Jump to content
CoinPeople.com

Hong Kong 1 Mil


buzkirk

Recommended Posts

After a few weeks of trying to buy these of ebay with very little success, I have now got a 1866 and 1865 still need a good 1863 (bidding on a nice one now)

 

What's with all the interest on these coins, they are bringing 3X book price, every one I bid on seems like 25 bids and is being snapped up by people bidding on thousands of coins a month.

 

Here is the link to the ebay sale

http://www.ebay.com/itm/370563350830?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1497.l2649#ht_542wt_1185

 

I'm guessing this 1865 will grade at EF or better.

How would you grade it off these photos ?

 

 

Any info anyone has on these will be appreciated

Thanks Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the photo, VF30 net, due to the green stuff. Crown isn't that sharp, though that may be a strike issue.

 

Also, keep in mind that Krause isn't always "on the ball" on prices as it is a generalist guide.

 

For specific collecting of any nation's coins, it's always best to use the standard catalogue for that country. e.g. for US coins, I would use the Red Book.

 

For HK coins, the Ma catalogue is standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any East Asian coin will usually attract a significant premium when slabbed (PCGS / NGC) versus raw, especially in AU or better, as it takes the uncertainty out of the grade and also the authenticity (not as significant in the case of minor coinage).

 

As this was a coinage that was only struck for several years, then circulated for decades with no new issues, yes, this relatively speaking is a pretty nice example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since ccg mentioned slabbed versions it raises a question for me. Maybe you guys know the answer. A while ago I believe NGC established an office in Singapore or Hong Kong (not sure which - maybe both) because of the volume of business they were doing there. Are the slabs exactly the same? Do they indicate in anyway that they were certified/slabbed in that location vs. the US plant?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since ccg mentioned slabbed versions it raises a question for me. Maybe you guys know the answer. A while ago I believe NGC established an office in Singapore or Hong Kong (not sure which - maybe both) because of the volume of business they were doing there. Are the slabs exactly the same? Do they indicate in anyway that they were certified/slabbed in that location vs. the US plant?

 

I would expect that any offices outside of the usual (e.g. 1-day walkthrough at shows) would use the same type of slab.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whew ! Finally got a 1863 1 mil, not as nice as the 1865, but I got one !

 

This completes the Hong Kong Mil coins, 1863, 1865, 1866.

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/190608707198?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1497.l2649#ht_500wt_1202

 

Now on to the Victoria HK cents, this is going to be alot harder to get, and about as pricey !

 

Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a little info (copy and paste)

 

 

As a result of the Treaty of Nanking, Hong Kong became a British Colony in 1841, but the Hong Kong's own coinage did not come into existence until 23 years later. Sir Hercules Robinson, the Fifth Governor of Hong Kong [1859-1865]. who declared that the commencement of Hongkong's own coinage on 16th February 1864. Though Royal Proclamation had already granted the use of the new coinage in Hong Kong on 9th January 1863.

 

This Mil first minted by the Royal Mint London in 1863. The inscriptions on the obverse of this coin are HONG - KONG ONE MIL 1863 V.R. and a crown. Four Chinese characters on the obverse means Hong Kong One Cash. One of the horizontal stroke of the Chinese character (Hong) is missing. Some other collectors told me that this was not an error, this was 'Filled Die'. At the time when this coin was minted, some foreign material went into the die to cause no impression on the planchet.

This mil is much smaller and lighter than a Chinese copper cash of the same period, and has a round hole instead of a square hole in its centre. This small Mil had never proved popular and was discontinued after 1866.

 

Mintage figures

1863 = 19,000,000

1864 = unknown

1865 & 1866 = 40,000,000 (combined)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very nice coin Tom and the info really helps to make your collection more interesting for me anyway. Thanks. :bthumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm trying to do better Art, now if i can just get a few good photos, Camera having a hard time focusing on such a small coin

 

Y# 1, KM# 2, metal Bz, 1 Mil ( 1 Wen in Chinese )

major variant without hyphen between Hong Kong

Mintage 40,000,000

Rarity = C (rare)

0000106a.jpg

 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

0000107.jpg

 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

 

Y# 1a, KM# 3, metal Bz, 1 Mil ( 1 Ch'ien in Chinese )

also note the different size of the 6s, in 66

Rarity = D (not so many)

0000108.jpg

 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

0000111.jpg

 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the photo, VF30 net, due to the green stuff. Crown isn't that sharp, though that may be a strike issue.

 

ccg it appears like it (1865) was a Double die coin, evident on the reverse, and missing part of the 8 on obv.

 

Looks really cool now I have it in hand, and a error coin could make up a little in price, also being a minor variant with the missing hyphen between the Hong - Kong

 

I am feeling alot better about the $40 now :yahoo:

 

Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ccg it appears like it (1865) was a Double die coin, evident on the reverse, and missing part of the 8 on obv.

 

I stand by my earlier comment that I think that it's a MDD rather than die doubling since the doubling on the characters are going in different directions rather than all the same way. Unless it's really messed up :lol:

 

Still a very neat example, though!

 

---

 

Credit / courtesy link for the above copy/paste info on the HK mil: http://home.netvigator.com/~ykleungn/hk1mil.htm

 

note: It's always best to provide links to pages with relevant info since it helps improve their page rank for SEO (search engine optimization) purposes. Copying information, on the other hand, may be viewed as duplicate content and hurt the ranking of both pages involved - both the copied and the duplicate. Think of google as an exam proctor who doesn't too kindly appreciate identical content. In this case, since it's a few paragraphs, and there's a lot more different content on both this discussion page and the original reference page, it's not as significant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom,

 

Nice coins and your photography is improving greatly as you go. Thanks for sharing with us. :bthumbsup::bthumbsup::bthumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...