Leaderboard
Popular Content
Showing content with the highest reputation since 05/01/2026 in all areas
-
9 points
-
This was a recent pickup in a USA auction, I like the condition of the piece, it being much better than most farthings of that era - but I enjoy the additional cuds on Charles II's nose and Britannia's right arm from the die breaking down. Also it appears as though the numeral 1 in 1675 was repunched - almost appears to have been repunched over a numeral 5!5 points
-
4 points
-
4 points
-
The double plume 1887 crown represents about 5% of the population. It is recorded and mentioned in a paper submitted to BNS blog but not yet published. Several of them were in The Thorburn Collection sold by Sovereign Rarities 23rd. Sep. 2025. notably lot 813 points
-
No way you’re new to this, your language and approach is not elementary, it’s very weird! I know it’s not helpful or constructive to say this but I am really struggling, I can’t pitch you at all.3 points
-
It looks to me as if there was nearly a brockage, as the raised detail of the teeth is the incuse detail on the die. If a coin is not properly expelled between strikes, it will act as the die and leave an incuse detailed impression, because a die has the inverted relief, ie incuse is raised an vice versa, so to have raised 'incuse detail', it had to be a wrong-un, because the die would not have changed its relief and would strike normally, albeit off-centre. With several examples known, the detail must have been from a trapped coin.3 points
-
I don't think 1927 proof coins are unloved, I just think that a mintage of 15k for a proof coin is not low, and comfortably satisfies the demand of people who wants one. In addition the series also has a large number of circulating coins at UNC giving anyone an opportunity to get a type example. The 1887 proof crown on the other hand has a mintage of only about 1k (and there are far fewer circulating UNC examples).2 points
-
Does seem a bit excessive. Many of them have the same 43.173. or 43.172 IP address range. I'll see what I can do.2 points
-
Comparing it to my pair of 1844 crowns I'd say that's the top part of a cinqfoil. The star is larger and goes almost to trhe top of the N and I whereas the cinqfoil is smaller and goes about halfway up the letters.2 points
-
That's the man. Splash out on literature. Spend 3 beers worth on a book instead of 1. As an aside and not referencing you as a subject, it never ceases to amaze me how many people consider spending as much as a lunchtime beer with a snack on literature is viewed as excessive and wasted money, when what they spend on coins has several zeros added to the same amount. It seems weird to me that people frequently won't buy the required tools to give them the knowledge required to increase their collection value, which is what they are trying to achieve. Bizarre. Not everything is on the internet, and that which is, is becoming increasingly untrustworthy. Everybody needs to tread more carefully than they used to with AI. A potentially useful tool that you can be guarantee to be abused.2 points
-
2 points
-
2 points
-
Not quite sure what you're saying? The Mint stopped using 92.5% silver from 1920 as the price of silver during WW1 had risen to the point where it exceeded the face value of the coins being struck. Yes, it came down again a few years later, but the Mint were never going to reverse their decision. The same thing happened after WW2 when silver was abandoned altogether but this time it never came down to make using it for coins cost-effective. I'd treat YouTube videos with a large pinch of salt!2 points
-
Those prove my point about it being easier to see on more worn examples - the ear on those is far better preserved than you'd expect looking at the obverse as a whole.2 points
-
2 points
-
Post-1752 Maundy coins were never intended for circulation so they are usually in good condition.1 point
-
It's not a common flaw and I am not certain if I have seen it before. In this grade, the flaw wouldn't make a difference. Both the obverse and reverse designs are really nice.1 point
-
I used the word probably which is a guess that there probably more potential collectors than coins to satisfy the potential demand from that amount of collectors. 15000 is not a huge amount of coins for example a 1905 half crown has a published mintage of 166008 and you would require a lot of money to obtain a good example. It's called supply and demand. Maybe there are more collectors of half crowns than florins and as the 1905 half crown was issued for circulation less of the total would survive in good condition but even a worn example attracts a fairly high price. Recently I saw one for sale in fine condition for GBP 440.1 point
-
I have found........., 4th bust 1673 KM# 438.1VICESIMO QVINTO 1673 KM# 438.2plume below bust 1673 KM# 438.3centre plume reverse I've not found references to stops, hopefully others will chip in with more information ... 👍1 point
-
1 point
-
I never logout so can't comment on that. However if I try to see messages or notifications, it just spins forever without letting me in to see anything. Also, I can't seem to 'Like' posts - there's just a warning message about 'reacting to this content'.1 point
-
Again I can’t say thanks Stuart 😃👍, thought it was probably just me doing something wrong 👍1 point
-
1 point
-
Try logging in on a different browser (or using incognito mode in Chrome, others have in private browsing too). This should allow you to see if it's a site issue or not (and hopefully allow you to reply!).1 point
-
1 point
-
I had not heard this determining key before. Thank you.1 point
-
Clearly not fully au fait when it comes to numismatic knowledge. Why point out a heart shaped pinprick hole, probably due to a bubble in the flan or a rust spot on the die, when there's a bleedin' obvious die flaw covering the first W on the truncation (or is it a naval cannon mint mark?). I think we should be told. Maybe somebody would like to suggest the mint mark to her and sit back to see what transpires.1 point
-
