Rob

Shouldn't be the same punch as the Soho punches remained there until they were sold off in the 1848 auction where Taylor acquired them. i.e, the 1825s would have to be restrikes to use the same punches as the mint was already using in house punches.

I'm not belittling anybody. As Azda said, it is a case of taking what is available, even if not perfect. I've even got a badly corroded aluminium specimen of one type because it's probably the only one in existence. The same went for a guy on the PCGS forum who took a P940 slabbed 61. normally he wouldn't look at it being a number chaser, but it is the only one he is likely to encounter. Again, it was another variety that hadn't appeared in a sale over the past half-century. I've never seen one other than that coin. Most patterns come up in really good grade at some point, so patience is the name of the game, but occasionally it is Hobson's Choice.

No it's not. It's probably the worst of the bunch as it has a large thumbprint on the obverse which is something that would normally be a reason for rejection, but given the last example I have recorded is in the Circular for September 1968 (CC4134) given as aEF and Mick Martin couldn't find any examples in the period from 1970 to 2008, buying was a no-brainer. Peck's own example went to Birmingham, and the BM has one (ex-Cuff 1854). That leaves only the Brice/Montagu coin as the other reference I have. Any of the aforementioned may be the same coin, but I can't be certain. The late Soho types KH3 onwards, say P1043 to 1048 are decidedly rare. I only have this one and the silver KH4 (not in Peck). I threw out the P1044 which I couldn't live with, but these aside I've not seen any examples of the others.

Somewhat ironically, it probably is a genuine rarity if the mintage figures of 100K or 200K for the real thing are to be believed. The Chinese will make them to order, and I suspect that levels have not yet reached the 100K mark.

Sorted then. I've only kept three. This sixpence plus the two shillings.

That'll see him quaking at the knees, not. Is anybody aware of an instance in which eBay actually backed up their rhetoric with action? Or is this just a malicious rumour spread about by their script writers?

Most people go for a year of birth collection at some point and seem to keep it irrespective of where they end up with the main collection.

It isn't rare. For that sort of money you would need to be looking at a French arms at date

That has to be shilled. It's a 200-300 coin with the scratch on the nose, or maybe that's the rare variety

At least you didn't try putting them in the meter

If I have any in stock they usually go in at £3, reducing for the others

I wondered where they went

Sorry, no spare

The catalogue images are pixelated black and white, so no better than what you have. The cover might be more informative however.

It was lot 316 in Spink 89 on 25/11/1991. Hammered at £21K.

That's a moot point. If the tool had bevelled sides then it would tend to throw the metal surfaces outwards on scraping. If the metal was removed to leave perpendicular sides to the scrape, then striking would lead to the groove being filled in at the surface as it folded over on striking. Somewhere in the middle, the two extremes would cancel each other out. Once the coin is worn, it would result in metal removal at the highest points, unhelpfully removing the evidence for either. IMO the best info is therefore likely to show where the lines are away from the highest points, but this is also where the relief will be lowest. Despite the logic of removing excess weight before striking, I still think it is post strike as the lines rarely cover the whole diameter which you would expect if scraped across an abrasive surface.

I'm keeping mum, as I have nothing meaningless to say.

P1046. This appears to be the first example to come to market since the mid-60s

P607. 1694 halfpenny in brass

Just found out that I came second to the Fitzwilliam. Somewhat depressing really as it is yet another coin that has been saved for from the public to be locked away in a cupboard and forgotten. If I had known that I would have carried on bidding because god knows where I will find an acceptable example now. At least collectors pass them around amongst themselves.

That happened to me a few years ago and is something I don't like. I went down for some gold lots which mostly had their estimates upped by around 1K on the day. I didn't bother bidding on them, bought one other lot and went home feeling a bit miffed. But, the person consigning is within their rights to do so just as they can withdraw the lots in advance of the sale.

Or as has happened on more than one occasion, given up as the acquisitions slow to a trickle. Most compulsive collectors will struggle if only adding 1 or 2 coins each year. The first half of the collection might come easily, but the second half can be difficult, verging on the impossible. That's why I deliberately reset my collection criteria to be as diverse as possible. I can easily look for a sovereign and buy a sestertius or whatever instead.

The guy was lucky in that he bought some sovereigns that made a profit, even coming from LMO. 3 or 4 years ago I received a call from a woman whose father had died and spent a 5 figure sum on LMO things. e.g over £1K on a 1791 guinea in a pretty little box with a cert of authenticity and product description showing a picture of a PAS 1791 guinea. Sadly, the contents of the capsule graded fine. Two other boxes held a selection of low grade Roman and middle eastern coins with a retail value of 150 to 200 on a very good day. Cost was over 1200. Lots of other overpriced LMO goodies(?) were also purchased together with maybe a dozen sovereigns. Luckily for me she had done some homework before calling, and indicated she was prepared to get back only a fraction of what he had spent without me appearing to be the one doing the rip-off when my face dropped on opening the boxes. I wish all were like that. The day before yesterday I had to give similar bad news to someone that had spent a few hundred on gilt modern coins - pennies, 20p's, 50p's etc. Again, the resale value is a few pounds at most per item - if you can find a buyer. He will get back approximately 10-15% of his outlay. It goes back to the point I put to the BBC researcher. Nobody would spend £10K or more on a car without looking at it, taking it for a drive, and generally satisfying themselves it was reasonable for the money, yet people hand over similar sums to the LMO and Westminster etc without blinking, i.e. the consumer has to take at least some of the blame for their predicament. Possibly more than half the blame considering the amount of money these companies have to spend on marketing and advertising in the national press. Whether you like the LMO or not, they have to charge over bullion to cover their costs. The problem is the self produced tat they market, less so the overpriced collectable items. Let's face it, every one of us routinely pays a massive premium to intrinsic value, but we are generally saved by doing due diligence. Caveat emptor every time.

It certainly seems a little 'un-British'

He is saying if you want to see the money in your bank account grow, then get some coins. Presumably he is going to pay you to take his crap off his list, as buying them would deplete funds. I was going to say that's a win-win situation, but on reflection, maybe only a win- as you would still end up with the coins.