Peckris 2

Duplicate? You willing to sell? It's much better than my own example.

The 1926 varieties : you need to say whether these relate to the ME or earlier effigy. The 1961 varieties : the disappearance of EF and CT are purely due to die fill; people were once excited about them and they appeared in lists as varieties, but I'd say they haven't been listed for decades as people stopped regarding them as anything but gradually filling dies and therefore nothing to get excited about. The polished blank (not die IMO) is more interesting, but not so well known is that there are several CuNi strikes after 1953 that are on polished blanks. I can't remember the dates offhand but I have one halfcrown and one 6d - both 50s - that are definitely on polished blanks. My theory is that they produced way too many for 1953 proofs and slowly used them up.

How many examples of Type 3 have you seen? If only one, I'd wait for more examples before getting excited.

Useful list. My only comment is in relation to the variety descriptors. For example, with the 1921 shillings it would help enormously if you added which obverse type the pointings relate to, i.e. is it the obverse used from 1911 to 1920, or the one used from 1920 to 1926? I.e., that's your main variety difference, then within them you have micro varieties. (And this might also apply to other years where there are both main and micro varieties).

The thing which made her look so stupid, is that she didn't even have the nous to play dumb or be diplomatic.. such as asking a very obvious question like "Why are you asking that?"

Apparently Liz Truss was asked "Did we recognise Russian soveriegnty over two regions?" She replied "We will never recognise it". Then had to be discreetly told by an ambassador that the regions in question are in fact Russian. And to think she may yet be PM - God help us!

by Arthur Daily...?

Here's an even better one - the exceptionally rare 1799 over 1806 farthing - and yours for only £2 https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/353869251507

Not TOO shabby... Yes, resizing on a desktop is a doddle, but on an iPhone...! Best thing is to go to the App Store and type in "jpeg" and hopefully an app to resize images will show up?

Yes, the normal halfpenny obverse for 1970 is the Type 2, which first occurs as a scarcity for 1956 then again as the slightly scarcer 1967 type. (I of DEI to a space? Anyway, a wider rim)

I bid live with the video on, but didn't win anything I don't know what happened to that particular lot.

LOL. Actually I was trying to get as close as possible to the original - "L.P. Hartley"!

"Do you have a copy of Fly Fishing by M.P. Party?"

That's why I backup four times a day to Time Machine (automatic) create a clone of my complete system as often as I remember have automatic cloud backups for smaller things like WP SS DB files, which includes all my coin stuff, so whenever I make a change it's automatically backed up And if ever upgrade to an OS which doesn't support my database software, I can get a newer version from eBay .. and as 'belt and braces' I can always output the databases as Excel SS's so a multitude of programs will be able to open them. So you see, it would take a widespread disaster to permanently destroy my data [touching wood ].

One reason the date looks smaller is that the teeth are small just below the exergue area giving the impression there's more space below the 9 and 6. Maybe it's an optical illusion, or a variety with compressed teeth?

I'm quite surprised the 72 set isn't worth more than it is, considering the date is only available from the set.

Nah. Too good looking.

Probably not... with one possible exception - Dave Groom. If you have a copy of his bronze 20th Century varieties book (I don't), he may have covered this.

In which case you don't mean "mostly" - none of the coins were for circulation.

the first one looks to have a noticeably smaller date.

I've never seen any Roman design remotely like that. I'd say it is more likely to be (perhaps) a token? In which case it is more likely to be 17th or 18th Century...

I'd say die damage, either manmade or accidental - otherwise it's something over 4 (the 4 being the underlying figure)

Then there was the lad who emptied a pint of milk down the sink and poured his late father's ashes in so he could scatter them behind the Juventus goal according to his dad's final wish. Unfortunately the officials wouldn't allow him to take "something that could be used as a weapon" into the ground. It's a sorry state of affairs when you can't even take a bottle of pop into a football ground...

Looks like he survived shell shock for a short time (4 minutes to be precise)...

NFC ?