Rob

You're cheap Scott, go for the halfcrown Go for a ninepence or sixpence - far less common. Better still a flat crown shilling where there are only a couple dozen or so survivors.

Spend a little bit on a course on how not to be taken in by sales pitches.

Their prices have been too high for the last few years now. In 2005 I bought a nice James I 1/2d mullet over bell for just over £50 all in, which wasn't cheap, but not OTT at the time. Maybe they have decided that if you can't beat 'em, join 'em. Ebay is full of overpriced tat and a few billion potential buyers who haven't a clue what they are bidding on or buying, so perhaps they are just trying to milk the market. Nobody is obliged to bid or buy, and at those prices hopefully nobody from this forum will waste their money.

No, not replicas (though these and fakes do exist). The pattern 1933 pennies were designed by André Lavrillier with a supposedly more 'military' looking George V. The reverse is very similar to the actual issue, except that Britannia has a thicker trident and the waves are different. One of the patterns is uniface (just the obverse). The Lavrillier 1933s are contemporary with, but even rarer than regular 1933s, though do not command quite the prices (it's a difficult one to call as any 1933 appears so rarely). The first picture I ever saw of them was in an old edition of Collectors Coins GB. I think the reference to replicas and copies requires both the highlighted sentence and the previous one to be considered together. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I tink Mongo was referring to the numerous modern pieces dated 1933 appearing on ebay. You don't get very many Lavrillier patterns listed, unsurprisingly.

Damn, missed it! Oh, no, it's been taken off, so no image! Bugger! What a shame. It was the first time I'd seen a Chas I coin with the bust facing right, sat on an upside-down crown too. Should have been kept for posterity.

Common date and it has been scrubbed, so probably about fair value. £15 max. An acetone bath won't get rid of the scratches which is the main detracting feature and there is no underlying lustre to bring out because the surfaces have already been compromised. It doesn't have eye appeal IMO as the washed out appearance suggests it has also been dipped.

Good fine, the reverse maybe slightly better, so a thousand pound coin ish. Halfcrowns are much, much harder to find in decent grade for this issue than the crowns. You tend to hit a brick wall around VF in terms of availability.

Forgive me Rob. I was going to reply to this, but then I realised... I have no idea what you are talking about! I will have to start learning all these terms, I have just about got my head around what a pattern is. The joys of being a newb! A pattern is a design which wasn't adopted for currency. Some are wildly different from the currency pieces, others have only subtle differences but are still patterns because they weren't adopted. Somewhere along the line, somebody will have catalogued the dies of the various patterns which then becomes the standard reference for that series. In the case of the Huth pattern double florins, ESC lists some in silver, platinum and gold with a footnote that other metal strikes were also produced - iron, copper, zinc, etc (tin, lead, cadmium). Linecar & Stone (English Proof and Pattern Crown Size Pieces, Spink 1968) lists the die combinations they could positively identify, but this as noted above has an error for L&S21. There is one obverse die (1), 4 reverses (A-D) and 4 edges (i-iv). So 1Aii refers to obverse 1, reverse A and edge ii. Lingford had probably the definitive collection of crowns in British numismatic history which was sold at Glendining in October 1950. He also had a vast collection of most other things, but only the James I and Scottish went through the saleroom with the rest acquired by Baldwins following his death. Thanks for the lesson Rob. How much do I owe you? Patterns are starting to sound a little more interesting now... are they struck at the mint, privately for engravers to exhibit their work, or both? I am intrigued. I see "patterns" on ebay, very cheap. I saw some 1933 pennies described as patterns, I am asuming these are not the real thing, but rather modern replica's? Sounds like a whole new world of coin collecting! Correct on the last point. Patterns in my view should be a series produced contemporary with the items they would replace if adopted and can be produced at both the mint or privately. So a 1933 penny is a straightforward copy/replica which has been produced in recent years to satisfy the demand for the unobtainable and is not a pattern. There is no prospective currency for the modern 1933 pennies to be used. If they were 2012 pennies, but with an alternative design, then they would be patterns as the mint could choose to adopt them for future issues. Modern repros are produced in bulk, whereas a genuine contemporary pattern is likely to have a very low mintage, up to a dozen or two struck of a particular type would be typical, but maybe only half a dozen or fewer.

Forgive me Rob. I was going to reply to this, but then I realised... I have no idea what you are talking about! I will have to start learning all these terms, I have just about got my head around what a pattern is. The joys of being a newb! A pattern is a design which wasn't adopted for currency. Some are wildly different from the currency pieces, others have only subtle differences but are still patterns because they weren't adopted. Somewhere along the line, somebody will have catalogued the dies of the various patterns which then becomes the standard reference for that series. In the case of the Huth pattern double florins, ESC lists some in silver, platinum and gold with a footnote that other metal strikes were also produced - iron, copper, zinc, etc (tin, lead, cadmium). Linecar & Stone (English Proof and Pattern Crown Size Pieces, Spink 1968) lists the die combinations they could positively identify, but this as noted above has an error for L&S21. There is one obverse die (1), 4 reverses (A-D) and 4 edges (i-iv). So 1Aii refers to obverse 1, reverse A and edge ii. Lingford had probably the definitive collection of crowns in British numismatic history which was sold at Glendining in October 1950. He also had a vast collection of most other things, but only the James I and Scottish went through the saleroom with the rest acquired by Baldwins following his death.

