Rob

If you buy from the US you will find a lot of coins are slabbed - certainly the high grade ones. It depends on whether you want to keep them in plastic or in a mahogany cabinet for example. Traditionalists prefer a coin cabinet, but most people will not touch raw coins in the US for fear of being sold a dud. Consequently I suggest you don't buy any coins until you have acquired a few books and done a bit of background research. A general price guide will give you an idea of what is available and a ballpark figure for the various options. A trip to a coin fair to see the coins in the flesh is a must. Ebay is to be avoided until you know what you are doing as it is full of overpriced, overgraded and sometimes less than genuine crap. If you know anyone else who collects, have a long chat with them. Similarly at coin fairs, chat to the dealers. Don't feel compelled to take the cheapest of what are ostensibly identical coins. Most coins are priced low for a reason. Lustre is something you recognise when you see it. It is not a flat colour, even if the copper/bronze has bright surfaces. Lustre can be false. There are a few dealers on this forum. Mongo asked the same question last week, so see that thread for a list. Try searching the forum for the various points you want answers to, as all have been discussed several times in the past. Slabs vs cabinets is a perennial topic.

Ah, one of my favourite patterns in Peck I assume this one is from your collection, Rob? Yes, it's ex-Boulton. You can't get better provenance than that! About 5 years ago in the Circular, there were a couple pages of mint state Soho patterns. All were ex-Boulton. The only halfpenny that was sold was one where I had the ex-Selig piece. So I took all the halfpennies bar one with spots and then wandered around grinning like a Cheshire Cat for a few days. Funnily enough, I only found out because I had phoned to find out where my copy of the Circular was because I hadn't received one. Sometimes you get lucky and to have passed up the opportunity would have been reprehensible. Quite chuffed.

Ah, one of my favourite patterns in Peck I assume this one is from your collection, Rob? Yes, it's ex-Boulton.

There used to be a link below the picture for sending messages, but it seems to have disappeared - maybe the site was upgraded. Don't ask me how to get it back as I haven't a clue. There is a send an email link below. Try that.

I suggest it's not a detector find, but a copy. A sixpence should weigh 3g. Please PM me the seller. Thanks.

As for grade, fine to good fine is ok, but I'd be a bit worried about the pitting. It's either been dug up from fairly corrosive soil or it's a cast. How much does it weigh, where did it come from and how much did it cost?

Looks like somebody told him he was talking complete bo**ocks. Now relisted correctly. here. Hardly a bargain though at £650 when you could buy the Slaney coin off Allan Davisson's last list for $4K.

Now you are just showing off! Makes my spreadsheet look like something I done at Playschool! Lots of nice ideas for me to add now, thanks everyone. Like it has been suggested, the good thing about spreadsheets, is the ease of being able to add more columns as I need to. I guess recording the coins you have is all part of the fun of collecting! It's not a question of showing off, rather finding a means of recording the data relevant to your collection in an easily viewable and retrievable manner. As long as you have the ability to sort data, the important consideration is the number of fields you might need to sort. If you don't need to sort data, keep that in a file dedicated to the specific item.

I have two databases. The first is the collection by reference number which links to a file on that specific coin, but also has the denomination, date, description, acquisition date, cost, source, reference (Peck/Freeman/Spink etc), catalogue value (for insurance purposes) and collection note which details the appropriate collection criteria. The second lists the collection criteria together with all the components of those criteria which are person in whose name a coin was struck (including episcopal issues), denomination, metal type, metal provenance, minting process, error/fault, attributed designer, initial or privy mark including overstruck marks, minting location, type examples, sundries and finally too nice to sell even if it means duplication. So for example, there are over 200 rulers or bishops in whose name a coin was struck, or nearly 200 attributed designers. By trying not to duplicate types or designs, it should end up as a nice eclectic mix with a bit of everything encompassing most of the things seen on British coins. Some duplication is inevitable.

