Rob

OK, I thought you had to be a member of Facebook and a 'friend' to connect to others. Thanks, so it's not necessarily malicious and could even possibly be a sensible discussion. That hadn't occurred to me.

A query. Why would my website report that Facebook referred a visitor to my site when I don't have an account with them? Facebook or someone at FB trying to access the account? I don't have or want anything to do with FB, so they would have no reason to do this as far as I can see and without an account I didn't ought to exist in their mind.

Charles I F3/1 shilling with a legend error. They appear to have had a bad time around the anchor period (8th May 1638 - 4th July 1639), because there is also a CHRISO error (cf. Brooker 519) and sixpences, both regular and Briot issues reading CHISTO. It's a common type, but obviously scarcer with the error.

I've had two sales this week off the site - both fraudulent. Get more of those than genuine sales. People must think you were born yesterday, like the idiot 5 years ago who made two purchases 13 months apart giving a different address, but only changed the last digit on his mobile contact number, and then 6 months after that made a third purchase but used the same email address he had used 19 months previously. Sometimes you fear for the mental capacity of this country.

I did notice that everything on the recipe pages was accessible through links. My programming skills aren't up to putting ads in though. I'm not sure I can relate to or cope with social media either. Maybe one day...... Sorry John. The topic in the op has wandered off course - not for the first time.

Apposite seller id though. Wollongongcashexpress will more than adequately summarise his cash flow if he can sell at those prices.

That certainly saves a lot of legwork. Presumably having ad-blocker installed would not count as a view? If it doesn't then I can see the potential from the poster's side. I have made 9539 posts as I write. Where's my cut?

D over B in the obverse legend.

I had a quick look through the income report and I still can't see why someone would pay them to post a recipe. Who pays for these things? Father Christmas? I guess success comes from working hard, but it would require a huge amount of canvassing to get people to advertise with you and then you take your eye off the ball and the business suffers. A plus for them is that everyone has to eat, so any company can advertise in the knowledge that their customers cook food, so it has to be potentially profitable, but surely nobody consults a random person on the internet to find out how to cook? That's just plain weird. Better off getting a wife that can cook, or at least buy yourself a can opener, after all, cooking is about satisfying hunger with a palatable dish and isn't about creating an artistic masterpiece, despite what the pretentious t**ts say. I think coins would struggle though. According to the Shopify home page, I had someone looking for Glendining 1989 catalogues today. I have 1989s and just about every other year since the mid-70s complete or nearly so, but not enough time to go through and list them, let alone the other auction houses. How are you supposed to find time to list dozens of auction catalogues, recipes or whatever every day and still find time to witter on inanely about them at the same time? And ultimately, nobody would pay for an average daily viewer count of 30 or so people. It is little wonder John took his website down recently

Just seen that nobody has replied. Edward III Class C pre-treaty. Cross 1 with wedge tailed R.

Aren't most of the mega-viewing figures mostly like facebook postings of people getting pissed in Ibiza or the asian idiot with the silly dance? I'm just trying to imagine how you would get hundreds of thousands of people watching something remotely practical and I'm struggling to think of anything common to so many people that requires advice. Certainly in numismatics, the two or three dozen daily visits to my site might generate two or three views if I posted anything. That's why I use this forum instead if I want to say something useful as more people read it. I can't see a blog having any traction when people aren't interested in the first place. I know GC posts things on facebook as he told me and he gets a few hundred views a day, but the response is akin to Sun readers buying the newspaper for page 3. Reading the content is the last thing on their mind. All they want is a pretty picture, which frankly is wasting everybody's time.

Sorry, this is beyond me as I don't understand blogs or much of the vacuous nonsense that emanates from my computer or television screen, but what purpose is served by posting an 8 minute clip on you tube about unboxing coins? What could anyone hope to learn from it? Goods inwards and goods out department activities aren't normally intellectually taxing.

Have you not answered your own question? i.e. it reads correctly.

With the odd spike pointing down, was this originally an 1861 die, filled and recut? Is that shape of 3 seen anywhere else to suggest it is a complete punch?

Naughty baddy to put him down.

Yesterday was a good day. A chance observation shows that the 'Cannonball' halfcrown (Allen obv. H) was recut to make obv. C. Behind the right hand horse's rump is a series of incuse lines above the tail where the previous die has not been completely erased. Below the horse is a circular area. Compare this to the left hand image of the excellent 'Cannonball' halfcrown from the National Museum of Wales collection, illustrated in Besly's book on the Civil War. The various features align, with the H obverse hoof showing as a weak line immediately below the flaw on obv. C. The R of CAROLVS looks to be in the same spot on both dies. However, the two obverses are not exactly to scale with one being a scan from a book and the other a photograph of an actual coin. Obviously it would mean that the two obverses are mutually exclusive in chronological terms. The question is, where were they struck? As the Cannonball was the result of obliterating the :SA: below mark, I think it likely that it was done to reflect a die movement from Shrewsbury to Worcester. The reverse die paired with the obverse C illustrated is Allen rev. 17, also known to be paired with obverse B which is the 'Tower' marked W below the horse die.

I'll have a go at resizing but the biggest problem is still overlaying images and making them semi-transparent. I got a copy of Serif 6 that you used a while back only to find that there isn't anything in the index about overlaying images. Going to need a more appropriate program, or at least one that has clear instructions. I could do so much more with the right tools. Computers - the bane of my life

Can be either. I know pretty much where my 1601 pledge halfpenny has been since 1601. I also know of a Rawlins Oxford crown that can be traced back to the Governor of Oxford, Sir Henry Gage, who was killed in action, January 1644/5. You can't beat a roughly 400 year old continuous provenance. That has to add value - that is, always assuming you have a desire to sell. Otherwise the coin is worth the same sunk cost in perpetuity. On the pleasure front, the acquisition of the annulet marked Ed. IV halfgroat last spring, gave me immense pleasure in having deciphered the 1874 dated ticket and traced the source back to Hugh Howard (d.1738). Provenances are fun to work out at the time and give a real feeling of success on completion. It is why I would probably sell my coins before my books.

No chance of scaling them. Firstly I don't know if the image in the book is to exactly to scale. Secondly, the coins are not even in the same country, so there is no chance of ensuring consistency in size by putting them together. The best I can do is guess (or buy examples of the types on the unreasonable assumption that they are available to buy!). The clover shape is a spur from a punch common to both (I think)

The additional wording is Long cross Type Br(ooke) 5 B(ritish) M(useum ) C(atalogue) IVa. S(eaby) Cat(alogue) 668 F something. What is the something? The rest makes sense, but is only general blurb. It also eliminates Lingford being responsible for the 76 in a circle because the Seaby catalogue numbers post-date his demise. Presumably the ticket is that of the Revd Campbell? If so, you could always add it to the ticket thread, as I have no info on what or when he collected, nor when the collection was sold. The missing link is the collector(s) between 1916 and 1944.

Rule no. 1 - NEVER throw a ticket in the bin as it is usually the only link there is to a previous owner. If you could provide a better picture of the ticket, it might be possible to match it to something else.

Also not sure why the 1874B rappen description is accompanied by a 1905 1/2Fr image.

I haven't seen the auction advert yet.

Anybody who collects these will probably point it out, or just ignore it. I have no concept of the demand for them, but suggest it wouldn't be that high from the UK. Krause listing values are a bit hit and miss in any case as they generally reflect past sales of coins in particular grades leading to inconsistencies whereby the lower grade coin is valued higher than the mint state version. There is a thread on the PCGS forum highlighting this anomaly.

It looks like clashed dies given it has the same folds as the dress. Someone might pay extra for it, but there's no logical reason to do so