The World's Ugliest MS63 coin

This might be the ugliest MS63 coin I have ever seen:




guy

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Judging by the design.... it would be ugly at ms 70 too.

 

i like the reverse. definitely not a 63

 

I must be missing something. What's so ugly about this coin? Yeah, William III wasn't exactly a model, but what's your gripe here?

 

If this is comment is directed to me then I apologize for insulting the coin. It's just that I'm so used to seeing lady liberty and got used to that type of design.

 

No, George you're fine, the comment is intended for the original poster.

It's not so useful to just say a coin is the "world's ugliest MS63 coin" and not say anything else. I'm curious what he finds so offensive about the coin. I saw it posted on eBay for $750 tonight, and I thought maybe he had some gripe specific to the toning, the planchet flaw on the obverse, the grade? Who knows what...

I presume Bart is an expert of this particular series and knows all of the strike issues, varieties, etc. to make such a comment.

 

Not really seeing the ugly. I bet that crescent in hand is full of yellow red and green.

 

still nicer then an MS70 nickel

 

I rather like it.

 

I think the coin is lovely and would certainly find a place in my collection. (Although I would have it out of its prison first.)

I am not happy with the grade - not because I necessarily disagree with it, but it is meaningless and wrong to apply a modern and essentially American only grading system to a British coin of this age. In the UK this would be graded EF, or EF+ - we do not give Uncirculated grades to anything of this age.

Which leads on to the really ugly thing - the price someone is trying to sell it for!

 

I too think it looks nice. Nice and crusty.

 

I'd be happy to give him/her a nose job via Photoshop.

 

Thanks for posting it.

I kind of like it. It is remarkably preserved or being around 315 years.

I don't compare it t a MS63 Morgan that may be full of machine-made mint luster & bag marked.

Of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

 

I can't say that I'm a fan of the carbon spots on the obverse, but otherwise it has what I'd look for in a coin from this era.

When this coin was minted Isaac Newton was warden of the mint and was busily trying to reform and standardize English coinage. In 1699, he would take over as Master of the Mint and the coinage would continue to improve. Here's my AU 1705 "Newtonian Groat" for comparison:

 

Well aged milled MS-63:thumb: coin but in the 1600 they did not engrave coin to be nice looking.just to spend.I do not think may folk could collect a coin + still live.but the Royals some did.
There a few uglier modern coin Ive seen.my2c

 

That’s funny and and just plain silly. :too-funny:

Thank you, nevertheless, for your thoughtful assessment of my post. I have never claimed to be “an expert of this particular series [who] knows all of the strike issues, varieties, etc. to make such a comment.”

In fact, despite having been on this site a few years longer than you, I have repeatedly stated that I’m not even a coin collector. I might have the delusion, however, that I could possess a piddling of knowledge about the history behind the coins I study.

That said…

After the Re-coinage Act of 1696, Parliament demonetized the previously hand-struck silver coinage, much of which had either been clipped or forged.* This depreciated coinage would be replaced with a standardized coinage, one that was both milled and edged. The new demands from an economy transitioning from an agrarian one to a commercial one also required an abundant supply of new coinage. Finally by 1696, the expensive Nine Years War with France was also drawing to a close. This required revenue and taxes with a consistent and universally accepted coinage.

This sudden re-coinage resulted in the opening of branch mints at Bristol, Chester, Exeter, Norwich, and York. These branch mints, as one can imagine, where under great pressure to rapidly produce adequate coinage for circulation despite their inadequate facilities and lack of trained workers. This resulted in several varieties of William III sixpences with numerous errors in the legend or design. Some of these errors are not typically listed. I do not know all these varieties and errors.

That said, the 1697 sixpence, despite its age is very affordable and readily available. Coins with an attractive eye appeal are relatively inexpensive. One can see from the recent Heritage Auction results that this is not an expensive coin despite its age. (The second bust of the 1697 series with its sub-varieties is probably the most desired type, by the way.)

http://www.ha.com/c/search-results.zx?N=0+790+231&chkNotSold=0&Ntk=SI_Titles&Nty=1&Ntt=sixpence+1697

I am not disagreeing with the grade of the coin. I have a lot respect for NGC world coins and I am confident that this coin, despite its “haymarks” and unusual (possibly suspicious) toning, warrants a grade of MS 63. I also recognize that the possible planchet defect has no impact on the final grade.

Nevertheless, I think I have the right, even as a non-numismatist, to comment on this coin’s aesthetic appeal. Although I may lack your numismatic expertise, I think my opinion is also valid. I have handled scores of William III sixpences as I assume from your post that you have. But our opinions differ.

Sorry, this is not an attractive coin. I do apologize that my calling this coin "the world's ugliest MS 63" was a little harsh. I just did not find it appealing. And I didn’t even comment on its high price tag.

guy

*"As more and more coins were clipped, the face value of the existing body of coins [minted before the Re-coinage Act of 1696] came into question, raising transactions costs. By 1696 over 50% of the precious metal content of the coinage was removed." (Jones, D. War and Economy in the Age of William III and Marlborough. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1988.)

 

I think you're right Bart, that is one ugly coin there. Coins that look like that are probably bad investments because even though someone graded it high it just looks bad.

 

To be honest...I like it. I don't have $750 to spend on it, but I do like it.

 

I would be willing to bet that a good numismatic photographer could make you change your opinion about that coin being the ugliest MS63 in the world.

 

Looks accurately graded to me. Nice coin.