Rob

Now the groat has dropped. Nicholas and I are talking about Edward 1, not Elizabeth 1. When he said E1, I automatically knew what he was talking about and didn't even stop to consider E1 as they are quite common and not so desirable. You're too Tudor-centric Stuart.

I can't recall ever seeing an ex-mount groat?That seems a lowly dream coin for your usual quality taste in coins? Most of them have been gilded or mounted in the past. VF is a high enough aspiration.

The Edward VIII sovereign from earlier this year? £516,000 all in. The Edward VIII was lot 949 in Tokyo. That made Y29m hammer.

Plus premium, but I don't know what percentage it was. The figure of £336K all in rings a bell though - so presumably 10%.

The Gothic was Y44m and the 1935 crown Y3m. You will have to work it out in £. The date was 22/11/2008 at the 20th Ginza sale in Tokyo.

From the same sale.

Very nice Rob! One you have a special interest in perhaps? No, I've already got an HC. It was just one I picked off the page at random.

There you go, just for you - Morrieson 555

There is a pair of them in existence. One in the BM and the other doing the rounds.

Do you need any lot info? I am using all four as we write.

£2K. Who's been looking at bidding in London Coins next sale then?

I knew I had a picture of it somewhere. Enjoy.

Simon Monks does a lot of tokens as does John Newman.

Surely they tone nicely because they normally sit in a felt lined box for years. That's mutually exclusive to circulating.

No way of telling once it has done the rounds for a bit unless it retains its original brilliance. If part of a set you can see if a currency piece has been added to rebuild the set by comparing the surfaces, but as a stand alone item you are on a hiding to nothing. Maundy threepences are the most likely item to be missing from a set due to the denomination also being a currency issue.

If you mouse over his 5th picture, you can make out the name Hearn!! And presumably he knows because that word has been erased whereas the others are reasonably intact.

The wife was going to see someone and her journey was not too far out of the way, so she dropped it off as she was sort of passing. Better than waiting until Wednesday to receive it.

Did you read the item description in the listing? Not only optimistic but borderline rude too! Is it rude to say people who don't want to spend anything are not welcome? Over the years I have seen/received a lot of derisory offers that were well below intrinsic value, let alone their price as a collectible. OK, in this instance the price is just plain silly, but I can see where he's coming from. In this case, yes it is. I refer to the words used, not the intended meaning. Ok, maybe he shouldn't discriminate and only refer to poorer bidders, but the idea of sticking two fingers up to time wasters is one that most ebay sellers can sympathise with. A person submitting a bid of £1 for a sovereign in the hope that the seller hits the accept button instead of the decline one isn't likely to be welcomed with open arms.

This is still spending $200 for $95 worth of work. Please, I implore you, send the $105 you have no need for or wish to pee against the wall to me, and I will spend it on something where you actually receive a benefit or goods for the expenditure.

Did you read the item description in the listing? Not only optimistic but borderline rude too! Is it rude to say people who don't want to spend anything are not welcome? Over the years I have seen/received a lot of derisory offers that were well below intrinsic value, let alone their price as a collectible. OK, in this instance the price is just plain silly, but I can see where he's coming from.

I fail to see why paying someone $249 to grade 5 coins that would normally cost $35 each, i.e $175 in total, is any better off than paying $200 to grade 5 coins that would otherwise cost $95. The first is a smaller overpayment, but still an overpayment, and certainly a larger outlay depite the lower overspend. Surely, if desperate to spend money for nothing there must have been a pyramid scheme closer to home you could have used - or you could play the lottery? It's little wonder you get grade inflation given the incentive to grade higher from the higher fees charged as a consequence of the higher 'official' value. You also run the risk of having coins undergraded as you have only paid to have them graded up to a certain value (for which read grade). It actually goes some way to justifying the use of a third party to grade the graders.

I've still got half a dozen or more questions waiting for a reply - tomorrow never comes. Basically you might get a reply if it doesn't involve them doing any research, otherwise, forget it.

Uh, surely you mean they charge you $40 for each of the first 5 coins and then however much per coin the the normal rate is after that? What are the benefits of membership? The entitlement to spend money with them?

I don't know if if the mint has any records remaining for the period, but you could ask. I haven't got any figures. I think that by and large the prices reflect the rarity/grade given in Cope & Rayner. It's far more useful than the vague prices given by the guides.

The point is that whatever the P&P charged, the outlay is clearly stated. Just as people would take the buyer's premium into consideration if bidding at Spink etc, so should bidders on eBay. It isn't as if you get hit with an unexpected charge after you have won the item. If the P&P was only known after winning, then there would possibly be a case that the seller was taking people for a ride, but surely not when clearly stated in advance. And for the same reason I don't think that people should be able to leave black marks against your name for what you charge - but they do, and that for small amounts of a few pounds.