Leaderboard

Mark Blackburn states that there are 'a number' but only mentions a few. They are: BMC 107-8, one in SCBI East Anglia 17, possibly #4 in the Manningtree hoard, one in SCBI East Anglia 1102 and the single finds of 2001 and 1970 on the EMC. There must be far more not recorded, though.

I think you and I are singing from different hymnsheets Rob. To you, it's not rare unless only a handful is known. To me, in the context of artifacts produced by the multi-million, a few thousand is rare, a few hundred very rare, and anything under a hundred is extremely rare. Which is where this whole subjective debate began...

"No returns". Mmm, that's confidence inspiring for a 4 figure purchase.

Someone tell him he's a ****. Why quote Marsh on the second item, when you can't be bothered to check the images of the 1817. Numerals are arabic 1s, missing serifs are blocked dies or broken punches. Simple. I cannot understand why people get so obsessed with infinitessimally small incremental die changes due to being used for their original purpose. I would like to claim the well deserved excessive rarity of my unmodified, struck as intended, virtually impossible to obtain normal type coin.

Well, this is the taxi I've bought. This is one of the photos as provided by Deptford Don. It's a '98 TX1 with under 300k on the clock (below average for these) and it's got the chrome grille, fake walnut dash, aircon and a CD player. Metallic green isn't the colour I would have bought new, but beggars can't be choosers, eh. It's always fun getting these insured as the insurers don't seem to understand that taxis can be used as anything other than as taxis. Direct Line will insure it but only if it has no meter fitted and I cover up the 'TAXI' sign on the roof.

20 pieces is relatively common. I think you need to get away from the 'isn't available today' approach. Most coins where there are only a few known don't get on the radar of the average collector who is usually concentrating on the more mundane varieties. Price is a factor here because many would steer clear of something which is going to cost them multiples of the common type. In these instances it is a case of waiting patiently for what goes around to come around. Anything with 20 pieces will probably come around once a year to a year and a half on average. With say 4 or 5 pieces they might come around every 6 to 8 years. I would call that extremely rare but not excessively so which I would take to imply virtually unobtainable. Availability in the case of seriously rare pieces is effectively determined by the average time taken to form a collection, as once it is complete the pieces come on the market again if sold. Obviously it can't apply if the collection is set aside for generations or passes to the next generation as an ongoing concern, but most collections are not like this. Most serious collectors don't really go for decent collections including major rarities until they are middle aged with a bit of money in the bank, so a generation is probably the time limit for most people to collect. That is the basic criteria I used in arriving at the above figures. In the case of the coin above, it was available in the market to buy in 1919, 1956, 1979, 1995 and 2011, so available every 20-25 years on average, or one generation. Then it only depends on the depth of your pockets.

Mmm .. I think it's difficult to pin down because, as you say, people will have different views. I think excessively rare has to be limited to under 5 known. I have a coin Michael Sharp termed as such (because of the privy mark rather than that it's an exciting design!) I have found 3 apart from my own. MS's is in the BM so I guess one less available. 5-10 rare. 10+ scarce. After that, well, patience and a fair wind will get you an example if you want so just "uncommon". As to buying rarities, probably not. Some things such as certain Morgan dollars or Newark siege coins command higher than might be deserved prices due to sentiment. Other genuinely rare but unexciting coins might suddenly become popular. But my feeling is that if they haven't attracted a collector base by now, they probably won't! Uniqueness is another strange factor. Unique coins are often undervalued. Then another turns up and it becomes a recognised type or variety and whoosh! When I bought my Sharp G3/2 (S.2804), which is one of the two 'discovery' coins published in the the BNJ, there were the same number known as S.2790 with the plume over shield reverse. However the list price for S.2804 doesn't and likely never will match the latter as it was known and sought after earlier. And particularly as there are now 10 known examples of S.2804 as more have come to light.

I would suggest a case where there is one available to collectors or possibly 2 only. There is an example of this in the BM but I don't know what it's like. Oxford 1644 groat (Morrieson F-2) with the Rawlins signed bust and first issue style line declaration reverse as opposed to the later cartouche. Not in Brooker, not in Morrieson who referred only to the BM's piece in his 1922 BNJ article, not in the most comprehensive Charles I collection I know (and that has more varieties than Brooker's silver) and not in Montagu either who would certainly not have passed up the chance to get one. Worth noting that despite being double struck and only around the VF mark, it was illustrated in Hamilton-Smith's 1919 sale which would not be normal for a commoner piece, or even some rarities.

Peck that is almost as bad as my "Mr Benn" comment!

The reverse is a bit better in the centre, but it is weak at the periphery. There is a lot of fine detail missing from smoothing. Here's another one.

Thank you - much appreciated. Would that be Spink 2799? How would you grade this - I thought AVF? F - GF for me, but hammered is not really my area!

Fine Spink 2791