Rob

Having gone through the exercise, I suppose 3 minutes to download last week's sale isn't the end of the world. However, they could make the pages bigger, as the pdf I downloaded only uses a 1/3 of the screen width here compared with over 3/4 looking at the list view. I guess I can enlarge it to 200+%, but surely scaling to fit the screen could be built into the software? After all, programmers take the time and effort to make things fit a phone screen. It still doesn't compensate for flicking through pages though, IMO.

All that matters is whether the existing setup works for them or not. Whilst it may help you or me if there was on-line bidding, it doesn't necessarily translate into greater profits for them, which is the whole point of business. The hard work has been done in facilitating an auction. After the initial business setup, tweaking a model typically gives a relatively small increase in returns as anyone in business knows. It should in theory produce better results, but how much is an unknown. I don't know what the various platforms charge for the facility, so can't do any sums. All auction houses are trying to maximise profits, as it is the only important statistic for being in business. Since Covid, DNW no longer send out catalogues, instead offering to mail them at £25 a copy. With at least a dozen sales a year, that is a coin. That's been a pain too, as it takes a few minutes to scan through a paper catalogue allowing you to quickly identify the lots/areas of interest. Having to plough through the whole catalogue online takes hours and hours. Consequently I have only bid on a few items that I noticed in advance and essentially ignored most of the offerings as I don't have a day to spend meticulously looking at each lot. However, that also works for DNW as they no longer have the cost of printing and mailing catalogues - greater profits, job done.

There's no weakness whatsoever at the periphery, nor is there any indication of metal flow. A bun head halfpenny superimposed on a penny would cover from the rim at 12 o'clock to the exergue line, whilst a copper halfpenny covers the area seen. However, I can't see the mint having spare 29mm copper blanks lying around in 1877 (unless for a late strike proof halfpenny). The closest in size would be a florin. i.e. I'm not convinced that's a halfpenny flan. We therefore have to consider the alternatives. Anyone familiar with colonial issues that could match the size seen? A third option could be a TPG error - a regular penny inadvertently slabbed in a halfpenny holder, with the missing bits hidden in a polymer sandwich

Wot? This one?

My thoughts too. As Peck posted, there are issues related to covid, but it did cross my mind that they might be trying to eliminate anything liable to a potential customs charge by forcing people to use a courier as it saves them money if they don't have to process liable items, and they do have DPD to divert imports to. The list of banned items encompasses just about everything, but clearly they can't ban letters as a postal service. I guess we will have to wait and see if it persists once the covid issues have gone away.

I see what you mean regarding the rump, but would still like to rule out the silver being a later strike, which it would have to be. The tail, highest hoof connection to the foreleg, notch in the cloak and the linear circle in parts are all showing signs consistent with the field being polished down, but you need to superimpose the images to establish how much peripheral loss of relief there is on the rump, if any. No narrowing of the relief increases the case for making it iffy, but that would be contradicted by the above points.

Yep. I sold a pump to Hungary and there's about 6 or 700 quid involved. Three years ago ago I sold a similar item to the same business and there wasn't an issue - hence my willingness to offer the same payment route. However, after this I can safely say I won't be looking to help others over myself, so it will be bank transfer only. The fundamental problem with Paypal is that all lines of communication are directed to the waste bin. Until you get to a position where you can take a problem to the ombudsman (and bear in mind you have to give the other party 3 months to sort it out after giving notice of intention to refer), all communications are ignored in the hope you will go away. Last time, I sent a courtesy email to notify them I had sent off the file to the ombudsman in the absence of any meaningful discussion or resolution and for the first time in just over 50 emails I had a phone call (international) within 10 minutes accusing me of not trying to resolve the issue. I pointed out that reading just a handful of the emails would show I had tried. 10 minutes after that I had a second call indicating my money had been transferred (to the same 'dodgy' account of mine that had been blocked for over 6 months), and they also wished to make an ex-gratia payment (because if the ombudsman has to investigate, they incur a charge of a few hundred pounds whatever the outcome). i.e. they had done absolutely nothing in the interim to identify the 'problem', whatever it was. The sad thing is that all I wanted was a functioning payments system with the ability to resolve issues as and when they arose. Attached is what the compensation bought.

