I have wrestled with this topic for many years and confess to not having the answer & largely given up. However, the topic was brought to the fore by an upcoming Aussie auction of 19th and 20th C. proof coins mainly from proof sets, but also including a number of alleged "VIP" (I hate that term and it does NOT seem to have come from the time coins were struck) Crowns from the 20th Century. Whilst I confess that they are nice coins indeed, the price estimates in Aussie $$ seem a bit fancy - well hard to tell in today's market. Back to the original point: the proof predecimal crowns of 20th century are known from the standard dates - 1927, 1935, 1937, 1951, 1953, 1960 (omitted the 1902). The first three are 0.500 silver with the exception of the 0.925 proof 1935 and the last three in copper nickel. There are some problems with designation in recent years however. In the last 30 or so years it has become more common to list some coins as so-called "VIP" (Very Important Person) Record proofs as they do generally appear rather nice. These are of ordinary years however, and proofs are known and somewhat common in what might be termed a "standard" form with polished dies and specially struck [perhaps] twice on specially prepped planchets. The preparation difference between these two types - if accepted as separate - is not entirely clear however. With especially fresh dies and when struck earlier from them, coins of the more common "type" or "variety" can have increased levels of device contrast that in recent years the TPGs such as NGC and PCGS have termed "Cameo" or "Deep Cameo/Ultra Cameo". These also are generally nice specimens and present better than so-called ordinary strikes from later die stages. So much better that some appear equal to the so-called "VIP" strikes. Auction values for the latter are a bit sketchy as they do not appear often with that designation (and the times they do seem to not be clear at all that is what they actually are) but the former are generally going for higher and higher prices whereas at one time there was little price difference in them or appreciation from more normal pieces. I have included a couple of pictures of each (also I apologise that one is taken through the plastic), and would ask readers if they choose to guess which is which and give opinion as to whether they spot significant differences. Also, if they can present cases or evidence of CLEAR difference between the supposedly special versions and the cameo. Also, I know as I often say as much: "have to see in hand, can't tell from photos".....Also, does I seem justified that there is a possible 500% price difference between them?
OK, I confess that I think I know the difference but don't like as you've gathered the "VIP" term or the price differential.
Yes I've found the whole VIP proof thing a bit confusing too - VIP proof sets definitely seem to have been struck in 1953, but I'm not sure about the other years. I don't know of any documentation to suggest that some proofs were better prepared/struck than others though, but as you say, some certainly do present better than others. I'm guessing that with some of these nicer coins, "possibly VIP proof" in one sale becomes "VIP proof" in the next sale. Definitely not, in my opinion.
Yes, obviously I agree. I think the key is in the hair on the obverse with very few reverse differences.
I guess so, although there are probably some "ordinary" proofs with near equal details.....An ordinary can come with relatively deep strikes and excellent cameo that overall appear at least to my eyes SUPERIOR to these "VIP" coins. The question is how much realistic premium is attached to the latter?
As a followup: the first unslabbed coin is the "VIP [sic]" Record proof, and the second is graded by PCGS as Proof66 Cameo, and is a sparkler in hand. As I looked at these more, the first coin has somewhat more pleasing presentation of George's hair to the top and possibly LESS hair detail behind the ear. I like the simplicity of the design overall, and so I have a nice little series of this in proof, matte proof and currency...
I was rather hoping that someone else might contribute an opinion about this, especially considering that there are so many cameo and deep cameo 1937-1960 Crowns that have been slabbed and now coming up for auction. I fear that buyers might be had by purchasing a cameo or deep cameo "ordinary" proof, but even moreso by paying what may (or may not) be the going price for VIP Record proofs. I have discussed these with some rather respected expert dealers in the UK (names withheld) and they tended to agree with my opinions.Although attractive, IMHO they are scarce - sort of - but overpriced. Even though these would be coins right up my alley, I simply will not pay the price for a "VIP" as per the OP.
Is there evidence that any of these were struck for a specific "very important person"? I don't know anything about these but it reminds me of the designations "branch mint proof" and certain "specimen" examples in the US. The position of many specialists is that the branch mints - San Francisco and New Orleans - had no coin press capable of making proof coins, and there's no evidence that the planchets or dies were specially prepared. Similarly for some coins designated "specimen", no evidence that the coins were minted in any special way or specifically for a person or purpose. They're just really nice looking examples and the grading companies decided to add some hype. My personal views only.
I think I agree to some extent about the hype although there were some special strikes that were NOT evidently labelled at the time. Interestingly, "special" issues did not always fall into nice neat categories of "proof", "prooflike", "specimen", "matte", "specimen" or others. And now there are attempts to pigeonhole these. There is some evidence that some proofs got better treatment than others, and one example is the 1953 proof set, where some of the pennies and farthings (and I believe halfcrowns) not only appear nicer than "typical" but were even struck from different dies. However, just like the crown in the OP, most can not probably be truly separated IMHO artificially. So a confusing issue that is interesting. I guess my main point was that the buyer beware (Caveat emptor) of especially crowns but also many of the other denominations & that the TPG label may not have a lot of meaning.
