Leaderboard

1863 Slender 3 F44 Well I just can't believe my luck on this one, I never thought I'd ever manage to get my hands on one of these 🤩

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!

Its a rotated die clash which this overlayed picture shows quite well.

Found another quite good condition coin from the hoard..... albeit 2 pence Maundy, George IIII, 1822, 😕 not sure I can cope with all of these good condition coins after a life time of manky worn out ones.... 😕

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 81

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.

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.

Loddy Heck!!! errrmmmm... This George V 1911 2 pence Maundy is also in nice condition as well 😕 I don't no how has happed but its in nice condition all the same. 👍

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).

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.

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.

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.

I now have the coin in my possession. Seems pretty nice condition for one of these, despite the odd mark in front of the King's nose:

I like this one 😂🤣

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!

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.

I am inclined to agree with you, Paddy, now I see all 3 together. But, keep looking for a 1915 recessed without the broken tooth as they do exist. I have one!

I have a 1927 set in an identical box even down to the remains of tape on the back of the box. I don't know if any 1928 proof sets were ever issued but this looks like a cobbled together set of 1928 coins presented in a 1927 proof set box to trap the unwary at a high price.

Post-1752 Maundy coins were never intended for circulation so they are usually in good condition.

Looks like a cud?

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 ... 👍

Not much fun in Stalingrad, no. You need the A361, Barnstaple section....

I would say poor strike, as the lettering on the garter is perfect, and that's among the first areas to wear. Difficult to grade without seeing in hand, but I would say the second one is AUNC.

Seems ok for me now. I did block an IP range and there are about 200 guests online at the moment. As soon as you block one though, it does virtually nothing as they use a load of different IP addresses. Don't think it's malicious at the moment. Probably training an AI or who knows.

Again I can’t say thanks Stuart 😃👍, thought it was probably just me doing something wrong 👍

Or add images/screenshots.

I’ve been getting account suspended too, and also can’t react to messages.

Won’t even let me give you a thanks Rob 😃👍

Looks like a site issue. I usually wait for messages and notifications before hitting the buttons, but it appears both are going for a long bike ride.

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.

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...

I don't think Charlie would be too impressed with truck loads of cupro - nickel dumped in front of the palace.

And yet another (this person needs the appropriate treatment) https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/358558652610?itmmeta=01KRNYZFVFSVZCD2C7D3B07R5C&hash=item537bc2d8c2:g:1d0AAeSwnxZqBwHF&itmprp=enc%3AAQALAAAA4GfYFPkwiKCW4ZNSs2u11xBitEe9RDa3sc7hUT9hX%2FCOfxQKyq%2Ffk9mvXOGbDczpUO9joLFvUS2WadpYmPIOnOAlf0YszrS2sdD8A1SJuELkDUqma1VpZnEy5q4ZXojfFHwyhdE%2BTCVfVAmS%2BC97DrbSX40H4RetRi4Gu7VpPOYPQ8N2Oho%2FSa9VEl8vLNcwB7paH1zB721WMloM8o9WVt59UTO1G1T%2BdwM36QfBsO4lddL5fyB5pBoVMFq2o7jay63EgK9cPpx%2FOTWHxhuG%2FVF5GY2mna9%2BULIMUbH1ZCiv|tkp%3ABk9SR4L-_b7FZw

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.

all, I recently found what I believe could be a medieval coin while metal detecting in a cornfield in Castletown, Celbridge (Ireland), and I’m hoping to get some opinions on it. The piece is quite small — smaller and thinner than a modern 2 cent coin. It appears worn, but I can make out what looks like a cross on one side. There are also some pellet-like markings, and possibly a letter (maybe an “A”) beneath them, though it’s not very clear. The shape isn’t perfectly round, which made me wonder if it could be clipped, broken from a larger coin, or possibly even a token rather than an official issue. The metal doesn’t seem obviously copper — I initially thought it might be silver, but I’m not certain. I’ve attached photos of both sides. Unfortunately, the detail is quite faint, but I’d really appreciate any thoughts on: What type of coin this might be Whether it looks medieval (and if so, what period) Or if it could be something else entirely (token, foreign, etc.) Thanks in advance for any help!

I wonder if it may be Father Andrew Alexander's collection? I made contact with my old school. Father Andrew's collection was passed to his brother on his death. I asked if they could pass on my contact details to the brother, but I have heard nothing since.

For what it's worth, I do not think this is a very rare thick flan 10+J but rather a normal flan one where the rim has been "rolled" in machinery and slightly compressed thus, and so makes the edge look wider. My evidence for this is a) this was commonly done with many, many bronze predecimal coins, I guess as people were just playing around with lathes etc in workshops, and I personally have many such examples of all bronze denominations and several monarchs, and b) from your photo, the rim itself next to the beads appears to be thin or non-existent, when in reality there should be a distinct rim edge surrounding the beads (see photo of obverse 10 below, taken from Richard's halfpenny website) which is basically where the rolled metal has gone from to form the "thicker" edge. c) The genuine thick flan is R20 for rarity, so VERY few known indeed. Of course, that is not to say another one wouldn't ever turn up, but mathematically one is more likely to find further specimens in the R17-R18 bracket, as you proved with your 1877 narrow date. But of course, one can only be sure when in hand and can be weighed, measured etc. But if you ask opinions from vague photos, be prepared to get vague answers, or indeed an absence of answers in light of the absence of evidence! I wish you luck with this purchase, just as you have had much luck already, but equally you must expect disappointments too... Also, give things a bit more time for feedback: you only posted on Saturday morning - I am replying Monday afternoon!

The coin was purchased prior to posting here.. To save you being party to any of it il refrain from posting questions about my coins here.

Business as usual, then! I still reserve the right to think you unusual, though. Keep going.

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.

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.

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, 141

It's good. I have recessed ear 1915 pennies both with and without broken tooth. Without seems rarer. Haven't yet seen a 1916 without broken tooth though.

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. Jerry

My most extreme die clash .Apologies, not a penny (1696 Halfpenny) .

This is just about the most extreme example I have come across !!! An 1862 penny Note the half circle on Victoria's back , its the shield from the reverse side . The extra ribbons are created from the folds in Britannia's. dress

Oh yeah. I missed that.

Very poignant and caught me out for some reason. I’m 60 next year and been reflecting a lot upon the last 40, so maybe something to do with that?