1949threepence

Some nice stuff on offer. As it relates to my specialism, highlights have to be the F23 1861 4 + D on a heavy flan, the 1864 F48 with numbers scratched in the obverse field (see Gouby), the practically unique but very poor 1881 F103, a very nice F139 1895 2mm, and a very nice F184, 1918KN - UNC but with the lack of hair detail so characteristic of the WW1 years. link to catalogue

Indeed. I've never had any complaints either. My coin arrived today, but unfortunately I was out so will have to collect from the Post Office on Monday.

Got a nice e mail from LCA today, informing me that my lot was on its way. Together with the tracking number. Never had that before from them.

I think so. Some scratches on the first pic are consistent with the second. But the Heritage pic makes the coin look worse with far more blemishes, especially on the reverse.

Indeed. I should say PCGS photo used by Atlas. Anyway, the first thread I got these pics from is here and the second is here

There is absolutely no doubt that the camera does lie. One of the best examples i've seen of this was in the last few months. Compare and contrast the first picture taken by Atlas Numismatics, with the second taken by the buyer a few weeks later:-

Actually, on that 1867 you mention, Pete, quite apart from the obvious tonnage inscription, there is also an odd feature on the reverse. It's a straight bar, rising at a 45 degree angle between the base of the lighthouse and Britannia's shield. link

Indeed so, Pete.

Yes. On its own, a crosslet in that condition might be expected to get £2500, +/- £300. So £9k for one with the tonnage inscriptions, does seem a bit high at first glance. However, thinking about it, I can kind of relate to what the buyer was thinking, given the rarity of commercially available specimens of this type. With specific regard to pennies, Gouby records 20 in existence. Of those,12 are in the British Museum, leaving 8 theoretically available, including all three 1864's. The current whereabouts of these 8 - apart from the one just sold - is vague to say the least. One, the 1867 (582/369), originally attributed to Henry Garside about 1925, has not been traced, leaving 7. So when this 1864 specimen (239/136) became available, it was always going to go for a big price. Consider the rarity, and the almost "once in a blue Moon" nature of one being offered for auction, and you can see why there would be intense competition, or at any rate, someone willing to pay a substantial price tag.

Thanks Terry. Pleased to have been of some help

Doesn't inspire much confidence does it?

Strange colouring on the reverse, Cliff. Any idea what happened?

I'd got for EF/NEF. But a very nice coin and a neat capture, given the rarity of 1849.

I can imagine a scenario during the times that the VIGTORIA's were circulating where the overwhelming majority of people would barely glance at them, much as with today's circulating coins. Maybe the odd person, idly musing, noticed it, thought it was an error, and then thought no more about it. It's only since demonetisation (sp), mass melting down of the worn out residue, and increased collector awareness, that we've started to look out for these things. I agree with you, Matt, that quite a few more will emerge in the near future - just as happened with 1863 die No under date.

That's what I originally thought, but then Jerry said that the bidding on the better one of the two started at about £4k - not sure what happened after that.

It seemed muddled thinking on their part, Pete. They shouldn't have split the two coins up. Mind, if they hadn't done, I'm betting it would have gone to the buyer of the 105.

Thanks. Yes, the F105 and F106 were split up, even though they were part of the same original Freeman lot (No 65) from the 1984 Christies sale. They set all the lots with a starting estimate of less than £100 from the rest, and they were shown on the last couple of pages. I only discovered it quite by chance. It's lot No 3393.

I thought that about the VIGTORIA. Yeah, strange about the 1862 halfpenny date. There's no sign of any sale in the realised prices?

There were two. I don't think either sold. Meanwhile the a/UNC 1864 crosslet with numbers scratched in the obverse field, fetched £9k ! - although you can't see the numbers on LCA's photo at all.

I went for the self same coin, bidding £500 by e mail. If real time on line bidding had been possible, I'd have definitely gone higher. As it is I did get the Freeman 106, lot no 3393, which was the other part of Freeman's lot 65 in the 1984 Christies sale. £90 hammer £105.30 with juice. VF and well worth it.

Which one was that, Stuart?

Cheers Pete.

Just looked at the results. Of the two I bid for, I managed to get the Freeman 106 for £90 hammer, but missed out on the Nicer Freeman 105, which went for £650, and I only bid £500. If it had been live I'd have gone higher.

Sorry, but you're never going to get them looking as good as the day they were minted. Also, if you're serious about collecting coins, you won't clean, and especially don't polish them, as you will substantially negate any potential future value, as well as their collectability. My advice if you're going to collect the £1 coin series from 1983 to date, is to just keep a lookout for reasonable specimens, and retain the best you see for any given year, supplementing as necessary if a better one comes along. Clearly, you've only got a limited time frame before the old coins are demonetised, so you'd better get busy. Unfortunately, the one pound coin has probably seen more of a battering over the years than almost any other denomination. Hence many of the early years are now really looking their age. There are a number of varieties, and some are going to be more difficult to obtain than others. The 1986 and 1988 are difficult, and will be extremely tough to get in decent condition, unless you decide to buy, say from e bay. This Royal MInt link gives you all the varieties and mintages of the £1 coin. Good luck.

Varieties are great to search for and collect, but if you're not careful, they can start to go on forever, with the merest difference from norm, such as one extra border tooth, counted as a variety. For that reason, I limit myself to Freeman types, and the odd well known Gouby. No disrespect to those who want to go the extra mile. Good luck to them. But just not for me at this precise moment in time. With specific regard to Edward VII (and this is one penny run I've started but not finished), I'd go for all the Freemans and leave it at that. Although I appreciate there are many micro varieties (even in just one year, 1902) as we have seen from the old coin monthly articles that Richard very kindly e mailed to some of us recently.