That is cheating, you have to pick one! or Huth Now that is a nice portrait! very smart. I like the toga, is that one of your Patterns? Yes. It's a 1911 pattern double florin struck by Pinches for Reginald Huth. Linecar & Stone dies 1Aii. Just discovered an error in L&S today (as I was chasing a provenance of a 1Ci dies in Zinc recently acquired which has thrown up a real can of worms). They list the iron pattern as dies 1Bii (L&S21) based on an example in the Lingford catalogue (1950), but the catalogue description clearly relates to a 1Aii die combination. The weight of the Lingford piece at 420 grains is within 1 grain of this coin and the description of a little rust agrees with the spot by the truncation and the lower eyelid. So quite possibly it was Lingford 637 but unfortunately this was not illustrated.

Actually, although I don't collect them, I think some of the ancient Greek portraits are superb.

That is cheating, you have to pick one! I can't, but I'll meet you halfway. Cromwell or Huth

100% agree with you both, I think the G3 copper series is a very pretty run of coins, would make a very eye-appealing collection, I've been tempted myself! I particularly love the chestnut tones that seem to turn up quite regularly with these coins, like nothing I've noticed on any other copper. I think I would try and get the full set in this colour, would look breathtaking I think! How many do you want?

He was good to me too. I didn't get one.

I can't make my mind up between Mary, Cromwell, Briot's Charles I or Huth's George V portraits.

This incomprehension and general disbelief at the prices looks like being an annual event! For last year's discussion. here

Alan likes his Tealby pennies. He gave a talk at the local society a year or so ago which was quite interesting considering the bulk of the available research material has no detail. Having to identify the dies from fragments of the legend or bust is ok once in a while, but as a routine exercise can become somewhat tedious. A well struck Tealby is an anomaly. I would like an example or two, but could never embrace the series with a great deal of enthusiasm.

Dave, what were you doing up at that time? I was in bed before 3.15am surely. But i work late shifts everyday and don't finish until 12.30am and get home at around 12.45am but obviously can't go directly to bed, so i'm normally up for another hour, sometimes longer Red. Not everyone feels the need to spend all night asleep. Turn in at 3, start dozing off by 5 and get up at 7 on the grounds it's too warm to sleep. A normal summer night.

Interesting die. The high 8 usually referred to is the last digit as this was punched in afterwards, but in this instance both 8s are high. An example exists of the halfcrown for instance reading 181-. The dot is no more than a flaw in my opinion and such an obvious feature wouldn't be used to align the letters is normally done using a wire-line. Both Davies and ESC record small 8s for 1819, with Davies also noting the same for 1820.

Therein lies both the problem and the advantage. In middle grades you are spoilt for choice about the problem but can usually pick up a cheap example of most things. Obviously, in most cases it will just be wear but in this case it was verd too. If not happy with a problem, leave the coin and move on. It's always better to buy something where you wouldn't have any intention of upgrading. Do that a few times and magically you find you have enough for a coin that's a grade up on what you intended to spend originally.

For what it's worth, the s.g. was 7.82 approx., so probably mostly tin with a bit of added lead. That's the usual mix as lead is normally the main impurity.

Learn to be patient. Low tides are not virtually unobtainable, something which might be a valid reason for buying below your normal requirements. You have already said you want it until you can afford better, but money not spent today on that coin can be more usefully spent on something you won't want to upgrade. God, I'm a crap salesman.

Spot on Peck. I have never seen a slab with a space for an old coin ticket. And you are reliant on the TPG getting it right, which is a real problem. Famous names from the past are rarely noted on the slab, but I've seen two coins for certain with the incorrect provenance on the label. One I now own and the other I wasn't prepared to bid up as the name (Norweb) appeals to US collectors who accordingly were bidding by number plus name.

Chasing every last penny is the trade off which people have to make. Customers could make their lives a lot easier by buying just the product they want in the simplest form. If you want life insurance, buy life insurance, not life insurance combined with credit card cover, house insurance and a free cup of tea on Wednesdays. You can always say no. The least opaque products are those where there is no combination of features. If something is cheaper as a bundle, you can rest assured that there is a reason. Changing banks isn't something you would do on a daily basis, so an intermittent inconvenience shouldn't be a problem. For savings, when an account matures, look for the best vehicle to reinvest as there is plenty of info out there. If you aren't prepared to look around, you cannot expect to get the best deal offered as it will almost certainly be found elsewhere. Mis-selling products is something that should be clamped down on, but the public's ignorance about anything and everything financial is to a large extent their own on account of indifference and laziness. It is incumbent on individuals to read the T&C on policies and it would help if they asked appropriate questions at the time a policy was taken out. The solution is product simplicity. No bundling, and a clearly defined narrow set of criteria.

It all depends on the coin first and foremost, but also the names involved. Certain collectors of 100 years ago or more recent times always command a premium because you know that they only collected (and were usually offered) the best available. Or maybe their collection was a definitive one of a series. Maybe they wrote the book. Some collectors are known to have been patient enough to wait for the right coin to come along. It isn't a failsafe system, but works most of the time. Know the history and you have a better hedge against misfortune. I remember bemoaning to the late Colin Cooke the fact that a certain member of these boards always outbid me. The coin in question had a long provenance. Aside from the obvious statement that my pockets simply weren't deep enough, he was magnanimous enough to say that there wasn't anything wrong with my collecting tastes, as the coin was from a who's who of top grade collectors. C'est la vie.