Rob

That is correct - just 5%. I have never attended an auction, but have put in quite a few absentee bids and have won a fair number of lots. They obviously manage to keep their costs down by being largely a family run firm and by not spending much time photographing lots. In my opinion, their grading of lots is consistent, if perhaps just a tad optimistic - but offer a decent alternative to the larger London auction houses. Therein lies the problem for all those of us not resident in the south-east. You dare not bid blind. Unc maybe unc, but there again, maybe not.

Pot luck. They can appear anywhere. Unless of historical interest with named affinities to someone important they will be cheaper than an unengraved coin, so obviously, if a coin had a dedication say e.g from Lord Nelson to Lady Hamilton then clearly it would become very desirable given their place in English history. Joe Smith to Jane Smith would not be important and given the intimacy of love tokens are often seen with first names only which makes attribution problematic to say the least. They can be quite ornate, but are usually found on bigger flans than shillings. Early milled crowns are a favourite, though halfcrowns are also big enough to fit on a decent amount of detail.

Don't know of one, that's why I'm asking. In that case, forgive me! I thought you had one up your sleeve that you could dazzle us with! It does seem strange that a design that they had apparently consigned to the recycling bin appeared on the final item... One thing that has just occurred to me, has anyone seen/got a not-so-wavey one in a pres-pack? Possibly they saw the design on these and decided to do a quick redesign for the circulation issue? Though its a lot of effort for only a million pieces... Also, why is the cycling one only got an issue of less than half that of the rest?! (see here) It could be a case similar to the set of progressive stages of 1818 crown by Pistrucci (cf. Lingford lots 473-495). The only thing is though that most of these were struck in lead using an unhardened die until the design was complete. It looks as if the swimmer's head on the line-free coin is in slightly higher relief, which would make sense if the model was cut deeper to remove the lines. It obviously would not have been done on the die today, rather on the large cast, though why they then went on to produce a working die from this stage is beyond me unless they made trials for the various stages as outlined above.

With all the rich foods over Xmas a piece of plain toast and a boiled egg followed by nice cuppa seems order of the day We finished off the cheese board,pickles and chilli & wine was through down our necks so many times. Seems reminiscent of a meal we cooked whilst at university. Curry for two and the end of term, so everything went in it including the best part of an ounce of curry powder and an ounce of chili powder. End result, colitis and a trip to the hospital at 2 in the morning passing blood and the body retaining nothing. Still, could have been worse - according to the record in the hospital log, the guy before me had "p***s caught in zip".

I agree with Tom. It's relative to the supply and demand for the coin, there seem to be many early milled coins graded VF or GVF (even by reputable dealers and graders) that in the condition they are in wouldn't sell for anything at all if they were post 1950. But thankfully there is some consistency across the centuries, so that inevitably you won't ever find any EF or above hammered coins or UNC or better coins prior to 1797 ... I have the sinking feeling however that I might be contradicted by some of the experts, of which I am certainly not one! You do get unc milled prior to 1797, though the vagaries of hammered coinage pretty much excludes these as a block from saying whether there is wear on a coin or not. Small things might justifiably get say a practically as struck good EF, but it is difficult to say the same with conviction for a large module hammered coin that is almost inevitably double struck and unevenly struck.

Not sure what you're looking at? the 2 and 6? I'd say good honest wear in the 1st picture Worn die/worn coin. It isn't 6/2 if that is what you were hoping. How about this one? There is definitely something poking out from the bottom left corner of the six. Looks a possibility. There is usually a small protrusion bottom left and a smaller one bottom right. Your coin also appears to tick the box with what appears to be an ascending diagonal line across the loop of the 6.

I don't think there is a great degree of harshness towards your coin per se. The problem is one of many US coins which for the past decade or two have been promoted as rainbow toned where there is no earthly chance the colour was acquired naturally. A coin from 1890 which has a degree of toning is quite acceptable. Your coin has some wear, so an amount of peripheral toning together with some in the recesses of the design is quite normal and is clearly offset by friction to the high points. Is the mark on the cheek on the coin or the holder as this is a bit of a blemish if on the coin and would affect its value? There is nothing wrong with collecting what you like - every single person on this forum is guilty of that. Irrespective of budget, if you like it and it gives you pleasure, take the hedonistic approach and stick two fingers up to those who don't like it. It's a good job there are plenty of contrarians, otherwise there would be no relief from a monotonous diet of bronze pennies. If you could define a true coin collector please let us know, as I'm sure someone will disagree.