Most are a bit cheaper than Paypal, but there isn't much between any of them. Paypal however are less conventional when acting as a banker, being prone to holding on to your money at their discretion. Some of you may remember I fell out with PP in 2007 and received compensation when I took the case to the ombudsman for that reason. Wind the clock forward 14 years and it seems not much has changed. To make things easier for an international customer a couple weeks ago, I said he could use the wife's account to transfer the money (as he had done 3 years ago) rather than set up a bank transfer. Paypal are now holding the money indefinitely until they are satisfied it is legitimate. How they propose to do this is not explained. I can feel another Soho pattern coming on. I've never had a problem with a credit card payment. If only for that reason, people could consider prioritising payment by card over Paypal because there more people to consider than just the buyer.

Do we know for certain that it is silver? If it was a trial struck before the dies were hardened, then something not fully struck up becomes a possibility.

There is a benefit to returning overgraded or not genuine coins for re-evaluation, but that benefit is entirely NGC's as it removes them from the population reports and enhances their reputation for accurate assessment. You also have the contentious assumption that a coin which was incorrectly graded in the first place, is then correctly graded at the second attempt. Given they supposedly use a fixed set of standards for grading, it should be inconceivable that anything submitted for re-evaluation receives a different grade second time around from the same TPG. A far better public service is offered by collectors who point out the inconsistencies.

If it was an Edward VI Bristol shilling with this as the initial mark, I'd be happier We shall see how much interest there is. I might keep it if nobody wants it, but I already have a 1st bust SSC shilling.

As per the title. Quite obvious. Probably just the one die.

Google Chrome did an update last night. Maybe that's the issue. Mine's a bit sluggish this morning.

According to Krause, Gambia did 5 0.925Ag 20 Dalasis silver proofs that year on various subjects (World Cup, Queen Mother, Endanged Wildlife, Mungo Park and Olympics 1996, but no other denominations for Mungo Park.

Things do genuinely go missing as opposed to joining 'The Collection of a Postman'. My parcel of stycas to Paris three years ago which ended up in Tahiti, and a couple of lots from a Heritage sale in June 2006 that did a 7 month tour of the world's postal service before returning to Dallas, both spring to mind. Very few properly tracked items go awol, and then I presume it's mostly down to being put in the wrong sack, or quite legitimately, the auto reader/sorter can't decipher the address label correctly.

Quite possibly. Venues are a mess at the moment. The regular bookings of pre-Covid are essentially cancelled and people are starting from scratch. Wakefield happened last month for the first time since lockdown in ................Huddersfield. No Wakefield in Huddersfield or Wakefield next month due to a prior booking - probably a Christmas party even if it is the end of November. Wakefield is back in Huddersfield for January and February with a possibility that Wakefield will be in Wakefield at the end of March, though sticking with Huddersfield given the better room lighting would be preferable. Simple.

Bloody good job they don't smoke then.

Which basically means that without being able to view because Kent is a long way to go and they no longer go to Wakefield, that bids will be few and far between from me. I'm not sure where it will be held, so will have to wait for the catalogue to arrive in order to find out. That doesn't look very good from the surfaces perspective. I've never seen a solid raised narrow rim before as they usually have some tooth detail. It would be good to see if the edge is milled as it should be

I'm going to say dye polishing lines - trying to remove the colour seen inside the crown.

Looks undergraded at aEF. Mine is better, and was previously in a 66 slab ex Terner. Apologies for the faulty auto-focus.

There are a lot of people out there who refuse to accept that these are modern copies. A few days ago I was asked by someone who wanted me to authenticate some American 1940s cent rarity. I recommended he use PCGS or NGC as I knew nothing about US coinage and US coinage was their bread and butter. He said he wanted a professional to do this as he had no confidence in them. He had paid his subs to both companies and submitted a load of coins as he had all the rarities - 1933 penny, 1954 penny...... and they hadn't authenticated a single one. So he reiterated he wanted a professional appraisal. I suggested he use PCGS or NGC as US coinage was their bread and butter. I could go on...........

Buy two or three, mix and match the trays to suit your requirements, and move the surplus on.

Or this 1697B halfcrown has both large and small rust spots on the obverse.

And this 1762 quarter guinea has a few on the obverse too

The only real option if the coin is genuine is a rusted obverse die. It is somewhat comforting to see there are no spots on the reverse which you would expect to see if it was a cast copy, as casting bubbles would almost certainly be on both sides. Rust spots can be big or small. Here are a couple of coins from rusted dies. A Henry VII angel with a heavily rusted obverse.