Rob

I never understood why two arrows are used as a simple up or down arrow would suffice. I suppose the first covers the situation where the obverse is so dire or nondescript that the orientation is impossible to ascertain and you have to work it out from the book.

norwich....nickers of ready when i come home............. beats swalk any day So what does City mean? It means it's a big town with a Cathedral Rob. I'll get my coat! Sorry John, I was thinking in terms of acronyms.

norwich....nickers of ready when i come home............. beats swalk any day So what does City mean?

If the local shops don't know the difference between UNC & EF I suggest you ignore what they say. If a proof, then this should be obvious, but if only EF would be impaired and not worth a premium to a currency piece. There are modern counterfeits of this issue.

Don't worry about the supply of proof sets drying up unless there is a huge upturn in the number of collectors. You can always pick up any year fairly easily. Maybe not the first person you see, but certainly within a few table visits. It is therefore logical to cater for those who collect individual denominations. If I have duplicate year sets I will usually break the one with the worst condition packaging to provide the singletons. No qualms. As I have done in the past, also without qualms. I'm glad someone had no qualms about breaking up the ex-Norweb 1935 set or I'd never have got my hands on the penny Happens all the time. I got all my Cu-Ni 1958 proofs because Colin Adams had to buy the set from the Circular for the halfcrown. He had no problem finding a willing buyer.

Let's see -- an 1893-S encapsulated silver dollar with a CC mintmark on the reverse with multiple examples available from mainland China. I wonder how much it is really worth I sold a CC dollar today at a bit above melt given the mint. It was dire, but numismatically far more collectable than the Chinese version.

Don't worry about the supply of proof sets drying up unless there is a huge upturn in the number of collectors. You can always pick up any year fairly easily. Maybe not the first person you see, but certainly within a few table visits. It is therefore logical to cater for those who collect individual denominations. If I have duplicate year sets I will usually break the one with the worst condition packaging to provide the singletons. No qualms.

I presume you mean it looks something like this? It made it into an MS63 slab though.

Far too much moaning about the TPGs here. No one person will be able to turn the clock back, nor fully convert people to slabs. Just accept them for what they are and use your knowledge to cherry pick bargains from the numerous balls-ups. There's enough for everyone to get something. Some people buy slabs based on the number, others buy the contents. There is an opportunity here for those willing to do the spadework because an unduly low number or mis-attribution can result in low prices for the bargain of the century. If the TPGs were perfect, there would be no scope for sneaking a bargain.

It will depend on what sort of encryption level they choose. If you don't store customer or card details, you can simplify the system, otherwise you fall foul of the Data Protection laws.

And just to throw a little confusion into the mix, the 1853 OT has an intermediate colon to DEF. Peck 1503 refers, but don't worry as it isn't very common.

I'm afraid you have to do your own spadework. All price guides are out in both directions on a regular basis, just as some prices are about right. People will list coins for sell at a price that they think they can realise. This may also be over or under the guides. Ultimately the decision is yours. You aren't obligated to buy anything, equally, if you like the coin and the price seems reasonable then you should be happy and any particular guide irrelevant.

That's very kind of you Gary, but when I look at that particular page all I see is gaps and coins that need upgrading. The years after 1869 are definitely stronger. I guess we're all far too critical of our own collections! Good job, or we would all rest on our laurels. It also helps the individual to grade.

I concur. The few examples I have images of all show the same. A flaw.

The one thing you can guarantee is that any reform of any benefit will produce a mixture of winners and losers. This will be no different. I think it may well be a transitional arrangement simply because life expectancy is increasing quicker than anyone could have imagined even a decade or two ago. The rate of increase in life expectancy has ticked upwards in the most recent years and pension review has been ongoing for many years too, irrespective of the party in power. All of which suggests the politicians are playing catchup (again) due to their innate unwillingness to confront politically unpopular issues head on. The increase in retirement age was long overdue. When pensions were originally introduced, the average worker lived a few years before he popped his clogs. Today that number is certainly 15 with many cases over 20. As the state pension was always funded from current receipts, it should not come as a great surprise when an attempt is made to narrow the period between retirement and death as the whole thing depends on current workers paying for the retired. If you want to provide a state pension, simplification is a must, in common with the whole benefits system in general. There are too many parallel benefits which should be rolled into fewer systems. It is also important not to get carried away too much worrying about who will win and who will lose. No system will be considered perfectly equitable because any two individuals will nost likely have different circumstances. Simplification with flat rate entitlements are much easier to administer too, which means there should in theory be less scope for abuse. On this basis I think it will be a step in the right direction. However, the benefits will have to be reconciled to the income to be distributed. Given the demographics and standard of living to which everyone has become accustomed, this might end in a nasty shock. A universal entitlement is not as bad as either party would have you believe. Those who need any allowance will automatically claim, but some well off people will not, thus generating a saving on the total expected bill. From my point of view, I think a state system should be predicated on the assumption that it would provide a basic, but sustainable allowance for 'Mr Average'. People that take steps on their own initiative to save for a rainy day should not be penalised for having planned in advance as this is just the other side of the coin to those who fritter away every penny and more, then expect others to clean up the financial wreckage they leave behind. The pension level should be based on the price of essentials such as subsistence, power, water, and not discretionary purchases on luxuries such as tobacco, consumer electronics or holidays.

OOOOPS, mistake on my part. I have checked the tomb and this one has been mis-identified by NGC (Not Grading Correctly). It seems they can all mess up equally as badly as each other Bob. NGC have the edge over PCGS for mis-attributions.

Can't make it through the rain band No rain, too cold. Actually, it's positively brassy. Mine fell into the skip today.

I think the weather took its toll on York today. Had an email which said no one had turned up. Did anyone go today? Sorry, just realised this is in the nothing to do with coins section.

Virtually no snow in Manchester. A sprinkling last night and a few flakes today, but no problems. Re-roofing a house at the moment which is not the ideal job for this weather.

They are very expensive ~ I'd only bid on a Heritage item if it was something I really wanted and had long been unable to get elsewhere. Keep your eyes open and you can get lucky because they do attract decent quality. It also provides a sales outlet for those ex-pat coins that have passed through auctions that were previously off the radar until the internet. In 2006 I bought the (unique?)F689A in an incorrect slab which had been in the US since the Freeman sale in 1984.

Good, thanks Peter - that makes me feel better - I only paid a fiver for it. GVF money would have made me feel guilty! Ignore our resident pessimist - those aren't so much 'knocks' as 'faint taps, almost inaudible' I have to confess it never leapt out at me either. In all honesty i don't think I'd be unhappy if I'd bought GVF blind and your coin arrived! I'll give you a fiver for it, Declan, then you won't have to feel guilty about it anymore! A deformed rim/edge is an imperfection, however obvious. I'm on Peter's side. Me too, the eye is drawn to it, so a negative in the eye appeal stakes, still a bargain though! Well I'm just going to have to jolly well go and get my PC out then in that case! That's because eye phones attempt to do what they say on the label. Wrong sensory object to use for making a call, nor is the phone very well adapted for visual reception. Use the right tool for the job.

Good, thanks Peter - that makes me feel better - I only paid a fiver for it. GVF money would have made me feel guilty! Ignore our resident pessimist - those aren't so much 'knocks' as 'faint taps, almost inaudible' I have to confess it never leapt out at me either. In all honesty i don't think I'd be unhappy if I'd bought GVF blind and your coin arrived! I'll give you a fiver for it, Declan, then you won't have to feel guilty about it anymore! A deformed rim/edge is an imperfection, however obvious. I'm on Peter's side.

Farthing

The obverse looks like an Austin traders token.

Thanks John