oldcopper

The flaw is about halfway up and appears as a small sticking out "branch" at right angles. You can see this very clearly on the Baldwin coin (Auction 50, lot 332) and the May 1976 SNC item 3996 (also sold Spink Coin Auction 14 lot 311 and Glens 30/4/86 ("Lancashire Collection"). However, and I must apologise as I was writing from memory previously, both the Mark Rasmussen example (List 7, item 175) AND the DNW specimen (21st Feb 2018, lot 370) don't have this flaw. [I said the DNW one had the flaw last time] https://www.dnw.co.uk/auction-archive/lot-archive/lot.php?department=Coins&lot_id=305672 I can't see the flaw on yours, but that doesn't rule it out as described above. But the two 9's aren't touching in the DNW specimen and they are in yours, so your coin is from a different die. I'll relook at the other's illustrations and will get back to you.

That's one of Nicholson's GVLIEEMVS reverses unless I'm mistaken - the better one. I don't think fully struck up Britannia heads exist on the 1701 coins, and are very rare on the 1700 date. Even Nicholson's no stops obverse 1701, possibly the best known 1701 (except the silver proof in the BM/Peck plate coin which has a fully struck up head) has a flat head and corresponding weak cuirass.

I've seen 4 of these 1699 BRITAN IA's - the Baldwins late 2000's sale, Mark Rasmussen list 7, SNC 1976 and a worn one sold recently by DNW in a mixed lot. DNW have also sold 2 others previously which were in no way missing the second N! (whoops!) but the more recent one was genuine. There is a characteristic flaw on the right hand side of the upright of the T - this is present on 3 of the above but not, surprisingly, on the Mark Rasmussen coin which is from the same dies on careful comparison. I think Mark's coin must have been struck earlier before the die flaw developed.

Nicholson's is somewhat marred by being badly double-struck. The Ashby coin was a more satisfying rendition of the MVRIA. The thick flan 1694 (15.43g?) sold in the Bates auction went very cheaply (£180 from memory). This must be the heaviest known by some way. It sold for more at the original 1983 Glendining auction (£290 hammer) if I remember rightly - perhaps I should have gone for it.

Well Well, yes, everyone has their mark-up of course! That's how business works. You may get an idea of what a coin is worth on the open market by the original auction price if you can find it. so unless there's something very special about it that everyone else missed at the original sale, and this does happen sometimes, you may be taking a big punt on assuming your coin will hold its value buying at a big mark-up. So I personally would feel better paying a 40% mark-up for a coin I wanted than a 450% mark-up. especially about resale. Who wouldn't? The thing is I do my research via auction archives etc especially with slabbed coins, and often find them in their previous incarnation, but perhaps many people don't.

Agreed, they have some nice coins, though you should be aware that some of their mark-ups can be pretty astronomical. Also, they sometimes get coins re-slabbed at a higher grade from when they bought them, thus semi-justifying a huge mark-up. I'll give you an example: 1841 proof halfpenny PR64 NCG, sold Aug 2018 Heritage Auctions $900 hammer (characteristic spot in front of eyebrow). Same coin re-slabbed at PR65 by PCGS, on sale by Atlas now at $5950. That's a >400% increase (including premium on $900 at 20%). Admittedly it may have been cheap from HA, but it's definitely not now, even with a discount! And bear in mind you have the 5% import duty to pay as well if you're UK based. Maybe I'll give that one a miss.....

I think they're relying on the fact that people can't see their coins too well. There's method to their madness!

If you go to Mark's archive icon (mid-right of home page), you can see when he last sold it, (List 9, circa 2004/5?) for £37,500 - so the price asked has nearly quadrupled in the meantime (£135K). I suppose it's worth chancing an arm, depending on whether anyone wants it that badly. But not so far. I will say the stain behind the head is a slight distraction - perhaps I'll wait for a better one!! Has anyone seen the prices for the St James Ed VII sale today? Go to their website and click on "bid live" then on "continue" then the "250 lots" button. Strange to say, the only coin I was tempted by actually went for a reasonable price, the 1902 LT halfpenny (£360), not that I bid for it or anything else in this auction. Some other prices were truly amazing; the power of slabbery! Fancy a couple of Ed farthings for >£500, anyone? Or a currency crown for >£3K?

Aka Sebaceous Pete....tiny white and oily flecks, can't be anything else. Not putting anyone off their lunch am I? If you cut the human element out of coin collecting, it wouldn't be an issue!

