TomGoodheart

I'd agree with Nicholas. It looks decent on the reverse with little obvious wear, suggesting the portrait is more weakly struck than perhaps worn. Do you know the weight Bagerap? As for where ... since there's interest here you might find it simpler to 'do a deal' on predecimal. It would certainly be quicker than putting into an auction ... and less fees than that or eBay. I've sold to several members here and I believe we've all been happy with how it went. Just an idea. .

Well, Happy Birthday to you too Copper! And of course to Gollum, Neil and ChKy, for yesterday. Happy Belated ChKy! I hope everyone had/has a splendid day!

Without a photo uk, it's difficult to tell you much. Coins can be dis/mis/coloured for a number of reasons. They may have been left in a pocket when clothes went in the wash. Someone may have played with it using some household chemicals. Sometimes coins are even struck from the 'wrong' metal at the mint. However in most cases it will be one of the former causes and the coin won't be worth anything more than usual. If it's a mint error it may be worth something. But not enough to give up the day job I'm afraid! There is a note on posting a photo here: http://www.predecimal.com/forum/topic/7880-posting-pics/ Oh, and welcome to predecimal. As you might have guessed, we get asked questions about odd looking coins quite a lot. A photo might help get you a more detailed answer. .

Got my first few coins from Bob at Dolphin. Gosh, I wish I could buy a few from the Double Sovereign now! But sadly their stock is nothing like it used to be. .

Yes. Hammered silver coin by the look of it. .

Mine for comparison: In case it helps. .

Genuine? I believe so. Mint mark? Anchor. S.2785 Sharp B3/2 My personal view? Not sure about the yellow patch. A couple of the other coins from this seller seem to have similar. If they are from old sellotape it will come off easily enough with acetone. But if it's something like Araldite ...

German States, 4 stüber (assuming about 29mm) Jülich-Cleve-Berg Occupying forces before the division of 1609 http://www.medievalcoinage.com/saurma/someoldcoins.org/saur/1/1639.htm Maybe ...

Which I guess brings me back to how sustainable is this Rob? Dealers will have to continue to pay higher prices for the top pieces, leaving nothing to enable them to pick up lesser, but still good, coins that can be held as stock. Everything will become shorter term as they need to find buyers for expensive pieces to release funds for the future ... OK, I know there aren't many dealers that have 'basements' like Baldwins. Heck, even Baldwins may no longer have a basement and the idea of holding on to something for five years, let alone 50 or more, seems increasingly unrealistic. But most markets depend on the dealers having stock that's available for some time, not just a few days. And customers at 'lower' levels who gradually upgrade their purchases so keeping some fluidity. If the housing market only consisted of the purchase and sale of million pound properties I couldn't see it lasting long. That seems to be the way the coin market is heading ... .

This is an interesting (and to me, slightly worrying) question. I say this because during the last few months I have offered some dealers a couple of very rare Charles I shillings. Both were quite acceptable examples of coins that will perhaps only come onto the market once every five years. In each case I was told the equivalent of 'not for me, thanks'. It seems to me that the market for rare but not top grade coins (or those I collect, at least) has either evaporated or dealers are not willing to take a chance unless they have a buyer in mind. This is in contrast to most dealers' sites where they are crying out for 'high grade' and 'top quality' material. So where is the market heading I'm wondering? Surely an 'only the best will do' strategy is unsustainable; there are after all only a limited number of 'top' coins (particularly with hammered) and when they have been bought, what will dealers sell then? Plus what happens to the collectors like me who are interested in the varieties that can only be found in 'mid-grades'? If dealers start to feel that buying anything below the top 10% in terms of quality is a risk, will it become increasingly difficult to source new material other than from other collectors or eBay?

Bugger. Apparently we've all got it wrong!! We should have been following Scott's example all along*: http://www.pcgsblog.com/jaime/news/pcgs-low-ball-coins "PCGS - Low Ball Coins Can you believe that a coin graded PCGS Poor 1 will bring a higher premium than a coin that is graded PCGS MS63. Its unbelievable. This 1897-S Morgan Dollar graded PCGS Poor 1 sold for $565 on November 2010. The same coin in Uncirculated PCGS MS63 grade sells for under $120. And there are many more PCGS Poor 1 examples in the market realizing even more. Who would have ever thought that a coin that is almost completely worn and has the date and design just visible could be worth more than a coin in Uncircualted grades. At PCGS, a coin assigned a grade of Poor 1 is a coin that has most of the design and date missing due to excessive wear from circulation. However, in most cases the coin has to be identifiable by its date, mint mark and type before PCGS assigns it a grade of Poor 1. Not only do some coins in grades of Poor 1 command higher premiums than in most other grades. Numerous times collectors have sent in coins graded PCGS Fair 2 under a grade review, in hopes of getting their coin downgraded to a grade of Poor 1. Perhaps coins in grades of Poor 1 are much more desirable because they circulated heavily, and therefore have much more historical significance. Or, it can be because this is the lowest grade possible and its really hard to find a coin in this one specific grade. Is it because it takes just a bit more wear before it becomes un-gradable. Or, is it because of the Set Registry and several collectors want to compete in Low Ball sets? Or it may be because collecting Low Ball coins is really fun. Whatever the reason is, its fun to see Low Ball coins attract this much attention in the marketplace." Who knew?? (what those crazy Americans would do next to ruin the hobby...) *Oh, and apologies to Scott, who I realise is a serious numismatist and who has made some remarkable and fun finds, often for very modest outlay. Hopefully no offence was caused as none was intended.

