Rob

But the price is coming down with each new find

Not sure where the Edward VI reference comes in unless he has corrected it. However- I think we are all being a bit presumptuous here. Maybe it is crown sized, maybe florin sized - who knows? He hasn't put any dimensions on the description, so you have to go with the vendor's take on it unless you know better. Reverse design doesn't come into it, as there are well documented cases of a 'standard' die being adopted for other denominations, such as the 1950 pattern double florin which has a George & Dragon reverse, or my RM trial halfcrown which used modified ship halfpenny dies. There are others which are used susequently, even if not adopted at the time. Furthermore, diameter is no guarantee of denomination. I still wouldn't buy this though.....

Good job I scrolled down. I was about to ask if it was used in conjunction with a Roman catapult.

The point I am making is that so many things are described as UNC and people will bid on them because they are so described. If you don't put unc in the title virtually nobody will look at it, but the truth is that UNC coins make up a tiny fraction of one percent of the total population. Some are aware of this but many aren't. This thread exists in large part because of delusional sellers and buyers alike. It is like 'rare' on ebay. About 8 or 10 years ago in this thread I took the first 25 'rare' coins and separated out the rarities. There was a 1934 halfcrown, which is scarce in high grade, and an 1853/2 halfpenny which is at least verging on rare. The rest were 1967 penny type material. Descriptions are best ignored. The volume of listings is such that I believe it has conditioned people to expect most things to cost 99p or not much above because there are too few eyeballs for widespread competitive bidding. I usually list some piece of junk that has a chance of selling even at a quid, just to get a card out and advertise the site and so open eyes to the fact that there is a world outside ebay. I would also like to add that it is not a very successful method, but hope springs eternal. Ebay is just another place to buy, not the only place. Most dealers do not make 50% + VAT. 20% is closer to the mark for a typical sale, (and the VAT is applied to the margin, not the full price), though clearly some things slip under the radar and are acquired cheaply. Whether you buy on ebay or from a dealer, you will have researched the coin just in establishing what you want. Investing is buying cheap and selling dear, just as it is for everything else.

It's easier to throw them away. Last year I listed nearly 2kg of pennies with an 1871 and a few more 1860s deliberately placed on top - which didn't sell, probably because I started it at a tenner and not the obligatory 99p. Took the 1871 out and it sold for over a tenner as a stand alone listing. Took the rest down to the scrapper when I next passed him. Just over 35kg of bronze pennies and halfpennies have gone that way in the past year because it isn't worth the hassle of listing (& relisting). I'd lose the will to live if ebay was the only outlet.

Silly. It's all that is wrong with eBay, or at least the people who buy there. Rhetorical question, but how can some thing blatantly not as described reach £12.50, when a halfcrown in the same grade sells for melt, and a couple of other things sell for a third of melt? Answer, on a rare foray onto ebay via the wife's account, they weren't mis-described. The other things that didn't sell for below melt will go in the pot tomorrow. There has to be too much material listed to achieve a reasonable price by listing as an auction.

This is an excellent example of the bling purchased by people who say 'look at me and what I have'. Everyone has a phone on their watch,so doesn't need the extra weight on their arm, and the coin is of no collector value as it mounted and doesn't fit in a 2x2, tray, slab, capsule............. As a coin collector, you simply wouldn't buy this. Value? At the current spot price of $29.58/gram and 14g of .995 platinum (assuming it is correct) - $412.0494.

Diamond Jubilee medallion depicting 4 generations of the Royal Family as seen. The signature below says Greuber, but he was at the BM. Not sure if they were sold in conjunction with the BM or not. They are quite common.

It happens on all hammered coins because the diestock is essentially a length of bar of a given diameter, the end of which serves as the die. When it is worn out the end is ground down, polished and re-engraved. That's why you can often see traces of a previous die under the current die detail.

If it is that good, they could always make it available to all and sundry and be a competitor to eBay. Maybe that way they would get people to join. eBay has got too big to be much use for sellers as there is too much material for buyers to sensibly plough through. I'm sure the way forward is an auction site with a low fixed listing cost for everybody - say £1. That way you will eliminate 90%+ of the dross that is only listed because it is free to do so and encourage the average quality rating to improve dramatically. It would take a lot of things away from traditional auction houses too if the pricing structure for buyers' fees was addressed. The internet does bring benefits, but businesses ultimately need to make a living. all those anxious to buy everything at 99p will one day want or need to sell. Presumably they will be happy receiving 99p less costs for their period of ownership?

