1949threepence

It's Mike, Pete So how did the auctioneer play that? Did he say there was a bid of £2k? Thanks gents.

...and the one I made an absentee bid of £2000 for - the 1879 narrow date penny, lot 609 - went for £700 hammer. So that's mine..... I made that high bid in a "who dares wins" kind of way and it's paid off. Thought I might have to pay more than that. Literally the first one I've seen offered in that grade, with lustre, since the 2010 Workman sale. No way is that F6 a proof in my opinion.

Can't even get the date right !

I think illustration 5 was the original sketch. The note underneath states:- "5-8 Evolution of thrift design, showing Miss Kitchener's original sketch (5), her two models (6, 7) and the modified version by Mr Metcalfe (8)2

Just read this book. An absolutely brilliant read and very well written. I never realised how many different designs were considered at the time, and that the King wanted to face left rather than right, as he thought the left side of his profile was better than the right. Also interesting that the modern designs drawn by Wilson Parker were liked by the King, but eventually dropped - with the exception of the wren which was originally designed for the 3d, but eventually rescued for the Farthing. At one point it was even mooted that the new 3d should have a hole drilled through the centre, but this was soon discounted as it would have compromised the Royal effigy. The thrift plant design by Miss Kitchener was adopted for the threepence, but had to be re-designed by her to omit the word "thrift" which was shown just below the plant. Here's a pic of the alternative 3d's - apologies, it's not great quality.

I know they kick them out for the slightest trace of verd. But as you say their standards are not as rigorous when it comes to certain types of toning.

Don't know if anyone else here has had cause to contact them by phone, but I just have in order to ascertain whether a foreign seller had yet been paid (bought a really spectacular 1891 BU penny from a guy in Norway) Unreal, just literally unreal. I know some of our automated phone systems are irritatingly crap, but paypal is in a league of its own. Took me half an hour and putting down the phone to repeat the entire process just to eventually get through to an operative. There were long call waiting times, and I was offered a callback on the number I was calling from, but despite the auto voice reading out my phone Number back to me early on, I was expected to type in my number again, including the international code (which I didn't know). Also had to go into the site and insert my new mobile number in, as it didn't recognise it as my number. Also, the software couldn't get its head round the last 4 digits of my debit card 4710 - only when I said "zero" rather than O, did it accept it. Then when I finally got through to someone, she couldn't hear me and kept repeating her introduction and asking me again and again for my first and last name. Sounded like robotic equipment - not sure whether it was. So shut down that one and tried the landline. Eventually did get through to a normal person who confirmed that payment was going through and should be with the seller this coming Friday or Monday. Notwithstanding that the purchase was made on 31.8.18. Was initially alerted to the fact there might be a problem, as I have made this and another purchase recently using their "pay later" scheme. The one seller was noted as having already been paid, but the other not. I didn't know whether to swear or chuck my phone against a hard surface - and I'm normally a very calm and placid guy. Advice gents - if you need to contact paypal take any blood pressure medication first.

After all that palaver, found out that the money was with the seller on 1st September, the day after purchase.

Got a spare 1981 proof set if it's any use.

Meanwhile his Dad said, "you're 'avin a larf my son"

Absolutely agreed.

Extraordinary. Takes all sorts I suppose.

Indeed. To be honest, Mick, I'm struggling to comprehend why anyone would use that stuff on their coins. It contains sulfamic acid and phosphoric acid. I'd imagine it would do more than just get rid of the dirt. Apparently, In August 2009, it was revealed that household cleaners such as Cillit Bang and Mr. Muscle have been used to clean plutonium stains at the defunct Dounreay nuclear power station in Caithness.

C ?

It's a shame because without the damage it would be a nice coin worth the £499.

They're quite scarce in BU. I don't think many people thought to preserve them at the time.

Bang, and the value is gone

Often they have unusual names that are said very quickly, and you can't make them out. Like "Good Morning, my name is wrryyxxxdaa$$$!!!&***%%. How may I help you today?"

Well the near BU 1891 I bought from an e bayer in Norway has arrived. Absolute bargain, and apart from a very slight blemish on the reverse near the trident, and three negligible spots on the obverse, it's perfect. BU, but the lustre has slightly toned to a really deep orange. Despite all the hassle with paypal a few days ago, I'm really pleased. I know the 1891 is common, but scarcer in this condition:-

No worries. Might be interesting to post a pic of the reverse as well.

Ah, well spotted, Pete.

If they were 1986 or 1988 he might.

Couple of nice 1851's, Pete..........

You're absolutely right, but did they always use plastic bags? There must have been a time when they used paper or some form of sacking, perhaps?

They're not beads, they're teeth. It's a toothed border. I'd say it was genuine, but it looks somewhat pitted - maybe water damage? Also, that's obverse 6 - so unless it's a Freeman 17, it's not going to be an 1860, and you can only ever have a beaded border on an 1860.