Um ... I presume you've tried CNG to see if they have a copy they could scan for you Benny?

Oh, I'm a master of trivia Dave! Choc-a-bloc with (almost) useless knowledge. Once I had an idea it was a jousting shield it was a quick image search and ..

I guess George Kruger Gray based the shield design on a jousting shield. The 'loop' you refer to was where the lance would have rested ....

"With traces of mounting on edge and weak edge letters, some nicks and surface marks, rim bruise, scratch on necks and some speckling, very fine piece. Please message me for photo's of the actual coin" Hmmm .. Not one I'd go for!!!!

I don't think so, but I guess that's just how it is. A while ago I made enquiries about viewing Australia's national coin collection, held by the Royal Australian Mint. The public aren't allowed to view it, though apparently dribs and drabs of the interesting stuff are displayed from time to time. Strangely though, Museum Victoria seems to have publicly available photos of its entire coin collection - a fairly comprehensive collection of British Empire coins (including the Sydney Mint and Melbourne Mint collections). Yes, I discovered the MV online collection a while back. Sadly, for what I collect, the quality is not brilliant. Though this is probably a reflection of the coins available to collectors at the time (1880s) But at least they have succeeded in getting images of everything, unlike the BM's rather slow efforts. http://museumvictoria.com.au/collections/themes/2860/numismatics-philately-collection for anyone interested. Also previously when I tried to make comments these did not post. I am pleased to see that this appears to have been corrected now. Now I just need to remember which coin it was where the reverse image was from a different item!

I know there are those who are more than critical of numismatists and collectors. Who believe that archaeologists and museums are the place that the past should be researched and preserved and that amateurs such as ourselves should stay out of it. That we destroy evidence, historical connections and valuable information. However I have to say that I am (yet again) none too impressed with the supposed guardians of culture. I have taken an interest in the Ryhall hoard, a coin find from the Civil War period. The hoard was not only the largest the last century, but also of remarkable consistency in the types of coins it contained. An article in the BNJ indicates that the British Museum acquired twenty-four coins from the hoard, principally examples of the predominant dies and the Leicestershire Museums Service eighty-nine. It also states that a full photographic record of the hoard exists in the BM Department of Coins and Medals. Well I searched the BM records and found ... four coins. None of them shillings of Charles I that make up the bulk of the hoard (around 2000 such coins). Department of Coins and Medals? No trace of how you would search to find what they hold in their collection other than a general record search. As to photographic records ... no I dea how you'd access those. And although Cornucopia (an online database of information about more than 6,000 collections in the UK's museums, galleries, archives and libraries) indicates that the Leicestershire Museums coins reside in the numismatic collection of the Newarke House Museum there is no suggestion of this on the Leicestershire website. Nor any indication that one can visit to inspect the collections. In fact there's no sign Leicestershire even has a numismatic collection. OK, so it's a specialised area. But time and time again my father-in-Law has said "You're interested in coins. Why don't you visit the British Museum. Surely they must have one of the best collections in the word?" It's not an unreasonable expectation. Such collections are surely held for the Nation? So how come it's almost impossible to find out what there is, where it's kept, let alone actually see the stuff? I don't expect everything to be on display. That would be impossible. But I would hope to be able to confirm the existence of something that is supposedly in a collection. And contact someone to ask questions. Or am I being unreasonable?

It depends what gives you pleasure Rich. But it seems to me that over the last 10+ years I've been collecting the market has shifted from rare coins in any condition to conditional rarity. I'm no exception in that I have stopped trying to fill all the gaps with coins in any grade and now look for those with 'eye appeal'. That's because I've realised those are the coins that give me pleasure to own. I even now have some duplicates. Duplicates! I never imagined I would have any of those when I started because I always assumed I would keep the best I could find and sell the lesser examples to upgrade other coins. But when each coin is unique (and admittedly none perfect) two coins of the same variety can both have appealing but different features that I enjoy! For all I know, commoner coins in better condition have always commanded better prices. Certainly the collector base for true rarities will generally be smaller because, as Nicholas says, it requires more in depth knowledge. I have some very rare coins indeed. Such as this one: But I suspect that when I tell you that it is only the second example I've ever seen (or heard of) and that the other (in rather better condition!) sold for over £1000 it still won't make it any more desirable! It was, and remains, the best I can afford because there just don't seem to be any others out there! If knowing something is rare gives you pleasure then, go for it! But just remember that rarity doesn't always equate to valuable. You'd be best advised to research a bit before spending any decent amounts of money. Of course, if you fancy rarity and would like a 'second only known' .. well, I'm sure we could agree a reasonable price for the above coin!

