Rob

Simple. I just want an example struck at King's Norton. The current gap is either a 1918KN or 1919KN, but I already have the design with a Heaton, albeit with Freeman dies 1+A instead of 2+B, so I suppose a regular penny of the mint would pass the non-duplication criteria, but it is difficult to get excited about the (minute) differences.

I think for beauty combined with a few thoughts as to how it was made, you have to look at ancients. Super detail that had to be made without recourse to a magnifying glass when engraving the dies. I have put up the Epaticcus Boar's Head before which is only 8mm diameter, but you could equally choose any one of many early works of art.

Yes, but that one doesn't say where it was made. First is better.

Not a clue, though would be interested if for sale. Saves getting a 1918 or 1919 which is a design I already have.

Is it possible to access their list of varieties, or do you have to be a member?

I think the Ns are inconclusive because there is no sign of the left hand foot. The underlying R is about 10% smaller in height than the other, so assuming the same font was used I would think there ought to be some trace of the underlying N other than the upright. Maybe someone has some close-ups of the appropriate farthing characters to see if the same punches are used? I'm not aware of this variety having been recorded elsewhere.

The final line of the description says 'The Best of British Manufacturing'. He omits to mention the quality British literacy in the title.

It has most likely been plated. A silver or nickel plated example might show signs of underlying bronze. A cupro-nickel flan intended for a different issue would be of similar weight to a bronze penny unless of markedly different thickness. The only off-metal strike that would be easy to ascertain would be a normal thickness penny struck in tin. This should be just over 7 grams against the normal 9g+ of a standard bronze penny. What's the weight to a couple decimal places preferably?

If I were you I would edit the post and remove your email address. Then save the pictures as a jpeg and resize them if necessary. Photos from a camera usually start out at 1 or 2Mb, but opening with paint and trimming off the excess irrrelevant content, then saving as a jpeg will probably reduce it to a few hundred kb which you can attach. The limit is 500kb.

All for £3

You could stick a 1967 penny in with a reserve of 10K as a vendor. They wouldn't have to accept it, but you could try. If someone resubmits a coin from a couple years ago at double the previous estimate, then it might sell. Certainly worth trying from the vendor's perspective. There are no rules to say you can't sell at a certain price, just the stigma of ridicule.

There is very little difference between the two editions. The second one only lists half a dozen or so additional illustrations and inscriptions compared to the first. The second edition is more conveniently sized, with smaller, but more pages. 88 pages in the first, 136 in the second.

Grade is proportionally related to the wear on a coin. It has nothing to do with eye appeal, which is a subjective matter. Coins can look to be low grade, yet merely be weakly struck. The improvement will be in eye appeal, i.e. it looks more attractive, but you can't reinstate metal lost through friction in the past.

How can you improve the grade when grade is a function of wear? Ancients suffer from a lot of filled and tooled examples to give an improvement in grade, but that is because there is a prospect of someone paying seriously big bucks. Thankfully, building up pitted and corroded modern coppers and bronzes don't appear to have comparable adherents.

http://

Edward IV first reign, light coinage, class Xb, mm. long cross fitchee/sun

Usually rubbing with an abrasive to remove dirt. People are impatient.

There was no reasoned argument from either side. That's why people, just as on this forum, debated the issue amongst themselves. The numbers quoted by both sides were designed for effect, but the simple truth is that there is only a finite pot of money to disburse, which means that not everybody can have what they want. And as for business, it will adapt to whatever situation it is confronted with. That's what they do, otherwise they go under. Consequently I believe that with the prospect of this issue hurting both the remaining EU members and the UK, a sensible agreement will be forged. The main side issue for the EU not addressed by Brexit is the ongoing fully centralised power agenda of the EU commission, but that is moving relentlessly forward irrespective of the wishes of any member state - you can do that when there is no control mechanism. Divide and rule. Allowing some national controls divides the constituent states. Formulating and handing down legislation by an unelected commission is the rule bit.

I don't have an issue with the ruling, nor the body that made it. The Supreme Court is there for a good reason and sometimes they make judgments that people don't like - something that is inevitable when opinions are divided as is manifestly the case. They have stated that it has no bearing on the referendum result and this is as it should be. Brexit or not is not the preserve of 11 men and women. My gripe is with the politicians who are arguing for a debate and amendments to suit themselves on the grounds that it is a subject that needs to be debated properly because the public didn't understand or consider the arguments. I concur with the first part, however, they had a year to debate this properly in advance of the referendum and chose instead to involve themselves in peurile yah-boo politics without addressing the topic and the important issues arising, presumably on the assumption that the outcome was foreseen. That debate was held across the country by the very people they deem to be unsuited to make decisions. Not for the first time it is our elected politicians who have abrogated their position of responsibility to put forward reasoned arguments for voting one way or the other.

It should be ok if it came from Noble's sale. I presume it was part of the bulk lot in the link below as that is the only 1882 halfcrown in the past couple of years, and the previous example doesn't match yours. It is actually quite a scarce coin, but again, if you aren't sure, don't bid. There are plenty of reputable dealers who will gladly help you. eBay is a steep learning curve with a lot of potentially expensive pitfalls. http://www.noble.com.au/auctions/search?q=1882+halfcrown&c=&e=Any+estimate&g=Any+grade&x=46&y=11

First of all, welcome to the forum. Secondly, why do you buy something if you are concerned that it is not genuine? Golden rule - If in doubt, leave it out. Nobody is forced to buy something on eBay, so presumably greed had some part to play in this, i.e. it was cheap. If you are unsure, look for another one elsewhere. Very few things in numismatics are so rare that another is unlikely to appear for many years, and if it is a bargain because nobody wants it, there might be a very good reason for this. That aside, there is nothing that shouts fake to me, though the pictures could be larger. The obverse is the side with the monarch's head on it, which looks as if it has been cleaned given the parallel lines. The reverse doesn't have any problems that I can see. A flaw by the N is just a case of wear and tear on the die. The overall colour is too pink, so unhelpful in determining whether the coin is bright in the hand, but it probably is. Maybe someone knows if the Chinese are producing 1882 halfcrown copies?

That ship sailed long ago. Even the wife accused me of being odd at the weekend. After 35 years I can safely say she's a slow learner.

I'm not sure if the argument holds up about haggling as the price is on the ticket, so a dealer is hardly able to double it on the spot just because someone is looking at a coin. Displaying the coins is the hardest job because to accommodate coin, details and price in a manner that makes all the info distinctly visible takes up an unrealistic amount of space, so there has to be some form of compromise. The most obvious thing to hide is the price because people aren't looking to spend a certain amout irrespective of the coin, but even so, the problem persists even just displaying the date info and the coin. People can't read the date in the exergue very easily, so I have settled for showing the date and working on the premise that the collector is able to identify the denomination from the flan size. Even so, given the quick scan that many make over a table before moving on in a very short space of time still means that engaging is the easiest way to draw their attention to what they are looking for, which is why the unresponsive nature of customers is so frustrating. However weird and wonderful the collecting habits of individuals, dealers don't care. We are all trying to sell coins, not find suitable candidates for the funny farm.

Given the free entry, I will happily sell you an early bird ticket

Handling is less of a problem with silver than it is with copper due to the reactivity of the latter, but mirror-like proof fields will show fingerprints whatever the metal. If you have dry skin it is less of a problem, and in any case you should be handling the coin around the edges only. Cotton gloves may or may not be ok depending on how easily you adapt to them. As for capsules, a few people on here use various types. If you search coin capsules it should give you a few threads where these are discussed.