New submissions just back from PCGS.....

canadacolornut

I'm OK with the George 111 piece--MS64- although I really thought it was a proof.

Am I better off with this coin in MS 64 or Proof 64?

Really disappointed in the Hong Kong piece. I was looking for MS 65 or 66 and it graded MS 62.

Not sure what I missed....

JCMhouston

I don't think the 1816 is a proof, but if it was it would be rare to very rare and worth much more than a MS coin. It does not look like a proof from the strike on the reverse and the rims and denticles on both sides. As you know 1816 was the first year of the new coinage and it's not uncommon to find them with PL characteristics.

It does look like they were pretty harsh on the Hong Kong piece, still a pretty coin though and worth more than 62 money.

MacCrimmon

Nice PL surfaces to that 6d., but I think the MS64 grade is fair considering the overall marks on the coin. It looks like they gave you the benefit of the doubt regarding those 'file' marks on the reverse rims. Did the Brits use adjustment marks at this late date? Anyway those same adjustment marks match up with striations central to the reverse centers, FWIW.

The HK does have nice pastels, but a "62" is wholly consistent with the soft strike and the number of surface marks on Edward's portrait (quite a few for a small coin). Also take note that a coin like that HK design (reverse side) should really have next to no marks on the central lettering to get into the 65+ range, but I think the obverse was the biggest culprit in landing in a "62" holder.


P.S. I based these comments on viewing the pizza platter sized TrueView™ images.

canadacolornut

Thanks for the help fellows; I know you both know the series a lot better than I do.

I feel better about the grades with your opinions. I do tend to discount a weak strike somewhat when
a coin has the kind of color the Hong Kong piece has.

Thanks again.....