1949threepence

It is indeed. Thanks Bernie.

Yes, yours shows the same pattern as mine. With that level of wear on Britannia, you'd reasonably expect commensurate wear of and quite possibly rubbing of the lettering. But that's not the case.

Something I've noticed as a feature exclusively common to reverse F, is that on otherwise fine or even good fine specimens, Britannia seems to have worn away far more than other areas of the coin, which leads to that characteristic flat look, extending downward into the centre of the shield, rather than the shield being individually affected. My own F32, which I'd otherwise describe as GF, is a prime example. Just wondered if anybody had any thoughts as to why. It does seem to be a pattern of wear unique to reverse F.

Hope he recovers soon and his sight is not permanently affected.

Certainly seems that way, Jerry. The question is, how many are out there? If it's anything like the N over sideways N (Z), then it could easily become a variety in its own right. Nice purchase and neat variety spot by Larry Gurney. Just a suggestion and feel free to poo poo it, but might it be worth e mailing Michael Gouby to see if he knows of it, or may like to look?

Well I suppose the AA01 might have some cache, but there's nothing that distinctive about the rest - if it had been 690096, then at least you'd have had a palindrome.

I see Cureton was a buyer in 1832, and still very active in the 1854 Cuff sale. I assume the buyer's name and hammer price was written in manuscript by the auctioneer or his assistant immediately after the coin sold.

Well to be fair you said:- That's a blanket statement covering all coins under 100 years old, which is obviously no the case. But now you've clarified, I'd agree with what you are saying as far as the vast majority of coins >100 years old are concerned. .

Couldn't agree more, although if you're anything like me, you learn as you go along. As I started collecting, I also started to buy books and learn. One thing of considerable note IMO - that once you are deep into collecting your chosen speciality, the increasig breadth of technical and other knowledge you hold about that speciality, will stand you in very good stead both for avoiding being ripped off, and possibly even more importantly, recognising a bargain and/or a prized acquisition. Keep at it Jamie and good luck

To be honest, I'm not sure that's true. At any rate not for all coins under 100 years old. Certainly a 1954 two shillings in UNC condition will always have a market amongst beginner collectors starting on that denomination. Let's also not forget the rare 1932 florin. Others that come to mind are the 1926 ME and the 1919KN penny in outstanding condition - and who can ever forget the 1934 crown (hardly ever available) and the 1945 silver threepence.

That's asparagus for you !

Agreed. With the wear on that coin I'd say it's far more probable than not, that there was an H there. But let's not forget. as Jerry alluded to, the no H 1882's have obverse 11, and the coin above is obverse 12.

Went for £1700 at dnw, then for nearly $6k (£4255) at Atlas, according to @oldcopper above. I bet it looks nearer to the original pic, in hand, though.

Thanks for the heads up.

Crikey. Talk about a transformation. Is it trick photography or has the coin been treated?

Neat capture - love that phrase "brutally honest state"

Could be an H. It's in about the right spot. Here's one for comparison:- http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/img.php?a=160&l=2446&f=r&s=m

Absolutely fantastic find, Richard. Very, very well done. Probably just about the best F28 out there.

No worries. Very nice coin. No worries. Very nice coin.

Although at least one can easily discern every word Bradley Walsh says, unlike some accents in the UK.

Cor blimey......if only !!!

They do exist. It's finding them that's difficult.

It's just his manner. Once you get to know him he's a lovely guy. I'll get me coat ----->

What's the remainder of the serial number?

Here's a shot of my much more typical1907 reverse for comparison. Like yours, nominally a/UNC with reasonable lustre. But just look how blurry and tired the detail is, compared to yours, which is much sharper. Like comparing standard with high definition using a television analogy.