That is the absolute worst portrait i have seen on any coin ANYWHERE. No way is this baby sitting in my pocket. (assuming a lottery win enabling me to have the choice.)
Point the second
£14,500 thousand for a coin with a legal tender value of £1000. Do they think I’m insane?!?!
Now I understand that if you buy a commemorative coin at its face value, then over time it will become collectible and increase, but when you have to buy the thing at 14.5 times its face value whats the freaking point?!?!?
Holy flip. I clicked on that link, since I used to collect coins and I’d seen some ugly potraits on coins in my time (George III-as-Roman emperor, for example). I thought, how bad could it be?
Heavens. Having just watched both Harry Potter movies, I can state that he looks exactly like the Slytherin with the bad teeth. And that’s not a good thing, considering how good-looking the kid is in real life. Yikes almighty.
Yes, it seems that the mint nowadays wants to get in on the financial benefits of collectible coins with none of the risk of being an actual collector. They determine, by fiat, what will be a collectible coin and how much to charge for it. I just hope that everyone realizes what a fucking butt-ugly piece of shit this coin is, and that no-one buys it.
1 KG of gold = 35.2 oz
35.2 oz times ~$350 per ounce = $12320 of bullion value
plus a bit for markup and the ugly portait. So $14500 really isn’t THAT out of line.
Tell me that’s not an actual photograph of the coin. Please tell me that! I can forgive it if it’s just a (bad) artist’s rendering, but if it’s an actual photo…
The thing’s about as far on the negative side of the looks line as Wills himself is on the positive.
I used to work in a Knightsbridge shop (not Harrods) and remember one day when Princess Diana (as she then was) came in to buy a few gifts. All by herself, too.
Serving an icon of the age in an empty shop on a rainy afternoon was one of those things you don’t forget, and I distinctly remember that when she signed her credit-card slip she signed it just “Wales”. IIRC lesser lights of the aristocracy would do the same thing, ie Lord Muck was just “Muck”.
So at a guess it’s probably kosher for descendants of the Prince of Wales to add “Of Wales” to their title, and it may even be the more correct form.