Two very rare (possibly unique?) RSA Proof Sets: Comments please.

[Pierre_Henri 64]

According To Hern’s Handbook of South African Coins & Patterns, the 1979 and 1982 nickel R1 coins were only struck in non-proof (uncirculated) condition.

 

Only the silver R1 coins of that year were struck in proof condition.

 

But look at the following two proof sets of 1979 and 1982 in their original SA Mint boxes as issued – the R1 coins are the nickel issues (weight 12 grams) and they are very clearly proof coins.

 

The two proof sets do not include the larger silver R1 coins.

 

Has anyone seen sets like these before?

 

Pierre

[testrarossa 10]

Hi Pierre,

My 2010/2011 edition states ''prooflike obtainable as single pieces'' for 1977-1983? In proof sets too maybe judging by your photos. Heres a qoute from Hern's regarding the silver ''Often the difference between a proof coin and an uncirculated coin is very small.'' Why not the same for nickel? I only collect silver proofs and the early ones are very tricky(ie opposite language proofs) My opinion is that the R1 series (both silver and nickel) is abit of a grey area from 1965-1991 when above qoute is taken into account. I also found that NGC slab the nickel 1990 R1 and the label says S1R. Could therefore easily happen with proof/unc too. Bit off topic sorry I know but trying to complete my series and learning all the time

[cyberexchange 10]

Hi Pierre

 

I note that Hern mentions proof like individual pieces of that date in nickel.

 

Could the silver rands in the proof boxes have been replaced by the nickel rands mentioned above.

 

The purpose of doing this is beyond me.

[Cold Sea 6]

The nickel coin is slightly smaller in diameter than the silver, so the coin would be a loose fit if in a normal box.

[Tulley 10]

1979 proof set with nickel rand sold on a DNW auction in September 2013 for £500.

 

The description was:

 

VIP Proof set, 1979, comprising Rand (nickel), 20, 5, and Cent Afrikaans legends, 50, 10, 2 and Half-Cent English legends (cf. Hern 53; cf. KM. PS106) [8]. Virtually as struck, brilliant, extremely rare; in dark blue dated S.A.M. case of issue - 5 sets struck

 

[Pierre_Henri 64]

1979 proof set with nickel rand sold on a DNW auction in September 2013 for £500.

 

The description was:

 

 

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]5244[/ATTACH]

 

Thank you Douglas

That was the info I was looking for.

 

With literally a handfull of sets in existence, one would have thought that the set would actually sell for more that £500.

 

Does someone perhaps know if more than 5 sets were issued of the 1982 set?

 

Pierre

[jwither 16]

With literally a handfull of sets in existence, one would have thought that the set would actually sell for more that £500.

 

Does someone perhaps know if more than 5 sets were issued of the 1982 set?

 

Pierre

 

 

Not really. From the posts here, I understand that it is the Rand coin which has this mintage of five or less in the "off metal" strike. The other coins are apparently the regular proof strikes.

 

If this is correct, then this price of 500 GBP isn't that far out of line with Rhodesian proofs from 1968-1975 which have a reported mintage of five and which in the past have sold for the same or less. I concur that South Africa is a larger market but there isn't that much collecting of RSA and most South African collectors focus on Union and ZAR while there is much less to collect from Rhodesia and Southern Rhodesia.

 

Also, there isn't any automatic reason to think that just because a coin or set is rare or has a low mintage, that anyone should really want it. Why? Just because of the low mintage and rarity even when there isn't anything of distinction about it whatsoever? I doubt most South African collectors are even aware of the existence of this set, even if they own the Hern Handbook. And they probably can't tell the difference either because they look almost identical to the silver issue.

 

The only market that I am aware where every rare coin sells for a high price is the United States. But then, these prices are disproportionately not just high, but exorbitant and absurd. And the reason that they are is because there is huge population of collectors with a lot of money to spend and the ridiculous prices of these coins don't impact more than a few collectors.

 

If you think this price is too low, you should also take a look at the Heritage archives for the UK "proofs of record". A large collection sold within the last five years. For those who are not familiar with a "proof of record", only a few proof sets were struck in large numbers in the pre-decimal era. My recollection includes the 1831, 1839, 1887, 1893, 1902, 1911, 1935, 1937, 1951 and 1953. So for example, a 1948 2/6 is a "proof of record". To my knowledge all of these have a mintage of less than 10. and in the Heritage sale, I believe they mostly sold for $1000 to $2000 USD which is not out of line with this GBP 500 either. There are also many 19th century issues which have sold in the same price range or only somewhat more.

[Pierre_Henri 64]

I just ordered this book from RANDCOIN and hope that It will shine some light on these issues.

 

Its a pity that we do not read books anymore and just rely on GOOGLE for information don't you think?

 

Buy books boys!

 

Pierre

 

Books & Catalogues - *#* S.A. COINS FOR A HUNDRED YEARS - F Malan *#* for sale in Johannesburg (ID:164307381)

[Cold Sea 6]

I was wondering if anybody can explain the price difference of R20 000.00 between the 1979 set (R41 000.00) and the 1982 set (R22 000.00) Both are supposed to be equally rare even though a scratched 1982 R1 specimen is currently being offered for R7 500.00

[Pierre_Henri 64]

It takes Two to Tango

 

I was wondering if anybody can explain the price difference of R20 000.00 between the 1979 set (R41 000.00) and the 1982 set (R22 000.00) Both are supposed to be equally rare even though a scratched 1982 R1 specimen is currently being offered for R7 500.00

 

I think the answer lies with the under- bidders...

 

Regarding the 1979 set :- 9 minutes before the item closed, there were still 3 bidders in for R40 000 that included RANDCOIN.

 

When the two under bidders saw this, they probably realized (four minutes later at 21:55) that the 1982 set was probably also lying at R40 000 so stopped chasing the top bidder and gave up at R22 000 not wanting to push it further to probably the R40 000 + it was at.

 

In an auction, I really takes two (or more) to Tango

 

Pierre