Rob

It's a farthing (P922), not a halfpenny. The weight is 8.85g which is marginally above the average recorded by Peck. This frequently causes confusion as the halfpenny weighs a whopping 17g or so. The coin is actually the one from the Oxford collection (217) which made £1000 when sold by Colin Cooke. The image on their site shows a much more honest image as there are quite a few marks which you can't see in the Swiss catalogue, so not so desirable and not for me. The estimate is too high given the problems.

Highly desirable, what catalogue is it from?

The price of Aussie gold is going through the roof because of Aussie demand. Almost any piece in UNC will be snapped up for a 4 figure sum. Even slightly impaired top grade pieces are mopped up easily. A genuine UNC will easily surpass Spink prices which are playing catchup. My Melbourne Victoria sovereign cost more than Spink book, and in the case of the Sydney & Perth coins I have bid on recently I didn't even come close, despite bids over book. All that is without premiums.

Quite agree. Ever since the introduction of credit cards in the 1970s, people have been deferring payment as there is no requirement to pay up front for the luxuries you covet but are unwilling to work or wait for. It's no coincidence that Germany doesn't have a credit problem and the populace are reluctant to embrace credit cards. As you say, if you can't pay cash, don't buy it - and they don't. As a rule they don't fritter away their hard earned savings on depreciating liabilities like the latest fashionable item that has to be bought because it is available, yet discarded tomorrow because it's old hat. They tend to buy quality and insist on it lasting for years or even decades. I'm glad my wife is German - or maybe I was born in the wrong country.

The proofs and patterns of this series have plain edges. This also applies to the shillings.

Be careful what you ask for. The Cerne Abbas Giant is rumoured to have connections to Oliver Cromwell according to the blurb at the viewing point. Looking at it, it is easy to see why this country opted for the restoration of the monarchy.

The man is a complete twat. With a name like styx collectables, it is entirely appropriate that he likes holes.

A decent library will always pay dividends. You can never have too many books.

My maximum snipe is the amount I would happily pay....anything less is a bonus. Sensible Peter. I usually go to a bit above what I think will be the maximum snipe from elsewhere. For example, if the current bid is £40 and the approximate value of the coin is £75, then I might bid £100. Typically, I might then get it for £55 to £60. You might also get it for £100 when it is only worth 75. Much better to get it for £55-60 with a bid of that amount.

It isn't unknown for letters to made from the punches of other letters with additions. A good example is the V being used for the A with the crossbar being added later. When the crossbar is forgotten a variety is created. As has been noted previously, William III is notorious for the number of misprunts (sic) and other errors.

Graffiti is undesirable unless it is of historical importance and would make this coin difficult to sell, but as the coin is not in high grade it can't reduce the value by too much. The price would probably reduce to a couple of pounds at best, however with plenty of low grade examples around to satisfy collector demand wouldn't get many takers even at this price. As it isn't wear as such the grade is unaffected, but a description would be qualified with reference to the defacement.

Nope, damaged die. The filled 2 is raised on the coin so must be incuse on the die. A bit has broken off the die at the inside angle of the 2, unless it is a bit of trapped metal which has attached itself to the flan. You don't have any relief perspective from the image.

Carlton Palmer. GVF or NEF ? Mediocre I think.

Whilst on the question of sponsorship, the best one that springs to mind was Carlton Palmer when he played for Southampton (maybe still does?) - he was sponsored by Bursledon Sunday Market and Car Boot.

In that case I am the headwind. NGC list one 1673 1/2d in MS65 and PCGS two in MS64 as top of the respective population reports. The MS65 and one of the MS64s both now out of the slabs and so safely out of reach of the number chasers. After all, they would be more interested in the pieces of plastic with the number on it - I'll see if I can find them if they haven't been thrown out. Ah, a mahogany man I presume? I'll give you a trillion for them (Zimbabwe note of course) Better make that two trillion as both had the wrong attribution. The NGC coin was my 1675/3/2 and the PCGS was a 1675/3. Both initially acquired because they were obviously wrong!!

In that case I am the headwind. NGC list one 1673 1/2d in MS65 and PCGS two in MS64 as top of the respective population reports. The MS65 and one of the MS64s both now out of the slabs and so safely out of reach of the number chasers. After all, they would be more interested in the pieces of plastic with the number on it - I'll see if I can find them if they haven't been thrown out.

Quite frankly, the TPGs are better steering clear of hammered as they are out of their depth most of the time. The argument that they are on a learning curve isn't a wise business proposition as any coin graded will retain that grade whether remotely accurate or not. They should be slabbing and grading them (- if they must) after they have gained the technical competence, not before or while they are learning. There are too many variables with hammered to apply a single number. It might work if there were multiple grades applied for shape, wear and strike, but that would confuse things beyond belief for the casual purchaser.

I've always found IGC to be consistent in their grading and have never seen one that was wildly at odds with my own assessment. I might not agree with many MS designations from any of the TPGs, but as long as any grading is consistent I know what to expect. A PCGS AU58 could be anything from a really nice VF or gVF upwards. I've seen too many overgraded earlier pieces to expect otherwise. Edited to add that as ICG and ANACS are less frequently encountered than the major players, so the sample size may not be large enough to give an opinion that is a true reflection. If the numbers encountered were larger then a different opinion might result, but to date I've not seen any howlers from either of these second tier companies. The same goes for ICCS.

Has anyone got a decent image of a 1765 penny? Thanks in advance.

It wouldn't be worth any more in cash terms as a variety for the same basic reasons as your half sovereign which is that there are insufficient collectors of the series with deep pockets. But a 6/5 would have a numismatic value as our knowledge base would be extended, i.e. the 1765 die was made but never used.

Apologies due, cocked up here. I've just noticed there wasn't a 1765 penny with only the 2d, 3d & 4d struck. The original request was because my 1766 looks as if it is over a 5. So the question arises, was the die produced but never used. In that case any images of 1766 Maundy pennies would be appreciated to compare dies. Thanks.

Farthing

That's what the members can deliberate over Scott. There are a few theories re this date and others between the years 1850 and 1874. Rayner thought it was a forger operating in the 1890's. Others think it was possibly mint employees tinkering with old dies after the 1887 issues. Some think they are genuine mint productions. A very nice find among a £300 lot though! Genuine Mint product or not, its still a pretty good price. Rendel Ingram seems to have cornered the market for these mystery 1860s halfcrown coins with a number of them at between £400 and £900, so not a bad deal. This is quite interesting. I picked up one of these about 4 years ago. Believe it or not I was approached by a guy in the local who said he had a few old coins from his mum after she died. The usual crap such as an Ed. VII florin in fine and a couple of later Victorian sixpences etc and then an 1861 2/6d. Not what I was expecting. Mr Ingram bought it after I listed it on the website and as you note, doubled the price or more. Pic below for comparison. The interesting thing is that they always appear in this condition with most detail missing but the date clear. I would suggest that they are effectively practically as made. The weight of my piece was 12.87g.

If CGS or anyone else slabs that as V over inverted A when there isn't any sign of the crossbar even at x200 magnification then they are risking their credibility. Granted that would increase the value slightly, but I think you would struggle even more to convince a purchaser that it has an underlying A where you can't make it out in the hand without the plastic to distort it. If you are going to say it could be an A but it's hidden, I suggest it you submit it as a blundered Q

I think both are out of alignment.