| Author |
 Replies: 11 / Views: 3,580 |
|
|
Valued Member
269 Posts |
A decent 1932 Florin currently for sale, & considering purchasing it. I can guess the grade but TPG's are full of surprises. Opinions appreciated.  Bluesheet currently has this at: AU55 $7,500 | AU58 $8,600 | MS62 $33,000 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5825 Posts |
I'd say AU-50 or -53 from NGC or PCGS.
But remember, non-US grading standards are tougher.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21786 Posts |
I hope you are looking at a coin that is up for sale from a leading dealer with an excellent reputation,
or the private owner can independently prove the provenance.
There a few very deceiving fakes of the '32 Florin, out there in the wild.
Looks OK on screen, but that would not make me happy enough.
Potentially, lots of money to be paid out in this case.
Grade wise, some obvious light wear on the high points of the design, both sides.
EF. (British grading)
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
185 Posts |
Hmm I don't like the look of the long " bulging " kangaroo's body and the emu's legs might be a little too thin, or at least its leg against the shield....is the kangaroo's right hand paw on the shield normal ?
I could be mistaken, but that 1932 2/- looks a bit unusual to me.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
599 Posts |
The pic is not good enough to grade.
But if I had to I'd say probably 58, maybe 62.
It appears to be a scan rather than a photo so its probably better in the hand.
Watch your top knot
Edited by echidna
06/18/2019 06:22 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
694 Posts |
The date is repunched on the 1 and 9 and as echidna has mentioned because of the weird way the coin looks from the picture I personally would question its authenticity. I certainly wouldn't buy it raw unless it came with a traceable provenance If you put your coin and this PCGS coin believe it or not was graded AU-50 together there are so many differences albeit very minor but to me cleverly minor. Different fonts and design styles My first concern was the shape of the G's you see how on a normal 1932 they are flat at the bottom on yours they are more C shaped with a deep curve.And the stars don't point to 12 oclock position they are rotated further anti-clockwise But this could all be down to how the picture was taken. If you are sending it to PCGS you will find out one way or another but if the coin on the right is AU50 then yours is at least 2 grades higher maybe more I am more inclined to go for MS60   |
|
Valued Member
 269 Posts |
Thank you to all that replied. Zoo: Interesting observations. If the southern cross stars are incorrectly aligned - that would be somewhat peculiar. The G in D.G. does typically have a flattened base. This 1933 detail is interesting (from an MS65)  So far as I know, all George V florins originate from the same Master die - no obverse varieties are known for any 1911 to 1936 series florins. Kanga: I suspect it's higher than 50/53 Echidna: yes it'd likely be somewhere in the 58-62 range Squaremeal: The Emu and Roo details seem okay. Quote:
There a few very deceiving fakes of the '32 Florin, out there Maybe - but I've yet to see one. Edited by CoinOS
06/18/2019 5:31 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
694 Posts |
Everything in red or arrows are differences. Now they may all well be just camera effect but when areas like where the A of Australia starts on the ribbon is much further in and not close to the edge or the lapel edges on his collar are almost twice as high if these coins were all struck from 1 master die you seriously have to ask questions. One of the first things I noticed was the O in George and OMN just didn't look right they look like they are sideways and are wider horizontally than they are Vertical. The reverse legend fonts are different designs and the Ground under the shield looks nothing like the coin on the right which is all raised with very intricate moss like grass. In contrast to the very modern looking dots to make the appear the same.Missing emu foot. If I could excuse camera effect as a very plausible explanation then I wouldn't have concerns but on those areas I have pointed out Which are core design features I would question its authenticity. Only other explanation is there are more than 1 variety type . Not beyond the realms of possibility if you know the history of British and commonwealth coins. We are even now well modern date 2009 finding other Die pairings in the UK for some denominations Like edward VII shilling where there were only 2 dies used for the series now there are 3 . So it is quite possible another die could of been used.   Edited by zookeeperz
06/19/2019 07:11 am
|
|
Valued Member
269 Posts |
Quote:
If I could excuse camera effect as a very plausible explanation then I wouldn't have concerns but on those areas I have pointed out Which are core design features I would question its authenticity. Only other explanation is there are more than 1 variety type . Very interesting study you've done there. No varieties are known, as far as my reading takes me. Just as I went to Email them for a HD photo - the listing vanished. Not marked 'sold' but rather gone. Maybe the owner or auctioneer reads this - and had doubt. Thank you again for the work you did here, I learned a thing or two reading your posts. Cheers. |
|
Valued Member
269 Posts |
Update: Coin resurfaced on ebay 173943187414It has numismatically contentious characteristics but insufficient to call it out as likely counterfeit. I want one, but I'm not giving them eight thousand dollars. |
|
Valued Member
Australia
369 Posts |
MMMMMM. Don't think Status(the seller) would make a blunder like that. Although there are minor differences I would have to inspect before buying.MS62 would work for me.
P.S. It may have come to the end of it's listing cycle and automatically relisted.
Edited by airgem
06/26/2019 5:21 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
599 Posts |
It sold through Nobles as "nearly uncirculated".
Sale 118 Lot 1137.
Watch your top knot
|
| |
Replies: 11 / Views: 3,580 |
|
Posted 06/18/2019 01:29 am