In my experience (well, bitter experience in some cases!), the key agent in spotting a coin is...….dandruff. Tiny skin flakes are deadly, especially on a proof or lustrous coin if left for any length of time. I always try to check my coins before I put them away after viewing: at least the white flecks show up well at certain angles. Then I dab off with a cotton glove, or if it's still sticking, a very light application of a toothpick. So if a coin were slabbed with a tiny skin flake on it, further deterioration is likely to happen. And you wouldn't know whether the coin was graded with that spot or not. I have a lovely 1951 proof set I bought about 20 years ago with fully gleaming bronze, but the penny over the years has developed two small but unsightly brown dandruff spots, both residues spreading from skin flakes which I spotted then removed - great, the most valuable coin of the set as well!

The production standard for these crowns was high - I get the feeling it's relatively hard to tell the difference between a proof (if they exist!) and a well-struck proof-like currency piece, and many of these coins look well polished.

It would be nice if LC would list the "unsold" coins in their prices realised. I suppose it helps the vendors if they decide to resubmit it though, people will think it's a fresh coin. Ignorance is bliss!

Provided people realise they'll get naff all if they try and resell them.

Perhaps they mean £100-£200 for the 1902 florin? But maybe not - you should see the crown estimates! They're estimating a possible £3K plus for a 1902 crown (proof or currency: upper estimate + extras). Some anonymous American plonks a high number on a nice but common coin and kerboom...the price is supposed to go stratospheric. What a racket! I remember pointing out to Stephen Fenton a crazy estimate for a bog standard 1787 shilling (unslabbed, £700-800 from memory) a few years back. He just chuckled and walked on - he didn't explain or say it was a typo. Anyway, it didn't sell in the auction - fortunately no-one was that stupid!

sorry, not next item: 1909 penny lot 118, 1902 proof halfpenny lot 109.

Talking of ascribing imaginary numbers..... Baldwins of St James have done the same thing in their Edward VII collection catalogue 30 (on sixbid). They've ascribed "F168A" to the dot in ONE 1909 penny variant, whereas Freeman never listed this variety, certainly not in the 1985 update. While I'm at it I notice the next item is a 1902 matt proof halfpenny. They have a letter from the Royal Mint stating that he (Graham Dyer) was inclined to think it a proof and also a 1977 letter from Michael Freeman stating that he thought it was a proof as well. I find it odd then that Freeman didn't include it in his 1985 revised edition of his book. Perhaps he changed his mind!?

Just checked - the 1919KN actually went for £1600 hammer (September 2016). It looks a lot more lustrous in the picture than when I had it, may just be the lighting, and the distinguishing spot/stain on the reverse identifies the coin.

My mail sent before I'd finished, don't know which button I inadvertently pressed. Anyway, the vendor will probably put it in the next LC sale where it may well go for a good price. From recollection, I sold a 1919KN to a dealer (the one ex CC's Workman Collection) a couple of years back and it ended up in an LC auction, it didn't sell, but realised £1500, above estimate, in the next, so that shows the fickleness of the auction world. Also, someone should get a prize for transforming the horribly verdigrised proof 1868 quarter farthing in Pywell-Philips (Lot 831, £150 hammer) into the almost unrecogniseable coin (Lot 796) sold in this auction (£550). I'd like to know their secret!

Surprising for the 1827- I would have thought LC was a shoo-in for people paying silly prices for key dates, though it wasn't as good as the one they sold in September.

The 1827 was even more of a bargain in the Spink Pywell-Phillips sale when it went for £850 hammer. Someone looking to make a quick profit, perhaps they'll be slightly disappointed.

Sadly I realise it probably doesn't exist but just having a happy thought it might turn up one day! Perhaps some of these vanished varieties were made but disappeared through time. It's a shame the Royal Mint doesn't seem to have many records apart from yearly mintage figures from the early 19th century.

I'd love to see that 1836 penny footnoted by Peck (or was it Bramah?) as being in Australia "on good authority". Let's hope it wasn't a small silver one!

I went Saturday - never as good as the first day of course. The number of times I heard "that went yesterday" when enquiring about a coin.....I lost count! Still, I did pick up a nice one so not a wasted trip. As for the eye candy.......

Most of the auction stuff (apart from the RM decimal gold) came from a collector who seemingly collected mainly from Spink about 20 years ago, Their SNC and auctions had a lot of good silver back then.

OK, poor sap! Well, until it's slabbed as PF66 and sells for $6K!