Leaderboard

True Scott, difference being though that Boris isn't a terrorist supporting racist who changed his views with his hairstyle.

Didn't realise Terrorists had Jet Fighters?!

Hmmm.......interesting. You might want to consider contacting the Royal Mint for their observations on the issue. They could also test the coin in order to determine the precise breakdown of constituent metals. I'm somewhat sceptical though, because I'd normally expect such a 3 to 4 year old coin to be in generally better shape. For example, the vast majority of 1 & 2p coins dated 2013 in circulation, are still almost fully lustred.

I think the UK is currently the second biggest international arms seller, a legacy of conflicts like the Falkland Islands were by a smaller force won basically due to superior weaponry, the Harrier jet, sea wolf, sea skua and sea dart missile systems all untested until this conflict, the success of these systems had all and sundry raising hands saying me, me, I want one of those. We have sold larger weapon systems particularly armoured vehicles and Planes and we have also sold munitions, bombs and missiles, to most of the UAE, Indonesia/Malaya and others in the past and some others currently, but none of the weapons associated with these terrorists, we currently do not make Kalashnikovs In fact most of the weapons and munitions used by the terrorists were those left behind by a fleeing Iraqi army

May, and previous governments sold arms to a legitimate government, who were asked to aid another government against terrorist insurgents. Lets get a bit of honesty please. People may not like Saudi, but its position in this case is internationally sound, whether we like them or not.

Not William III, but the third design of bust used for strking. For what it is worth, I sold one a little poorer for wear, but with rather nastier scratches for £15 on ebay recently.

Looks to me like it's been in a corrosive environment. A lot of detector found cupro nickel looks like this, even quite recent losses. The durability of modern coinage isn't a patch on the old. Jerry

Hey Elaina, As it's magnetic it's unlikely to be Copper. I would say it's not of any particular interest and that something may have happened to the Nickel plating leaving the steel beneath to rust, but I wouldn't know for sure or how the plating would have come off.

I was thinking that! Which is quite difficult sometimes as there are loads of contact marks, bag marks, clogged dies, weak strike, polished die marks, etc that can be mistaken for wear.

I'm with you there Ian: "It can't be UNC because I can see a bit of wear on the eyebrow" etc.

Something I have done a couple of times is to get together the coins from a particular monarch and spread them on the table then pick at random 4 or 5 of them. I then try to place them in ascending order using my judgement and a grading book noting key indicators for wear, weakness of strike or whatever the book tells me is significant for that series of coins. I then place them back in the pack and pick another 4 or 5 at random and repeat the process until I get bored. I might then pick another monarch and look for the key indicators for that series and repeat again. It might sound labourius but it's actually quite quick. I don't use the Sheldon scale far too many variables for my brain to wrap around, I just stick with the good old F, VF, EF, UNC and a few inbetweeners such as AUNC. I also seem to work it out better if I start off by deciding what it is not rather than what it is, that might sound a bit backwards but it's just a case of elimination sometimes it's really obvious and sometimes it's a choice between two grades if thats the case I will go for the lower grade until proven otherwise. Just the way it works for me, I keep it simple and I am happy with that.

1946 and 1949?

I wouldn't bother trying to tone the obverse side if I am going to sell it. Toning takes too long and the two sides of the coins will always look (very) different. I brought a coin described as 1902 crown AU from W&W when I first started collecting. It turned out to be a cleaned matt proof. It has been toning for six years on my sunny window sill and this is what it currently looks like.

You could leave it on a sunny window sill shiney side up that might naturally tone it, but nothing will bring the matte finish back and the crispness of the original engraving on the obverse.

I think the price was cheaper than analogues due to the unprofessional cleaning of one side. I do not recommend you to clean the other one. It look quite nice in this condition.

Sorry Declan but i have to laugh at that one Have you only just bought it or had it a while ?

Very good advice! I too would return the coin if the option is available. But it's no big deal if you can't. A decent example would cost about twice the price you have paid and so £85 sounds OK. The obverse is less than UNC IMO after the coin has been cleaned like that. The person probably realised he has damaged the coin after cleaning one side and so refrained from cleaning the other?

What it's odd is that they only cleaned the obverse.

That is the reason it was cheap perhaps ?. If a novice like me can tell its cleaned i would send it back regardless of price. You will pay more for one thats right but if it were mine would annoy me looking at it. To sell it someone in the future telling them its cleaned will surely put other buyers off also. Anyway its your coin and if your happy thats all that really matters

Hi all, looking for a George III Fourth Head Guinea - preferably EF or better - the fourth heads are scarce as hens teeth on the dealers lists at the moment so I'll give it a go here - price in the region of £800-1000. Thanks in advance, C44

It won't be described as proof if its been polished (which it has been) now called impaired and UNC or less all due to the polishing, i'm guessing the person who had it didn't realise it was supposed to be matte

Hi and welcome, I am also new so I will probably not be too helpful but in 2012 Royal mint changed 5 and 10p coins to nickel-plated steel, so it should be magnetic anyway: http://blog.royalmint.com/why-are-some-uk-coins-magnetic/ I can't help you with regards to the colouring, it's not rust is it? - I am not sure if they even can myself. Do you have a picture of it so we can see it? Hope this helps somewhat.

Other than the qualities you mentioned, the uniformity and flatness of the rim is usually indicative.

What does reveal that it is a matt proof? Apart from the crispness, and the matt surface. Other examples I've seen on this forum sport a nice streaky toning, like a very fine buff on the fields