Forums

hello..........I am Brian from the colonies(Las Vegas, Nevada).................I have been collecting since 2017................I am a member of both PCGS and NGC registries..................I have found the PCGS people and registry system to be more responsive and open to the desires of the customer and a joy to work with...................on the other hand the NGC registry is simpler and therefore easier to use, but limited.....and the hired help less capable if not rude nor in some cases even aware of what collectors want or need.........................of course the available work forces are very different....Florida is less educated and California more educated........it is hard to find new employees either place..................as you may have noted a PCGS PR69 is many times going to be a NGC PF70.........certainly not for sure................I "feel" that the PCGS grading standards are a bit higher than the NGC but both are certainly higher and more accurate than my poor abilities............the rule thumb seems to be never cross over an NGC slab to PCGS because you may loose a grade. as I mentioned, I collect both.........but only Queen Elizabeth II gold sovereigns............the NGCs tend to cost less and the PCGSs cost more........and in many years the the NGC slabs are more available..................there are simply more coins graded by NGC...(supply and demand)...so some NGC slabs are dirt...like the 2013-I...it is hard to sell one for much over spot...and the same for 1918-i even though so many want to say that it is "Rare"...it is not. in the end both companies do the best they can given their respective situations.......both growing like mad and having to contend with work force problems have a good day Brian

I have the Michael Marsh book and often look at a few different resources for info on sovereigns, but it often involves a lot of flicking through pages and Google searches etc to find the info I'm looking for. Also I found it hard to keep track of the info when it is spread across several pages, e.g. comparing mintages from different branches for a given year. I thought it would be useful to have the information displayed graphically as a kind of "overview" with the main info at a glance. Such a resource may well already exist but I thought I would make one for my own use anyway and learn while I'm doing it. Then I thought why not share it with the community for feedback, input and ideally to be a help to others. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/156gWOBDS2n4f7P3ChMSJNIOgSnjLYqZxQuWv0mGCwYw/edit?usp=sharing The spreadsheet concentrates on changes in design (e.g. portraits and different reverses and mint marks) but ignores minor varieties etc. All the mintage figures are as per Marsh. Mints are colour coded. I will move on to proofs, halfs, doubles and £5s in time. Let me know of any errors or any comments and suggestions please 😄 Please could I request members not to share this link beyond the community right now.

Since I posted this about 1 month ago I ended up coming across about a dozen over different listings without specifically seeking them out. I've got one in the bag now at least so that's one less portrait to look out for 😁

Regarding half sovereigns, according to Marsh, 1982 was the only year that normal halfs were minted with the Machin portrait. There were 2.5million minted in 1982 compared to over 90 million minted between 1893 and 1915!

You don't see a lot of Machins in general bullion circulation in my experience. I recently got a handful in and they flew out again so fast I made a note to put up prices a bit higher next time! When you compare the official mintages (whether these are to be trusted or not I know not) there are around 37 million for the Machin portrait compared to 315 million of George V, and while more of the GVs will by now have been melted down, I'm sure they still vastly outnumber the Machins. Until recently I assumed the portrait by Arnold Machin was the same as his portrait on the stamp (the most reproduced artwork in history), but in fact they are distinctly different, not least as the portraits face different directions! I prefer the Machin portrait to the Gillick portrait, which I find a bit "soft", but not sure if that's down to the engraving or the strike.