Silver Stackers logo

Silver Stackers

Discussion forum for those
who love to stack precious metals

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Forum registration is temporarily disabled due to a spam attack.

#1 2016-04-24 08:14:52

hyphenated
Member
From: FNQ
Registered: 2012-10-06
Posts: 459
Trades :   76 

2005 Perth Mint Sovereigns

Hi guys

I'm finding difficulty tracing down mintages for the 2005P Sov, which was a recreation of the Sydney Mint Type 1 Reverse.

According to the Perth Mint Numismatics info, there was a maximum mintage of 7,500 with a declared mintage of 2,909 for the proof with book.

However, it is also possible to pick up what are described as Proofs, in capsules, no COA or book.  Now I can believe that several books went astray, but I think it more likely that Proofs or UNCs were also sold; the question is how many and what were they?

Does anyone have any definitive information?

Thanks!

Offline

#2 2016-04-24 08:33:35

trew
Silver Stacker
From: Melbern
Registered: 2011-08-24
Posts: 3,958
Trades :   

Re: 2005 Perth Mint Sovereigns

If the Perth Mint says the mintage was 2,909 then that is what it is.

You just underestimate how often the book might get thrown away

Offline

#3 2016-04-24 10:50:10

hyphenated
Member
From: FNQ
Registered: 2012-10-06
Posts: 459
Trades :   76 

Re: 2005 Perth Mint Sovereigns

Hmmm.

Chards mention an uncirculated version and a capsule-only Proof version and price them all separately, so my confusion remains, even though this might be an old page.

https://taxfreegold.co.uk/2005australia … ersary.php

Offline

#4 2016-04-24 19:50:39

trew
Silver Stacker
From: Melbern
Registered: 2011-08-24
Posts: 3,958
Trades :   

Re: 2005 Perth Mint Sovereigns

OK that's an interesting one

A 2005 bullion version sov is not listed on the Perth Mint mintages nor in the Kruse catalog

and yet there are some available for sale on ebay


????????

got me

Offline

#5 2016-04-26 08:38:47

hyphenated
Member
From: FNQ
Registered: 2012-10-06
Posts: 459
Trades :   76 

Re: 2005 Perth Mint Sovereigns

Yep - it's a puzzler. 

Is there any easy way of differentiating Proof from Bullion in this case?  The Chard photos make we wonder whether it's as simple as a frosted field for Bullion and polished for Proof.

Last edited by hyphenated (2016-04-27 00:38:39)

Offline

#6 2016-06-05 04:26:35

BullionBuddy
Member
From: Australia
Registered: 2016-03-12
Posts: 53
Trades :   13 

Re: 2005 Perth Mint Sovereigns

Guys,

i am seeking some thoughts on the new Perth Mint Sovs as a long term investment strategy, my thinking is that as they have such low mintages each year they should appreciate better that the old sovs from the 1800's /1900's that had much higher mintages. is this a fair assumption or completely wrong?

Offline

#7 2016-06-05 06:41:47

hyphenated
Member
From: FNQ
Registered: 2012-10-06
Posts: 459
Trades :   76 

Re: 2005 Perth Mint Sovereigns

Low mintage doesn't necessarily equate to high value.  Also, prices do not necessarily go only up (or stay up) - witness silver S2 Dragons, for example. 

Certainly Perth Mint takes a fair old premium to themselves on launch of boxed Sovs, and a lot of punters didn't like the Australian Coat of Arms Reverse designs (I don't).  I think the replica Sydney Sov is interesting.

Bear in mind that the ebb and flow of historical Sovs is what causes the market to have rarities - lots melted down, several different Mints; many different dies with potential errors; Shield designs and different monarchs... the list goes on.

However, they are Sovereigns, the mintages are small, so who knows?  I'll happily pick 'em up if cheap enough, but I'm still puzzled about whether there are bullion coins or unboxed proofs; and if so, at what mintages.  Bear in mind that sometimes it's the contrarians who have the last laugh - buying the unfashionable before it becomes the fashion.

By the way; I did ask the original thread question of Perth Mint, but have had no response...

