Who is This Misleading Advertiser?
The Royal Mint!
We, at Chard, believe in honesty in all our dealings, and try hard to keep all our wording as accurate and unambiguous as possible, idiot-proof being our somewhat optimistic aim. Naturally we do not expect other traders and competitors to use similar high standards, but we do expect bodies such as the Royal Mint to set a good example in their advertising, after all, if we cannot trust their written word, how can we trust the quality of their products, or their other ethical standards? They are, directly or indirectly, one of our major suppliers, and it is a potential cause of concern to us that a major supplier should publish such an unfair and misleading advert.

The Get-Out Clause?
We guess that the "British Gold Sovereigns" they were referring to were in fact quarter sovereigns. Their lowest priced sovereigns were £269 each. Perhaps their marketing department have been taking lessons from Dixon's.
We brought a similar advert directly to the attention of the Royal Mint in 2000, and also to the trade association, the BNTA whose council considered the advert before writing to the Royal Mint to pass on our concern.
In 2009, we noticed they had started a similarly misleading advertising campaign, and this has continued until March 2011.
We may be slightly old fashioned, but we believe government agencies and national institutions should set a shining example of honesty in all their dealings including advertising.

Hype & Misinformation

Inaccurate Information From Our Competitors
In our web sites, we try to give you accurate, factual and historical information about all our products, including gold sovereigns.
Some of our competitors are not as careful or accurate.
It can only be a matter of time before someone telephones us to tell us our gold sovereigns are overpriced at £220 each ( £255 for new 2011s) because the Royal Mint are selling them at only £65. They will probably take some convincing!
We will naturally advise them to read the small print of the advert, and to carefully avoid ever buying from such misleading advertisers. We believe in honesty and accuracy in our advertising, so they would get better information from us, more knowledgeable advice, and lower prices. Actually our service is usually faster, too!

We Wager a Sovereign We Are Correct
If, at any time during the many years when sovereigns and half sovereigns were in circulation, any person had made a wager, or a contract, to pay or receive a sovereign, the recipient would have been most aggrieved to have been offered a half sovereign in fulfilment. We could well imagine that the offer would lead to a bloody nose in the former case, and a lawsuit in the second. When the original agreement was mooted, neither party would have discussed what size of sovereign. The agreement would have been clearly understood by both parties to mean the gold coin with a one pound legal tender value.

Relevant Dates & Other Information
The screen shots shown on this page were made in March 2011, mostly on or before the 17th.
We noticed the Royal Mint �65 sovereigns adverts were still appearing on 1st April 2011 (eBay & Google).

A.S.A. (Advertising Standards Authority) Complaint
Although the Mint's misleading "Sovereigns from £65" adverts have been running since 2009, we have only noticed these online rather than in print. The Advertising Standards Authority originally only had responsibility to act in the case of traditional media, such as newspaper, magazine, television, and radio advertising, probably because its foundation predated the internet. Internet advertisers could mislead to their hearts content. From 1st March 2011, the A.S.A.'s remit has been widened to include websites and internet advertising.
We thought the Royal Mint would have revised its advertising and websites to conform with this change, but midway through March it appeared to be continuing flouting the rules, and on 17th March, we filed a formal complaint with the A.S.A.
We are currently awaiting their decision. We hope that one government sponsored body will not unfairly rule in favour of another.
Curiously during the last week of March 2011, we have not seen any of the misleading adverts. It is possible the Mint have been advised about the complaint.