Leaderboard

Photo of a Jacaranda tree taken a week or so ago at Laidley Qld. Jacarandas flower in Oct/November and mark the start of the exam period at High Schools and Universities.

Yes a spectacular tree native to Brazil widely planted around the world. I've seen them growing in LA and Spain as well. Grafton, NSW holds a Jacaranda Festival every year in November I'm sure they are grown in South Africa.

I am not certain but I think the Jacaranda is native to Southern Africa. Certainly when I was young my parents drank Jacaranda Sherry, which was South African. (My mother was born there.) I still have a "pottle" - half a demijohn size bottle - with the Jacaranda Sherry label on it. Currently filled with home made Apple port...

That would be my view. 🙁

Well, no I don't. Other repros - like Ed VII, 1933 pennies, and different Vicky coins - are made recognisably different and only a fool or a novice would be taken in. If it's so lifelike, then it's no longer a repro, it's a deliberate fake and designed to deceive.

I think you know why. 🙁

The original fake copper pennies were easy to spot with their shiny surfaces but it appears they're being produced with a more "lifelike" finish which is harder to spot. The coin below has already attracted several bids (although the starting price should be a clue) but is a modern copy. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1843-Large-Penny-Queen-Victoria-UNC/174046700799?_trkparms=aid%3D111001%26algo%3DREC.SEED%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20160811114145%26meid%3De054dda566274366a6b0092fb5fbe2f0%26pid%3D100667%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D5%26sd%3D174046700799%26itm%3D174046700799%26pmt%3D0%26noa%3D1%26pg%3D2045573&_trksid=p2045573.c100667.m2042 If in doubt - count the teeth - 175 on the genuine obverse, 180 on the fake.

I think Spink would catalogue this variety at 8/5 simply because it is the only logical way to list it. To call it 5/8 would suggest it was a coin intended for use in time travel. I think the common assumption would be, as with Rob’s GEOE coin, that no-one would intend to change a correctly entered digit/letter. It would be difficult to trace whether these things happened accidentally (as in Colin’s valid suggestion), except in die studies (if you’re lucky enough to find an identifiable feature such as a developing flan crack pre and post the error.) so, unless proven otherwise, Spink would have to sensibly call the variety 8/5

A clear unlisted variety me thinks

A very rational idea, as logical an explanation as any. I guess that same rationale applies to the time the die was first cut too. I think the interesting point to clear up, though, is the idea that when an error occurs, it’s assumed the highest device (the one in greatest relief) is the first entered, when in fact it’s only about which device has been struck the hardest/deepest that has it sit on top of another letter/number/device on the actual coin. Diaconis talks about 5/8 and 8/5 but they are in this example one and the same (with only how hard the punch was struck to differentiate) when all the points are explored into how the 5 happened there in the first place. The 8 could’ve been first on the die and then unintentionally recut at a later date with a deep strike of the 5 (meaning to recut the 5 but using Colin’s suggestion), putting it in higher relief on the milled coin. Or, when the die was first made, a 5 was accidentally entered where the 8 should be, and was subsequently recut/repaired with a lighter strike of an 8, still leaving the 5 in higher relief on the milled coin. A bit wordy, I’m not sure everyone is grasping the concept.

It has been with two numbers ,first the 5 and then an 8 the second strike a correction that was not done firm enough IMO. The first 5 being entered as again should of been done in reverse the third number on a coin would be the second to look at on the die.

Unfortunately not mine, popped up on a Sov group i'm in, but thought i'd share so you can keep your eyes peeled, but its clear as day....