Quite. We all have to work within a budget. If I'd had more spare cash then I'd have happily bought the Newark. Likely it would have pride of place amongst my little collection of amulets and talismans I've made or picked up here and there!. But .. heck, based on the last few purchases, I could have bought half a dozen coins for the price! There was no way I could justify what would effectively have been a new collecting theme to myself. I balanced adding to my main collection with a fun novelty and the collection won. I guess the day I can find nothing that appeals within my budget might yet come. At that point I'll have some serious thinking to do about where to go from there. I like the idea that Geordie could no doubt keep a room full of people spellbound with stories of where his coins have been and the uses they were put to.

Though oddly I really like this: Not despite but because someone has smoothed the reverse and engraved it. Making it no longer a coin but .. a personal talisman of sorts. So I guess my imagination can be sparked by some things!

That's pretty cool Scott! Looks a bit like the stuff old brown circuit boards were made from - mylar was it?

Can't make out the obverse at all, but it's an 'orb / tressure' type of jeton. More info here: http://www.ukdfd.co.uk/pages/nuremberg-jetons.html .

LOL I can see the numismatic and historic appeal Geordie. But I guess my tastes are a bit more prosaic in that I like my coins to look pretty too! So I'd probably go for something a bit more centrally struck. Plus I do rather like a portrait coin as I like to get an image (albeit probably looking nothing like the actual person) of the King or Queen in question in my mind. Of course, later hammered shillings are my thing. Bit bigger than pennies. For example I was looking at this: Double struck (just says CHRIS on the reverse where it should read CHRISTO), scratched, the legend on the obverse falls over the King's crown. Was it struck after lunch and a few ales? In a hurry? Quite a few scratches and dints too, but the design is clear, the coin is circular and full and it's nicely toned. It's clearly (to me) a circulated coin that has been carried in a purse and spent before being hidden away or lost. But it's still got 'eye appeal' to me. I don't suppose it would interest Rob or Geoff at all. Others might well think of it as the centrepiece of a collection if it were theirs. Everyone is different. I don't think there's a 'right' or 'wrong' way to collect so long as you enjoy what you have. I just don't think struggling to identify Tealby pennies would amuse me any more than trying to decide if a Vicky florin is Davies 3 or 4 .. I like what I like. You clearly enjoy the history of the coins you own, puzzling out why they are the way they are and what might have happened to them and whose hands they passed through. I get that. It's certainly more interesting to me than proofs and MSwhatevers! Just I think I prefer my coins as 'objects d'art' to doors to the imagination! If that makes sense? . .

S.2791 Sharp E3/2 mm Tun (14 Feb 1636- 8 May 1638) Damn you're good... No more difficult than coming up with Peck numbers I imagine ... probably easier in fact!

I don't have any perfect coins. And I don't collect 'fine work' pieces because I find them too perfect ... yes, I know they show more detail than the currency issues, but to me money was meant to be spent. Now that doesn't stop me from looking for better condition pieces. I have several that are probably very much 'as struck'. Apart from the fact that I'd prefer them to have some toning then I'm happy with them. None is perfectly round or deep or crisp or even (sorry .. winter is coming!) But I also enjoy some quirkiness. That's why later milled isn't for me. It all looks pretty much the same to me. So for hammered I have a 'wish list'. A broad round flan, so the edge beading shows. Even thickness, so the majority of the design is picked up. Full weight, so I know it's not been clipped. And ideally, some old toning. Where there are weaknesses I am more forgiving if they are on the reverse than to the King's portrait, or the legends rather than the design. But I do insist on a reasonable privy mark - on at least one side! Mostly it's a balancing act. It's difficult (and generally expensive) aiming for everything. So I try to find a reasonable mix of the above although which is most important on a particular day is likely to vary with my mood. I showed off my latest buy before but here it is again. About as close to perfection for that bust design and mint mark as I am likely to find within my budget, or likely to want really ... Are you peculiar Geordie? No, I don't think so. The variability and 'handmade-edness' of hammered coins is what makes them attractive to me. Though like Peter, I aim for eye-appeal. But what makes a coin appealing probably varies from one collector to another... which I guess is probably a good thing!