Peckris 2

Perhaps he means the specimen?

That is NOT a ME - I can tell at first glance, even on worn examples. Surely, NGC should know better?

Agreed - I only have a few, and bought that one 1) because it was in a lot with other coins and 2) it's rather a fine design.

Good point. It was the same with 1951 Crowns in 2001.

Wow. I bought that for a fairly modest price 20 odd years ago, certainly nowhere near 3 figures.

Ah yes, that's much more exaggerated than normal. However, I still think it's the strike not post-Mint.

Which medal was that - the large size of the one with Young Head on one side, and Old Head on the other?

Do you think the writers of Allo Allo were thinking of that? Capt. Hans Geering : Do you not see? That if you kill him with the pill from the till by making with it the drug in the jug, you need not light the candle with the handle on the gâteau from the château. René : Simple plots are always the best.

Are we on the same page? I'm remembering an episode of 'Allo 'Allo!

is that on the gateau for the chateau?

Thanks

Why are they calling you "Guy Fonquernie", Stuart?

@copper123 I don't suppose you remember Loving You Has Made Me Bananas, a 1978 hit for Guy Marks? For decades, I thought the lyric was Oh your red scarf matches your eyes / You close your cover before striking / Your father had to shit for the blues / Loving you has made me bananas Turns out it is "Your father had the shipfitter blues" @Debono I really can't see anything wrong with your farthing. It could be that the strike has exaggerated the profile (not uncommon with Geo V) and therefore sucked more metal away from the reverse than usual? But face on it looks normal, and so does the shot of it resting on a surface. The picture with the blue ruler is a bit weird but the blue reflection doesn't help.

It is almost certainly the strike and not post-mint damage. It's hard to tell from your pictures, but convex / concave farthhings are not unknown, especially given the size of the coin.

I think it was from the big Photoshop Sale last year - Baldwins, I believe ?

There's a post about an 1839 plain edge proof halfcrown with coin axis in Confirmed Unlisted Varieties.

Spink lists 4 distinct varieties of 1839 plain edge proof halfcrown, but they are all inverted axis. Are you convinced the coin is genuine - do you have pictures?

Oh no, I just accidentally bid £10,000 on a 1902 halfcrown ... --- ... / ... --- ... / ... --- ...

Just chucking my two pennorth in here... I would argue that the bun penny market has generally always been larger than the copper series; also, the wide / narrow date varieties are immediately recognisable even to novices, and it's USUALLY (though not invariable) the case that the more recognisable a variety is, the more popular it is and therefore the higher the prices achievable.

I agree. It doesn't float my boat, but the amount of work you've done deserves to be published.

I'd take issue with his reasoning - i.e. the Jubilee Head obverse - as the change to medal orientation had already been done for bronze nearly 30 years earlier.

That's the point I was making: either wreath crowns should be regarded as proofs, or - as generally accepted - NOT proofs. In other words, describing certain examples as proofs is not valid IMO. There may be a few VIP wreaths as you say but I don't think those for sale are. 1951 Crowns from the proof sets are not noticeably different to those issued in cardboard boxes, which have often been described as 'prooflike'. It's something of a grey area when you have proofs and specimens which can not really be separated as such.

That's a hell of a time ago!! I would have responded to a reminder... Oh well.