I think they ought to be ok for US coinage, but their knowledge of world coins has many gaps with the id frequently incorrectly attributed. It stands to reason that if they can't identify something properly, how the hell can they say what grade the effectively unknown coin is? Grading accurately is based on a knowledge of what something looks like in a state of perfect preservation and varying states of wear.

This is a problem sometimes because you often see grades inflated for age by people who want to sell an item. On ebay, the only way is UNC or EF if old, so everything has its grade upped and the older it is the worse it gets. A rule of thumb seems to be a full grade every 100-150 years back to the start of milled. Hammered is a different matter as has been discussed previously.

The 2006 edition of Freeman is the same as the 1985 edition except for the prices which were changed. A pointless exercise as you will almost never find a coin in an exact grade at an exact price. The prices were never relevant, only the images and descriptions were important. You can pick up a new 2006 for about £25 on ebay, so that sets your maximum. Certainly won't break the bank.

Not sure what you're looking at? the 2 and 6? I'd say good honest wear in the 1st picture Worn die/worn coin. It isn't 6/2 if that is what you were hoping.

peanuts

They are modern concoctions, make no claims to be fakes, or genuine. They are just a pair of obverses and reverses combined to provide gullible consumers with something that they won't be able to sell easily in the future. The 1823 obverse doesn't even look real. Pence, not pounds should be the real price and I would recommend you avoid them. The 1823 'coin' went for £103, incredible!! What's going on there I ask!! Greed and ignorance presumably.

You could never accuse him of lying. MONEY WELL SPENT - WILL RETAIN VALUE AS TIME PASSES! MOST COINS SELL FOR THE STARTING PRICE SO IF YOU LIKE THIS COIN PLACE A BID - THERE'S A GREAT CHANCE YOU WILL WIN! Well, ........ apart from the misrepresentative id - mintstate17

Don't know of one, that's why I'm asking.

Looks normal to me.

Thankfully they don't ship outside the US or take Paypal from non-US accounts. Every cloud has a silver lining.

They definitely adopted the right one.

Depends on what they are made of, what condition they are in and how valuable they are.

Another quality item from mintstate17!!!!!!!!!!!! Not.

You and me both. I wrote up the coin reference file using the description of a submerged swimmer as seen in the hand without looking at any other images. I just assumed the crappy design clarity was considered contemporary excellence. That's a sad reflection of perceived quality when you expect a design to be abstract and only vaguely representative of the subject matter. Still no takers on the last time an unadopted design was inadvertently adopted?

A question to be asked is when was the last incorrectly rendered design issued by the RM? Spelling mistakes in the legend are common enough, but to actually release the wrong design into circulation may be a first. The withdrawn 1887 sixpences were due to confusion with half sovereigns. The 2008 20p and the 1983 2 NEW PENCE pieces were mules with an obsolete design and so don't count. I can't think of any other examples off the top of my head. Clearly they had to reduce the lined design down to the correct size, so you would have thought someone would have noticed unless there were 2 prospective designs, only one of which was adopted. I think there may be more to this than meets the eye.

It appears I've got one of them too. I have to confess being underwhelmed with the series and hadn't even bothered looking.

I dont remember bidding on that one although the words 'silver' and 'halfpenny' in a description would have tickled my fancy had I seen it! Aug 2006... just after I finished at Bolton Street... probably could have afforded £100 then as well! However, I assume this isnt what it went for?! Still, having recently purchased a 1983 Unc set with the 2p mule (unfortunately the seller did know what they had ), perhaps my budget limits aren't as tight as I thought they were! Well, you pushed the boat out for the second listing. The first time it was listed and shilled, you bid £75 and the shill won it for £365. In the second listing I bought it for £370 which was a bit under what I would have paid at Baldwins. First time round on ebay I bid £355, which makes me wonder whether the other bidder had noted my statement that I was going to bid the same again as this person bid £360 and the shill bid £356. Questions, questions. So many unknowns.

They are modern concoctions, make no claims to be fakes, or genuine. They are just a pair of obverses and reverses combined to provide gullible consumers with something that they won't be able to sell easily in the future. The 1823 obverse doesn't even look real. Pence, not pounds should be the real price and I would recommend you avoid them.