Peckris 2

Yes, commemorative as in "first year of reign". Crowns were not produced for general currency purposes after 1901 (some might argue for the 1902) and were either issued as specimen proofs (1927), in response to 'coinie enthusiasm' (wreaths), commemorating a jubilee (1935) or special event (1951, 1960, 1965), or commemorating the first year of a reign (1937, 1953). Sorry, I don't understand your point?

I think the position of the 5 is significant. But not the tail of the 9 which can be affected by die wear.

True enough - but the number for 1858 seems to dwarf any other date.

Sorry to be pedantic, but there weren't any currency 1937 crowns - they were all commemorative.

Yes, that's another example where the weaknesses on the reverse are quite normal. I'd say the BU value in Spink is for a normal strike and you could add a premium for fully struck up examples. They're scarce!

Very nice.

Nice tone. Good purchase.

I'd say 'no' - the grade refers to wear. However, a good or poor (rather than an average) strike should be part of the description and would affect the value. Another point to bear in mind is whether the coin in question is most usually encountered weakly struck; one example would be the 1895 YH farthing where the catalogue value takes into account that the reverse is generally quite weak, and a good example would carry a premium over that.

It's no wonder there are so many varieties for 1858. It was intended to be the final year for copper pennies and therefore the reuse of older dies made perfect sense - it was only the drastic delays caused by the problems with bronze that put the changeover back at least 18 months.

Agreed. (Or to put it in terms the RM understands, "a greed")

I wonder if one could treat a coin NOW, that was Unc-BU, with hypo? This could, for example, be recent but the seller hasn't made anything of it and appears to be offering it as a normal 1937. If someone was treating such pennies recently, you'd think they would say "RARE MINT TONING" or similar.

That's clearly hypo toned - but at the Mint or after? It does look just a bit too brown and lacks the purplish tinge of MT examples. It would also bring into question that the War was the reason behind Mint toning, if genuine.

Which moggel of iPad is that?

Dangerously accurate. Who on earth made these?

https is fast becoming the norm. The fact is, http really is unsecure and a hacker could see your data, or even track your IP address. There is a little app called "https everywhere" (or similar) which is highly recommended. We think just because we don't give out personal information on a site (like this) we're safe. We arent!

I was going to suggest Gornal instead of Tipton but I don't think anyone in Gornal can afford a car...

Interesting. Is it the complete catalogue? In 1968 they split it in two - everything up to early milled, then a slim blue book with more grade values listed, from 1816 onwards. I only have the latter as I didn't own anything earlier apart from a very worn Charles II farthing.

Yes, the 46 is quite common. It might be worth pointing out that of the 1945s I've seen, many had a much paler toning than is found on the other dates, misleading to the impression that maybe they were not toned.

A few pre-47 florins. Surprisingly, not a single sixpence or shilling with silver in IIRC. Do bear in mind that in the great silver meltdown of 1980, most pre-47 coins were actively sought and sold for melt. Remember - in 1980 the BU value for most George VI silver florins was £2. At the height of that year's silver madness, they rose to £12 before falling back again when the madness ended. The chances of finding pre-47 after 1980 dropped dramatically.

I got this when I tried to post a hilarious Amazon review. Many times I edited it but nothing worked ... until I spotted that one of the reviews featured a list of luxury brands (for comic effect). When I removed that line, the post sailed through. Have a look and see if something in your post can be identified as a product - you will get the "Forbidden" message as the software thinks it's spam.

Here's more about this series: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/cleopatra-thea-and-her-son-antiochus-viii.301597/

Interesting. In my own (FileMaker Pro) database, I designed a layout that compiles prices from Seaby/Spink from the 60s to recent times for my own collection. Here is a small sample (note that coins I didn't already own in the 90s have no values for that period which I own no catalogue for, unlike the other values; there was anyway a great stagnation in values for about 10 years from the mid 80s to the mid 90s): *note it's not up to date - there's nothing after 2009 in this image, and I've also since added 1976 values

Different penny. That one IS EF. But not a proof!