1949threepence

Obviously with them being so scarce, you're lucky to get a halfway reasonable one. What are yours like then, Pete?

Discounting proofs and stuff from modern mint sealed bags, all coins have been handled by somebody, I've never had someone give me change using cotton gloves or handling every individual coin by the edge! Just serendipidy that some coins develop a fingerprint or carbon spots as they age, there's a lot to be said for nice even toning on bronze rather than chasing lustre I agree, David.

Superb coin and so rare. I don't think anything can be done for the Freeman 69 that I have. It was polished probably decades ago, with brasso or something. That tell tale sheen never leaves, despite some re-toning in the interim. Here's a picture of it. It doesn't look polished in the pic, but it is:- 1874H F69 reverse 1874H F69 obverse Shame because it's otherwise not too bad for a quite rare specimen.

Although I'd hazard a guess that the vast majority of fingerprints on such coins, appeared during, or shortly after, the brief time they were in actual circulation. So the fingerprint is most likely from someone long dead. I'm not sure how careless or otherwise staff at specialist coin auction houses are. Do you have any evidence to support an assertion that they handle them carelessly? What does bug me are those endless pics on e bay with a coin photograohed in somebody's hand. At the auctions I've attended, the coins are in and out of the wallets at a million miles an hour, and being handled by anyone who wants to inspect it.Not good as far as UNC examples are concerned. Not such an issue on below EF.

As mentioned in the original title Jerry...... honesty or knowledge ................Maybe greed ?. Combined with stupidity as the pic he used says CGS reject due to cleaning.

Wonder what his reserve price was......

Always seems to be the case with really rare items, that they've been cleaned, polished and/or have verd on them. Yes, it's obviously a poor specimen. It was the rarity which drove me.

This is it here with apologies for the limited experience !

It was only fair, but even so, still a bargain. I've got a web page of it saved whilst the auction was in its early stages. Unfortunately I made a right horlicks of it, so you can't see the reverse properly, but I'll screenshot it, and post a link so you can see it. Just to give you an idea.

I must be honest, if I saw a rarity that the seller hadn't spotted, I'd go for it at the cheap price without informing them. It's the opposite of "caveat emptor". Don't know if there is a Latin phrase for "let the seller beware". A few months ago on e bay, an Irish seller listed a load of what at first sight was the usual washer like dross that crowds the pages. However, on closer inspection one of them turned out to be an 1860 Freeman 8 mule. A fact that wasn't lost on many other viewers. It went for £376 - and I missed out because the sodding time was out on the e bay clock. So my last second £400 snipe failed. The seller must have had the shock of his life - I'm sure he had no idea what it was.

Do you have any before and after photos you could upload, John?

Although I'd hazard a guess that the vast majority of fingerprints on such coins, appeared during, or shortly after, the brief time they were in actual circulation. So the fingerprint is most likely from someone long dead. I'm not sure how careless or otherwise staff at specialist coin auction houses are. Do you have any evidence to support an assertion that they handle them carelessly? What does bug me are those endless pics on e bay with a coin photograohed in somebody's hand.

Some very nice coins, but most are massively overpriced, in many instances, absurdly so even with slabbing. I've got most of them anyway, although I do like the look of the 1870. That is nice.

Neat capture, Matt.

Just for a few seconds I thought it might be a Freeman 38 obverse 2, given what looks to be a larger than usual gap between the Queen's Head and the rim - certainly akin to one. But it's not. As you say, just a bog standard 1962.

Yes, some absolute gems there - especially impressed with the 1875H and the 1878.

He's that type of guy, Pete. Responded to me within a few hours over a query I had about my F69, a year or so back. Top bloke. If you remember from the other thread too, he also signed his Gouby book for me before he shipped it! I should have thought to ask him to sign mine as well

He's that type of guy, Pete. Responded to me within a few hours over a query I had about my F69, a year or so back. Top bloke.

Well.......it might be a worn down die number. But more likely it's just a smudge of some sort. Very difficult to know. f it is a die No, what a shame it's worn down. Of course, they're as rare as hen's teeth, and you hardly ever see them for sale, even at the top auctions. Alfnail had a worn one up on e bay for £995 ( think Die No 4), but he withdrew and sold to a previous client. One of my biggest wants, an 1863 die No - not fussy as to which, or condition of specimen.

Lovely coin, Bob.

Take a look here Decent size image:- What do you think ?

Funnily enough it's the same over here. Similar temperatures forecast tomorrow due to exceptionally mild air, coming up all the way from the vicinity of Madeira/The Azores.

I've blown up your picture and I see a slight smudge wher the H would be I don't have the books next to me. seem to recall 1882 no H has a different die combination, so Hi res scans both sides please Fingers crossed for you! David Looks like F12 to me, as the eye is quite palpably closer to the bridge of the nose on F11, which the 1882 without a H is solely described as being. So either tooled, or the photo does not show up the H for whatever reason. Definitely an 1882H and I got all over excited for nothing. Sorry for the fuss, people. A few weeks ago Bernie Workman posted a picture of his excellent London 1882 Penny: http://www.predecimal.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=5326&view=findpost&p=41765 To me the eye does indeed look closer to the bridge of the nose on Bernie's coin. The only one where I can't detect any mark under the date, is the one shown in the link above (Bernie's)

Whenever these 1882 no H's come up, there always seems to be some tell tale mark under the date.

Happy Birthday, Bob - enjoy !