Home World & Ancient Coins Forum
Options

1972 panama twenty Balboa question

I know some experts here could enlighten me but aren't these supposed to be .925 silver.

This 1972 twenty balboa in this auction says .500 on the back.

Is this a variety, a reproduction or counterfeit.

Krause lists them all at .925 silver but doesn't mention this .500 silver variety


hope this link works, not my auction
http://cgi.ebay.com/Panama-20-Balboas-Silver-Coin-Proof-

Don't know how to get link to work

Comments

  • Options
    farthingfarthing Posts: 3,294 ✭✭✭
    I could not find an auction on eBay for the 1972 20 Balboa that did not correctly list the silver as .925 or sterling. None listed the coin at .500 silver.

    Perhaps the seller just made a mistake in their listing.
    R.I.P. Wayne, Brad
    Collecting:
    Conder tokens
    19th & 20th Century coins from Great Britain and the Realm
  • Options
    7Jaguars7Jaguars Posts: 7,254 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Hmmmmm, perhaps 1982 which WOULD be 0.500.
    Love that Milled British (1830-1960)
    Well, just Love coins, period.
  • Options
    CeephusCeephus Posts: 73 ✭✭
    Still can't figure out how to link

    Here's the auction number 310043459342 if it helps

    and a better link if this works

    http://cgi.ebay.com/Panama-20-Balboas-Silver-Coin-Proof-1973_W0QQitemZ310043459342QQihZ021QQcategoryZ45147QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem


    It's listed as a 1973 in title but the image in the auction shows a 1972




    It clearly shows front and back and the back says .500 silver

    All of the 1972 20 balboa's I've seen say .925 silver

    I'm considering buying some but don't want to end up with something that's not real
  • Options
    ajaanajaan Posts: 17,109 ✭✭✭✭✭
    link

    Looks like .500 on the reverse.

    DPOTD-3
    'Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery'

    CU #3245 B.N.A. #428


    Don
  • Options
    farthingfarthing Posts: 3,294 ✭✭✭
    Link

    The 20 Balboas were .925 silver until 1980, when they changed to .500 silver.

    It appears that the auction title states 1973, the picture of the obverse of the coin shows 1972, as does the COA but the reverse picture is from a coin minted 1980+.

    These are common enough, I would probably pass on this particular one given the seller confusion.
    R.I.P. Wayne, Brad
    Collecting:
    Conder tokens
    19th & 20th Century coins from Great Britain and the Realm
  • Options
    ajaanajaan Posts: 17,109 ✭✭✭✭✭
    David, that must be it. Nice catch.

    DPOTD-3
    'Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery'

    CU #3245 B.N.A. #428


    Don
  • Options
    CeephusCeephus Posts: 73 ✭✭
    Ok, in this particular instance the obverse and reverse are two different coins.

    I just knew something wasn't right

    It makes you wonder what the winner is going to get.

    I've already bought several and all mine say .925

    This is exactly why it pays to do research before buying.
  • Options
    ajaanajaan Posts: 17,109 ✭✭✭✭✭
    If you don't mind me asking, how much do these coins usually cost? I know they have close to 4 oz ASW

    DPOTD-3
    'Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery'

    CU #3245 B.N.A. #428


    Don
  • Options
    7Jaguars7Jaguars Posts: 7,254 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Yes, well there was a bit of confusion with coins in 1975/6 being struck in cupronickel but marked as struck in .925 and this was for the 1B and 5B, and I believe this type of error was again propogated in later years (1980 or so??). Neither have I ever heard of earlier pieces with fineness errors and the above is right that the reverse is of a later type & so it was that I suggested possibly a 1982 coin...
    Love that Milled British (1830-1960)
    Well, just Love coins, period.
Sign In or Register to comment.