Sylvester

I think the US mint melts them. I THINK! Feel free to prove me wrong. I wouldn't care to speculate on what the Royal Mint does.

I always wanted a non-biblical name. How's Montague? (I used to have a cat called that!)

And all of those names are better than Mathew, god anything is better than Mathew.

Mathew, one t. Not my favourite name, perhaps i should change it to Sylvester?

This is where i get pedantic. IIII is the general English version of the Roman 4 and IV is the general continental Latin version, per se. Although there are probably deviations all the way through. The majority of English historical document i've seen from the medieval period almost always write it as iiij (yes J usually in small letters with the dots), the j being synonoymous (sp?) with i. So English common practice was to write it as IIII and it always was. I presume the IIII didn't look educated/continental enough at some point or other and they switched to the more traditional IV variant. Both are perfectly correct, the French used XIIII for Louis XIV too. William IV also uses the IIII. I guess it's kinda like shewn and shown, both are correct gramatically, one is no longer really used and would be seen as archaic. Well that's what's happened with IIII and IV, IV is more fashionable.

I store mine obverse up, that goes even for the date set. I used to have them all obverse down (including coins where the date is on the obverse), but with the cabinet soft high relief coins can be slightly hairlined by the linings in the coin trays, so i keep the obverses up and the reverses down. The reverses are in lower relief and so it does not affect them at all.

The Spinks 1985 goes into some depth on this, but i can't find it! I think they make a big copy in some kind of plaster mould then use the reducing machine to put it on the die, stamp in the letters and then harden it with acids or some such chemicals. I'd have to look in the book to be sure.

Well logic would tell you when flipping a coin that the heads side is the heads side and therefore the front cos the front is the most important and you sai it first, hence Heads and tails, not tails and heads! The tails side is the back/reverse. Simple i would have thought? No?

The Queen is on the front not the back, the Queen is always on the front.

Just watch, wait and see... (I forget where the original post is, but i can find it if i look), it's much more eloquently put there.

It just something another collector told me. He say the British prices have been rising and rising and rising and it's come to the final quick rise pattern and then it's time for the drop. I don't confess to understand all the economics behuind it but this guy knows what he's talking about. The slow down is coming but no one knows exactly when, early 2005 is probably too early but come summer prices will either go up or begin to receed, if they begin to stagnate and receed then the dip will probably occur for the remainder of the noughties. I'd go for 06/07 and price reductions in some areas, and freezes in others from 06/07 onwards... with prize freezes of course the price looks to remain the same and so you thinkit hasn't gone down but inflation reduces the value anyhow. I think by the end of the decade things will have calmed down price wise, well for a short while.

Next dip; 2005-07

Brink back Kylie!

If you look at an early 80s catalogue and compare it to one now... also taking into account inflation you'll notice that prices were higher back then. I think by the early 90s the market had subdued.

Values may have gone down in some areas though. Actually when i read the title of this thread i was remined of the policeman from 'Allo 'Allo! Good mewning.

No i don't have a Sponk... (it could have been worse!) Nor do i have a Spinks neither, i haven't seen them yet, but i have not looked yet.

That's a defeatist attitude! It's not all that much different actually. Solid AU would be AU55, numbers in the 5X series lower than 5 (50-54) suggest a coin that we'd call AU- and numbers 5X above 5 (56-59) would be AU+. Obviously it's more complicated than that cos our AUNC and their AU are different, cos our grading standards are tougher. What they mean by AU is usually our EF. It's like our but on a decimal numbering system rather than on a +/- system. One thig i don't get though is why the VF spectrum is sooo wide. Covers the 20s and the 30s. VF25, VF35 etc. Why are there 20 VF grades and only 10 of everything else? Except grades below F which are all crammed in from 0 to 9. A very illogical system, devised by a copper nut so what do you expect. They always say copper coin collectors get very very in depth (with the coins being cheaper and more widely available is it any surprise?), but to come up with a whole new grading system for one area [large cents] that then spread to the rest, from one denomination (and only the large versions of it) to everything including world coins... well it beggars belief.

I guess he just proved his point about being confused. I find the numbering system confusing like why is 58 used more than 55? And why is 59 not used or 54?

Not always... The Provincial mint Sovereigns SA, C, I, S, M, P etc. were usually minted in the provinces cos it saved shipping raw gold over on ships (where it could be looted), minting it into coins in England and then shipping it back over to the colonies on ships (where if they didn't get it the first time they could have a second attempt). Therefore the sovereigns were minted near to the gold source and then shipped wherever required which meant only one shipping rather than two.

Oh i would. In about 5 or 10 years it wouldn't surprise me idf they didn't sell of the circulation coin minting royalties to another private company, either that or they'll shift production to China/India like everyone else seems to have done and make a better profit.

Oh tell me about it. And whilst we're bitching about it, what is it with releasing the proofs in different cases? standard and delux etc? Then of course we get speciman sets, piedfort proofs...

Household polish should do the trick. Also soap and warm water... it won't be an easy task but just give it your best shot, and use circular motions with the cloth, it'll get you plenty of hairline scratches. Once you've seen a coin properly cleaned you'll not want to see too many more of them. Another thing you can look at is those sets they sell at souvenier shops for tourists they are usually dipped/polished to oblivion. Well it saves you cleaning one. But if you clean a few pennies in circ... oh i've just had a though try salt and bicarb soda... but not together. I know salt can be used to shift tea stains in cups and bicarbonate of soda is just fantastic for cleaning all matter of stuff like teeth. Have an experiment or two, then once you've done chuck em back in circulation. Feel free to try vinegar too.

It's a rare building that needs brakes, some have been known to move of their own accord but not fast enough for brakes.

talking of hair look for hairline scratches on the ones you cleaned.

Actually the 1993 one is a 1992/3 issue or so it says and Collectors Coins was much smaller back then.