Peckris 2

Nice one(s)! Yes, that's a very nice 1893. If I'd known you were aiming that high I'd have spent more time looking out items for you, though the 1902 and 1936 were perfectly good coins, and competitively priced in my opinion.

It is most laughable in the 'Paul Is Dead' conspiracy theory. The theory goes that Paul had his "fatal car crash" ("he blew his mind out in a car..." ) on 9th November 66 after a row with the other 3 in the recording studio. If you hold a mirror (no really!) across the drum on the cover of Sgt Pepper's you get " I ONE IX ^ HE DIE ", the first part translating to the date. Sadly for these loonies, the British date translates to 11th September.

An EF 1936 : https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1936-KING-GEORGE-V-SILVER-SHILLING-COIN-1-HIGH-GRADE/154369175239?hash=item23f11eaec7:g:bnAAAOSw3RlgS7~W

Here's a very reasonable 1902 shilling ... but if buying, I'd ask the seller for the reverse picture. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/GB-1902-SHILLING/154318675080?hash=item23ee1c1c88:g:6eAAAOSw1x9gHBQw

In that light...

Have I only just noticed this, or have dates in quoted posts suddenly reverted to the nonsensical American MM/DD/YYYY format?

Hear hear.

The only thing that p*sses me off is that having selected an (upcoming) auction as part of a search, it doesn't remember that, so when you search the next coin(s) you have to also select the auction again.

Yes, I think that's fair - can't see any signs of wear. An early milled EF should meet the same requirements for wear as very late coins. However, they weren't struck with machines so you may find them off centre, or weaknesses in the legend for example. They're still EF but with extra things to describe. VF is too strong I think. Half a grade less, or not even quite that.

I had an email today with 'package ready' information and tracking number. Fingers crossed.

To a fellow forum member, yes I agree. But someone from outside buying the coin would be able to look up the DNW sale / lot number and possibly see any provenance quoted in the item description. DNW would have no record equating to "Nick's collection".

To follow on from Sword's excellent post: There are earlier shillings which are (relatively) cheap in high grade, especially in comparison to others of the same type: 1936 1916 and 1918 1902 1887 Jubilee Head

It's an obvious fake to us who have years of experience, but I can see how someone with little experience might be fooled as all the correct elements appear to be there. But yes, spending 000's without the necessary years of collecting and studying is not advised. Hopefully the current owner will join us here (anonymously) and get all the help and advice he needs.

Me too. You should see the complexity of the values calculation - so complex I had to create a tutorial layout to remind myself what to do!

I did better than that - I pasted the highlighted text into a new window but Google said it couldn't find the link.

Did you design that database yourself? I created mine 25 years ago using FileMaker Pro, and it's expanded considerably since then! Here are 4 layouts (out of at least 25)...

I suggest it might be better to mark it "DNW Fleet Collection Sale" plus the lot numbers and the date? That would make the provenance part of a chain and useful to any subsequent owners. You could always put your text as an additional comment!

A good auction for you @Nick ! At least, I hope it was - most lots were over estimate, quite a lot were well over.

That's a real shame. What a pity he didn't do more research especially as that's a hugely popular and therefore much faked rarity. I'll contact him with any advice I can offer.

My opinion, for what it's worth (and those are certainly good enough to collect): AF/F (rather flat portrait) GVF/VF (slightly flattened reverse) GF VF (ish..) and no, the grey tone - which is fairly typical - in no way reduces the grade VF the reverse is VF, the obverse is hovering around VF too but not quite as good As for paying, yes go with what you like and be prepared to pay over the odds (but not too much!) for something you really want. For example, I took part in my first ever auction today at one of the 'big boys' (Dix Noonan Webb), and paid over book price for a scarce halfcrown in top grade - I wanted it because I have every other one in that series in better-than-EF minimum and I only had the scarce one in VF/GVF. To me, as I could afford it, I was prepared to splash out in order to get it.

Straight out of Porkies. Barman, having answered the phone: "Mike Hunt? Mike Hunt? Anyone seen Mike Hunt?" I'm sure it would have been in The Simpsons too, when Bart and Lisa used to prank call Moe's .. unfortunately it wasn't after the watershed!

Must be someone who peruses this forum - it's been pulled.

Thanks! Yes, definitely a wrong 'un in my opinion. Everything about it screams 'repro'.

the link doesn't work