Offline

The following user says thank you for this post: BullionBuddy

#8 2016-06-23 07:08:01

hyphenated
Member
From: FNQ
Registered: 2012-10-06
Posts: 459
Trades :   76 

Re: 2005 Perth Mint Sovereigns

Got a response from Perth Mint:

"The Perth Mint did make a bullion Sydney Mint sovereign replica 1855-2005 (with a declared mintage of 9875) and it does have  a frosted table and the proof sovereign has a polished table.
700  of the Proof version were sold without packaging, however the numbers are included in the total mintage figure on our website (2,909).
At the time when the 2005 records were compiled we omitted to include an exclusive First Strike of 1000 coins of the Proof Sovereign coin with Book and Sleeve.
Therefore the total number of the proof sovereign coins sold was 3909".

So they will probably fix up the numbers in the next cycle.

So (employing my mad math skills): 
      700 unpackaged Proofs (in capsules, one thinks)
   1,000 'First Strike' proof coins & books (where did these go, I wonder?)
   2,209 Proofs with books
   9,875 UNC Bullion coins with frosted tables

Heh.

Offline

#9 2016-06-23 11:01:06

westminstrel
Member
Registered: 2016-06-01
Posts: 61
Trades :   

Re: 2005 Perth Mint Sovereigns

hyphenated wrote:

Got a response from Perth Mint:

"The Perth Mint did make a bullion Sydney Mint sovereign replica 1855-2005 (with a declared mintage of 9875) and it does have  a frosted table and the proof sovereign has a polished table.
700  of the Proof version were sold without packaging, however the numbers are included in the total mintage figure on our website (2,909).
At the time when the 2005 records were compiled we omitted to include an exclusive First Strike of 1000 coins of the Proof Sovereign coin with Book and Sleeve.
Therefore the total number of the proof sovereign coins sold was 3909".

So they will probably fix up the numbers in the next cycle.

So (employing my mad math skills): 
      700 unpackaged Proofs (in capsules, one thinks)
   1,000 'First Strike' proof coins & books (where did these go, I wonder?)
   2,209 Proofs with books
   9,875 UNC Bullion coins with frosted tables

Heh.

I think you're making a mistake...

The 2909 figure includes the 700 that were sold without packaging. Hence why the total proof count is 3909 - it is made up of the 2909 plus the 1000 first strikes.

Offline

#10 2016-06-24 18:09:45

hyphenated
Member
From: FNQ
Registered: 2012-10-06
Posts: 459
Trades :   76 

Re: 2005 Perth Mint Sovereigns

700 + 1,000 + 2,209

westminstrel wrote:
hyphenated wrote:

      700 unpackaged Proofs (in capsules, one thinks)
   1,000 'First Strike' proof coins & books (where did these go, I wonder?)
   2,209 Proofs with books
   9,875 UNC Bullion coins with frosted tables

Heh.

I think you're making a mistake...

The 2909 figure includes the 700 that were sold without packaging. Hence why the total proof count is 3909 - it is made up of the 2909 plus the 1000 first strikes.

Offline

#11 2016-07-14 06:57:32

westminstrel
Member
Registered: 2016-06-01
Posts: 61
Trades :   

Re: 2005 Perth Mint Sovereigns

Hey buddy, I still think your count is wrong... according to Perth Mint's statement from your post "700 of the Proof version were sold without packaging, however the numbers are included in the total mintage figure on our website (2,909)"

Therefore, here's how I think the count breaks down:

1000 (exclusive first strike)
2909 (declared mintage as of 2005 which included the 700 proofs that "were sold without packaging")
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3909 (this number tallies with Perth Mint's last statement from your post that says "Therefore the total number of the proof sovereign coins sold was 3909")

And then there are the 9,875 UNC Bullion coins with frosted tables.

Offline

#12 2016-07-17 23:54:41

hyphenated
Member
From: FNQ
Registered: 2012-10-06
Posts: 459
Trades :   76 

Re: 2005 Perth Mint Sovereigns

700 + 1,000 + 2,209 = 1,000 + 2,909

Offline

#13 2016-07-18 00:47:38

westminstrel
Member
Registered: 2016-06-01
Posts: 61
Trades :   

Re: 2005 Perth Mint Sovereigns

Mate, I must be going crazy! I thought you said 2909 instead of 2209. I just re-read your posts and realized you have been doing the count as 2209+700=2909. So, apologies for belabouring the obvious smile

Last edited by westminstrel (2016-07-18 12:11:10)

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB