1949threepence

The stand out piece for me is the Freeman 4, with absolutely original provenance from L.C.Wyon, no less, who presented it to Mrs Letts, the wife of a friend of his, the Reverend Letts, with a handwritten note, available with the coin, it the original case. link

Well, the good thing from our point of view is that Trump did say the UK would be at the FRONT of the queue with regard to new trade deals. It is, though, becoming difficult to lend any further credence to polls, which these days seem increasingly askew.

Hypocrites of the first order.

Looking back at the old Coin Monthly magazines from the late 1960's, some of which I bought from Rob a couple or so years ago, it's abundantly clear that there was little short of a mania for 1950 and 1951 pennies. For example in the August 1969 edition of the mag, Stewart Ward of London was offering an UNC 1951 at £22 (£326 corrected for inflation as at 2015). By contrast Ray Bennett of Sutton Coldfield was offering a BU 1949 at £1-17-6d (£1.875) and £27.83 today, corrected for inflation. Also offered was a 1953 BU penny at £6, which, incredibly, you could get for less than that today in absolute terms, let alone a correction for inflation. In the "market movements" section of the mag, a 1951 penny in BU is shown at £20. Just shows what heady days they were in the coin market.

Of course, and by the time you come to look at the book price, it may well have moved on from there. That said, much as I would absolutely covet a small date 1877 in AF, I wouldn't pay $15k for one. So that was a decent sale you got there, Bob. There is a certain cache attached to a small date 1877. Obviously there are other varieties within specific dates, which are just as rare, but which wouldn't fetch anywhere near what a Freeman 90 would attract. I suppose they are so instantly recognisable. I do take Pete's point about the 1912H - even in BU, £2k is absurdly expensive, as they are not actually that rare.

It's not just you that can't abide the X factor. It's inane juvenile drivel - I'm beginning to sound like my Dad, God help me

Are you thinking it might possibly be an F5 rather than an F4, Bernie?

Yep, definitely the same coin. The Atlas picture has been doctored, with only the most obvious blemishes showing up - it does look too good to be true. Well spotted, Richard. The camera is, in fact, telling whoppers.

He's actually put a decimal point instead of a comma between the 1 and the 9. So if it was just under £2, I'd buy it

It's going to the wire, no doubt about that. Too close to call.

It doesn't look it, to be honest with you

Just thinking, a coin like that must surely have some provenance. You could try tracking back, beginning with whoever yoiu bought it from - to see where they got it from. Did you buy it through an auction house?

Beautiful coin. No idea on it's origin. Absolutely flawless. Neat capture.

As Rob says, Jon - link I might go next year, but it will be to the July one. Not going in the middle of Winter.

Anybody got any thoughts about this? Not for me personally, but doesn't look too bad if you want to showcase your coins.

No, it's not cleaned - that's for definite. The coin is lustrous, but just worn looking. As Matt & Pete said, many of the Edward VII pennies have very poor reverses, probably due to inferior dies. I first uploaded the pic of that coin back in February 2013, when the issue arose on the first page of this thread

I know many aren't good, but this one is exceptionally bad. The "wear" on Britannia looks like 15 years worth. Anyway, it just kind of proves Colin's point that the look, is not indicative of the grade.

Talking about apparent wear on pretty much UNC coins, take a look at the state of the reverse on this aUNC1906 penny. It is my coin, and I'd forgotten about it until this thread reminded me.

Nice coin, but I think there might have been a little, shall we say, "journalistic licence" for want of a better phrase, exercised in the writing of that article, simply to embroider the story. Bit like the gold piece supposedly given to the kid to play with, which we talked about a few days ago.

I know we can be unnecessarily suspicious at times, but I have to say that if ever there were an example of what shill bidding might look like, that has to be it. I'm not saying it definitely is, but if it were, it'd be a classic for training purposes, as we say at work

I notice there are, unsurprisingly, five enquiries.

Well it's certainly not about uncirculated, nor as far as I can see is it an N over sideways N (Z), as suggested by the vendor. 69 bids for that, most of them by the same bidder? Yes, very fishy indeed. About as dodgy as a nine bob note, I'd say,

Also, they are prone to the inevitable "cabinet friction". I must admit, it would be nice to stumble across a pre decimal coin (of any denomination) that had lain undisturbed in the same spot for a very, very long time. The older the better. Although knowing my luck it would be a 1967 penny

Amazing what does turn up from time to time. I imagine that is how some of the most well preserved coins are found. Not in a collection, but having been left in the same place for maybe well over 100 years, having been originally lost or forgotten by the original owner. Especially if they were left somewhere conducive to good preservation.

No, but I've got an approximately 35 degree out of true rotation on a 1908 shilling, if that's any help. So definitely in that ballpark, date wise. They were very common in the Victoriam era, but not abundantly clear when they stopped. If indeed, they ever did. Although you wouldn't expect to see one today.