Pretty certain it will be. The top stop of the colon after D is also nearly filled.

Most of the silver is cleaned. The surfaces are all wrong on all bar the low grade milled and most of the hammered. The Calais halfgroat and the Roman look too bright too.

Which might feed into why the 1791 gold halfpenny I used to own but sold on account of the heavy scuff on the cheek, resurfaced 6 months later slabbed proof 64 cameo. The only reasons I could see for this getting through was either the identity of the submitter, or they don't actually check very hard when you have a rarity/unique piece, because it is desirable on their part to say they have slabbed it. After all, PF64CAM sells better than Unc details. . I can't disagree with the protection issue, but slabbing means storage requires upsizing - think of a full height wardrobe sized cabinet, and presentation becomes a tad more difficult when you need to use a telescope to see the coins laid out at the end of the line when laid out.

On the assumption it is real in that case. Roman coins are widely copied, which results in many sales, just none recorded through auction houses. Nothing to compare with at least rings a warning bell and warrants further research

Yes, but for a quid it is probably worth finding out.

Leeway doesn't come into it. Wear is wear, whether it happened a year ago or a millennium ago is irrelevant. Leeway is wishful thinking on the part of the owner. All people have to do is accept that there are coins which don't make unc and be happy with them. It's not difficult really. None of the three I posted alongside were uncs, VF, nEF and a decent EF was the best I could go to.

You might struggle for people with in depth ancients knowledge on here. Can't help, sorry.

Don't worry about it. It is what ebay is all about. I pointed out to a seller of 'high grade' coins that were obscured with image manipulation that he was a bit wide of the mark and gave a comparison to back up the argument - so he left me a neg (in the good old days when both parties were allowed to call a spade a spade). Quick quiz. Guess which of the below was the high grade coin I questioned? Clue - it wasn't VF or better.

Nope.

Somebody has scanned it in in that case. You are better of with the book though, as you have to keep going to and fro from description to the plates which are at the back.

Probably Godric at Stamford.

Yep. Not cheap, but invaluable. And no, not available online. The internet wasn't about in 1958.

That is the point of saleroom notices. It is very easy to make a mistake when cataloguing, and equally difficult to proof read, particularly on multiple lots. Let them know, and they will correct it. It doesn't serve any auctioneer to give a misleading description, as they will only get the coin returned.

It has been discussed at length on here since Chris started the forum. Do not read too much into estimates. This is a function of the reserve set by the vendor as you are not permitted to have a reserve higher than the top estimate. If you have a coin that will normally go for about £100, then the estimate would logically be say £60-80. If you have somneone who says I want to receive £200 for my normally £100 coin, then the estimate will have to increase to take account of the reserve. All it needs is one person to submit a bid and the coin sells - thus giving the illusion that a new base level has been set for that type. The auction house will charge a fee whether it sells or not. The high prices are likely aimed at US buyers who will pay according to the number, though £1200-1500 for an 1887 crown that isn't a proof seems a bit steep. Yes slabbing is more popular in the US than here and yes it did start there, but there are some on this forum who are UK based and also prefer slabs such as PWA and The Coinery (not Coinery). The attraction of slabs is assisted by those who just want to buy a product off the shelf. That in a way is why slabs could take off to a larger extent in the UK, but it is certainly not going to be highly correlated with someone interested in the study of coins, as your sample material is protected from serious examination by the plastic.

The thing is that all these numbers are relative because there is no way in any shape or form that you are going to be able to compile an accurate corpus for anything but the rarest items, and even then it isn't guaranteed. If Peck (author of the BM catalogue published in 1958, English Copper, Tin and Bronze Coins in the BM 1558-1958) assigned a rarity to a variety, it was always going to be loosely based on his personal experience over the years. The same goes for Alan Rayner and ESC where the rarities are way out in some cases. Nobody can be expected to find all examples of anything, not least because a lot of collectors hold things close to their chest, or maybe haven't looked hard enough at the coin in the first place. Some things are mis-atttributed. There is no failsafe method of catching all examples and rejecting all mis-attributions, just what you can work out yourself.