Fortunately with his (or her - Linda??) outrageous prices, most people are fly enough to not fall for such bull, but I do see this one has sold: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/358558956337?itmmeta=01KS30XZG90WV7QVHWDYHQTRTW&hash=item537bc77b31:g:74IAAeSwAllqBx9t Obviously, post mint damage. Part of me thinks if some idiot has £500 to throw away on this sort of rubbish, more fool them, but I do take the point that naive people might get burnt. Don' know what the solution is. Ebay aren't ever interested in reporting items like these...1 point
-
Plenty of silver types, of which I am looking for a specific one. Without trying to state the obvious, it has cast copy 'written' all over it in the form of casting pits. Even if it was genuine, desirable it ain't.1 point
-
From my observations, it's preferable to use the second N of PENNY rather than the P. Both vertical limbs point to teeth on a regular coin, spaces on a HT. Because the limbs themselves are much narrower it easier to be certain you've picked the right line.1 point
-
1 point
-
Definitely not the genuine article, but will definitely be the coin in that little group that will catch the highest bidder out, as there’s nothing else in there they could possibly be wanting!1 point
-
I am confident enough that it is a recessed ear, and that is good enough as it is going into my own collection. @Martinminerva also expressed the opinion that it was right in a previous post in this topic. I already have an example with the broken tooth in only slightly worse condition, so I will keep both to cover my bases. Neither will be sold until I pop my clogs, by which time I won't care anyway!1 point
-
Great. A few weeks ago another that I sent to the USA was returned to me, no reason given. So I'm now a bit nervous sending to the USA. I've emailed you a PDF of the Irish book.1 point
-
I suspect it may be related to the Irish obsidional currency , this article may give you a lead. https://oldcurrencyexchange.com/2015/09/03/obrien-rare-coin-review-confederate-catholic-rebel-money-coinage-of-1642-44/ Jerry1 point
-
Business as usual, then! I still reserve the right to think you unusual, though. Keep going.1 point
-
Probably a lack of trust in the honesty of the US enhanced by the unpredictable policies of the Trump administration coupled with a $30 odd trillion debt that's still increasing. without limit as numbers on a computer. The poo will hit the fan when someone asks for their money as I doubt if this money exists as your comment regarding the amount of gold to support a gold standard suggests. As for gold it depends what value you put on it. when Nixon broke the link between the $ US and gold was at $ US 41/oz. in August 1971 now $US 471/oz One advantage of gold is you cannot make any more like paper promises on a computer. Many countries are increasing their gold reserves at the expense of the $ US. You are right about China wanting to replace the $ US with the Yuan with the Petrodollar system starting to breakdown along with a policy of isolation are symptoms of the decline of the US as the number one power and will be accelerated when and if China takes over Taiwan and the US loses control of the Pacific Ocean. Not a situation I relish but the signs are there.1 point
-
The repatriation has more to do with Trump's sticky fingers than any "gold standard" since there is nowhere near enough gold in the world to run the modern economies. Xi is far more interested in getting the Yaun turned into the standard currency rather than the dollar, especially for buying oil.1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
The recessed ear is a three-dimensional phenomenon, but most photographs are taken from directly above. With a coin in the hand I'm sure we all look from a variety of angles without thinking about it. With the images above I purposely used an angle to help accentuate the contours. It might be interesting to look at a similar view of a near uncirculated coin. Not to be found in my collection sadly!1 point
-
It's not the thinness - it's the recessed area as you say. On the left coin you can clearly see a hollow surrounding the ear which is absent on the Unc example.1 point
-
1873: 1 to 6, 10 to 14, 16, 17, 19, 21 to 24, 26, 27, 30, 31, 34, 35, 37, 39 to 48, 50, 53 to 65, 67, 69 to 71, 73, 75, 76, 79, 83 to 89, 92 to 94, 96, 100, 101, 103, 105 to 107, 109 to 111, 113 to 115, 117 to 123, 125, 127 to 129, 131, 132, 135 to 137, 1411 point
-
1 point
-
Better than EF for me, contact marks aren’t so much of an issue as scratches and other damage from circulation. You can always be caught out by photos, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was graded MS 62ish. Price at auction is so unpredictable, you could offer it at a fixed price of somewhere midway between EF and BU in the catalogue but be prepared to wait, or nearer EF price for a quicker sale. Jerry1 point
-
I completely agree about the common coin in uncommonly good condition being something to relish. The 1873 shilling I sold to Geoff Cope when he was desperate to find something to buy close to the end is one in question. I bought it from Andrew Wayne's sale at London Coins 110, lot 1046, 1873 shilling where I paid just over 200 for it. However, all good things come to an end, and with a date run of 3rd young head shillings still in the collection all in similar grade and toning due to being a bit too nice to sell, a decision had to be made when I needed funds for something else, so it went in the trays for about 3 years. Couldn't sell it for love nor money because everyone thought it wasn't worth book price, which I was asking. Sold it to Geoff for book price (about 500 at the time) who said 'Ooh, that's nice. I'll have that one' and lo and behold, a few years later sold for CHF 5500, or about 10 or 11 times what he paid as a top pop 66. So at least two other people appreciated the quality and it was worth at least most of that at today's prices. The colours on it were genuinely superb and the best of the bunch, but I made the decision to get rid of all bar and keep the higher graded and near perfect 1874. Reminds me of Non's 1843.1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point