He's done well to fairytale a bell out of the foot of the P! I think the 11o'clock'ish legend double-strike is actually showing the upper left-hand component of the V? I'm only making that assumption based on the locations of the double-struck P&O of ferry! Actually, just revisited that reverse...it can't be the V, it's in the wrong place comparative to the P&O, very strange! I think I've got it. The clue is in the right hand leg of the double struck cross. The bell is an offset P which is also not fully struck up and so resembles the side of an A which is the main cause for confusion - I couldn't reconcile AO in the legend and the O could not be the D of ADIVTORE. POSVI is there twice, rotated and displaced outwards to NNW. Detail would help, but hey, when you have an impossible error you must take what comes.

I like this one best.

This guy's lost the plot too. Long cross over bell as a mint mark? 1580 was two years before the first ever issue of a bell marked coin. It is clearly double struck as you can see an O (or similar) or part of one superimposed on the adjacent P along with a couple of other characters in the general area. E1 sixpence. Although it must be due to double striking, I'm struggling to reconcile it to the existing legend on either side.

Just checking through the ebay listings for error coins, it's amazing what is claimed as an error. Here's one that is claimed as an error because GVLIELMVS is correct and as such an error because Spink doesn't list the spelling!! Help me God. GVLIELMVS without error, in error if you see what I mean

A lot of W3 copper varieties are only available in crap. Even after Baldwin's basement was emptied, most remain unobtainable in better than VF with quite a lot fine or a bit better at best.

Nonsense. Yesterday I was congratulated on converting the previous day's anaemic offerings into something really tasty second time round. It was only braised beef though with veggies, and browned mash sealing in all the flavour. Maybe it is me but I think us chaps cook better given the chance.I can't eat Mrs Peter's spag bol without a chop or chicken portion. Her Pork in lemonade as well as her asparagus and kippers will be remembered for the wrong reason.I have also endured dill with a bit of salmon. I often cook on a Sunday with fresh veg,a good cut of meat and plenty of gravy and good wine To be honest, I'm not surprised. An unlikely combination.

Although rarer than 1700 or 1701, 1699 isn't that hard to find an example of, certain varieties excepted. It is a much commoner date than 1698 date in exergue for example which were only struck for a three month period and then not extensively. I agree it isn't a bad example, just a shame about the weakness as you can't be certain what you have without die duplicates to compare.

Nonsense. Yesterday I was congratulated on converting the previous day's anaemic offerings into something really tasty second time round. It was only braised beef though with veggies, and browned mash sealing in all the flavour.

Lot 298 in Norweb pt.1 hammered at £7500. Previously it was obtained from the Seaby's Bulletin for Nov.1957 (7317) where the price was £160. So Mrs. N did ok there (or at least her family did). It is thought there is one other known.

Probably someone experimenting with producing moulds and casting using electrical solder (tin/lead) or some similarly low melting point alloy. You can do it in the oven at home and easily engrave the edge milling too given how soft solder is.

Copper, silver and gold being in the same group of the periodic table share the same basic atomic structure. If you have one metal plated on a different metal of the same group, over time there will be some migration of the two materials into each other under the right conditions. You would not expect this to happen on a large scale and quickly however. If the area of contact was great enough, then it might happen, but coins are hardly a flat surface and so the actual contact points are minimal in relation to the surface areas of the two objects. A solution based explanation seems far more likely. At a bimetallic junction, a voltage is generated - that's how thermocouples work. Voltage generated, circuit made and current will flow, allowing for the migration of atoms within the crystalline structure.

Long tail Q, Davies rev. A Thanks Rob! I was actually just looking at the ones you have for sale, I might go for both types you have on offer. Then I will only have to find the long tail to complete the set! You can have one of those too if you want. Thanks Rob. My coin pocket money is spoken for this week, so I will have to stick with those two for now (along with one of those stock box's I asked about). Will put my order in on Thursday for those 3 items Thanks

Long tail Q, Davies rev. A Thanks Rob! I was actually just looking at the ones you have for sale, I might go for both types you have on offer. Then I will only have to find the long tail to complete the set! You can have one of those too if you want.

Long tail Q, Davies rev. A

No reason to believe it isn't real. The date could have reinforced on the die at some point which would give the same effect. It's pretty dire and difficult to imagine too many people wanting it, despite the rarity of the date. Having said that, it's eBay, so anything could happen.

Not an area that I can help with I'm afraid.