in the mint and destroyed. Do they use the Sheldon Scale to grade scrap?
The first couple planchets at the start of a coining run are not struck at all. After a few more cycles of the press the image develops. When a complete full pressure strike occurs a coin is produced that passes inspection. All earlier planchets running through the press are normally captured and destroyed.
I wonder if PCGS gives all blank planchets an automatic MS 60 grade? Does that seems fair? If there is no wear at all - it should be a 70 - right? The grade of MS60 is a technical problem for me - why 60 and not 65 or any mumber at all?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1695 Posts |
PCGS does grade blank/unstruck planchets at numerical grades higher than 60 (and also in non-ms grades lower than 60). I haven't seen higher than 63, however.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8715 Posts |
Doesn't a coin have to have an identifiable date to be graded? Even if it's an error such as a blank planchet, shouldn't it just be authenticated and not graded? It makes no sense to me why they grade coins with mint errors that have no date.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5362 Posts |
It is interesting to note that NGC does not assign a numerical grade to weak strikes unless there is enough detail. So at least for them you first need to have a nearly full strike before using the Sheldon scale. One thing I agree with.
Strike used to be a criteria used to establish a relative grade.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
Now after some time to think about it, does anyone think the grade is actually appropriate? Seems appropriate. It didn't circulate and 60 is a terrible terrible grade. Quote:
First - is this even properly called a coin? No date and only a fractional image does not make it a coin in my opinion. It is a mint error, hardly a coin. It is more of a planchet than a coin. Many mint errors have no visible date. Quote:
Second - even if you see it as a coin, does the Sheldon grading scale actually apply? Does the grade give any relevant information about the coin? It apparently never entered circulation because it is MS. But how would you be able to tell if it did circulate? Common sense says it never circulated. The surfaces would provide further evidence of this which is impossible to tell from pictures. Quote:
wonder if PCGS gives all blank planchets an automatic MS 60 grade? The don't. Fred Weinburg is on various forums and does errors for them, he would be the one to contact for how they grade them. Quote:
Doesn't a coin have to have an identifiable date to be graded? Not for errors. Plenty of off center errors have no date as another example. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5362 Posts |
basebal21 Your answers support the PCGS position, however, do you realize that I am not referring to encapsulation and authentication but only to numerical grading using the Sheldon scale? NGC for example will authenticate and encapsulate a mint error but for weak strikes they do not issue a numerical grade. The NGC statement on "Die Adjustment Strikes" includes the following: Quote:
Die adjustment strikes, as the name implies, are used to set the distance and the pressure of the dies to the planchet. In this stage of operation, there can be a noticeable lack of detail to the coin. This lack of detail will prevent the coin from being eligible for grading, although it can be readily and accurately attributed. To me this seems like a far more reasonable position.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
do you realize that I am not referring to encapsulation and authentication but only to numerical grading using the Sheldon scale? Yes I do, and I also realize that with errors the grade is really just a ballpark which is all it was being used for here. They almost never give out 60s, they just used that as a way to say it's uncirculated. The numerical grade also indicated its not a details coin which would be important to some, but overall they're just ballpark figures not the minute grading that happens with non errors |
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 18 / Views: 2,809 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 03/07/2018 8:36 pm
