1949threepence

I have had the Mascle for a number of years now and am very pleased with it. My only (retrospective) preference would be to have had the option of an additional simple drawer-like tray, in which to put the coin tickets (either too large or square) and dealers' envelopes that came with the coins, but that don't fit into the usual round recesses with the coins. Cabinets also come up in auctions fairly regularly, but the advantage of a tailor made one is that you can specify the size of hole you want for your coins rather than just make do with what's supplied (usually a range from small to large). I've got the Mascle as well, Tom ~ but, man, those prices have gone up significantly since I bought mine in January 2010 I'm very pleased with mine too. There's more than enough space for what I've already got, and what I intend to get. As you say though, another drawer for provenance and other purchase related documents would be a good idea. For anybody thinking of buying, it might be worth asking Peter about this, although I think I may have heard that he was retiring. The address has certainly changed from St Leonards (near Hastings) to somewhere near Nottingham.

Just wondering what members thought about this, as it seems to me to have a fair few positives and negatives, depending on which way you view it. There's an article about it from SAGA here The main changes are that there will be a single flat rate of contributory state retirement pension, amounting in today's money to £144, as compared to the current £107. Recipents will need to have paid Class 1 or 2 National Insurance contributions, or been awarded equivalent credits for 35 years, to get the full amount, and at least 10 to get anything at all. This compares to 30 at present (but that used to be much higher than (even) 35, not that many years ago) The state second pension SP2 (serps as it used to be called), will be phased out, but those who have contributed towards it, will receive some transitional protection. Maybe the most contentious aspect of the arrangement will be the fact that existing pensioners will not receive any benefit from the new arrangements, and even more contentious will be the cliff edge approach to entitlement. Only men born on or after 6 April 1952, and women born on or after 6 July 1953, will be able to receive the higher pension. Those born before those dates, will be awarded a pension under the existing system. Women born prior to the above date of 6.7.53 will lose out more because they see their pension age rise, but lose out on the higher entitlement ~ so a double whammy for the early 50's born females. By comparison, the biggest beneficiaries will be men born between 6 April 1952 and 5 December 1953, as they get to draw the higher pension at age 65, before the threshold age rises in stages to 66, for those born after 6.12.53, and before 1955, by 2020.

Peter Nichols mahagony coin cabinets

Slow, difficult to navigate and poor search function (particularly as the interesting archive of auctions appears not to have been (yet?) made available. At least, that's what I've found. That's a shame, Tom. A well designed and easy to navigate website, enhances the whole experience. Conversely a badly designed, user unfriendly one, irritates and frustrates before one even starts.

They are very expensive ~ I'd only bid on a Heritage item if it was something I really wanted and had long been unable to get elsewhere. Michael, I bid the 1860/59 up to $7,750, but was underbidder to the winner at $8000 (w/Premium $9,400). That was my limit! I have one in AEF, but I wanted this one in UNC. Yes, Bob, I remember the 1860/59 you bought a couple of years or so back. I honestly didn't think that could be improved upon, but obviously there was an UNC specimen out there. As I recall, the overstrike was very obvious.

I used to live in Chelmsford, so I know all about the line out of Liverpool Street. It can be a total nightmare at times. You're also right about how rude London can be, and the suited City types are the worst of the lot for just walking straight at you as though you're not there. It's the kind of breathtaking arrogance that you rarely encounter elsewhere, except from low life chavs. Meanwhile the snow scene at the front of my house can be seen here if anybody interested. Really bad in Warwickshire at present. A lot of snow and temperatures well below freezing. Currently about -3C. I left work at 1pm today for a difficult journey home.

That scenario sounds familiar. We get the same at work with new programs. No trial run, so all the flaws are discovered by the end user on day 1. Somewhat perversely, they always withdraw the old system before installing the new. So if the new falls over, you can't revert to the old one. What's the issue with Spink's website, anyway ? You didn't say.

They are very expensive ~ I'd only bid on a Heritage item if it was something I really wanted and had long been unable to get elsewhere.

Very nice example, Bob.

Here is the Obverse! It's so easy to forget that these coins are nearly 140 year's old when you see one looking like that! I admired the pictures for quite some time! Lovely coin! Isn't it just......

that's just who I had in mind, Debbie! Ironically enough, it was guidance from Derek's book, "The Standard Guide to Grading British coins", which first led me to think your 1864 might not be too far off EF. Although as Peck points out, there is wear in the chest area, (and on the gown), which lessens it to GVF. However, the fine hair and shield detail, which are classic indicators of wear on a bun, seem more redolent of NEF. This is purely in terms of wear and takes no account of edge knocks. Although, separately, along with stains, these can have an adverse effect on grading. The edge knock on your coin is not really too noticeable anyway.

Gorgeous, flawless specimen, Bob, with a supremely attractive golden toned lustre. One of the top 10 for that year, probably.

Really? Now this is important. I've got it booked in as a VF, but even if I only bump it up to VF+ it becomes my most valuable coin. At VF it's only No. 18! Votes on grade would be very welcome! It's a slightly weird one, that. At first glance it's a VF coin, but when you start examining closely for wear, there is less than you'd think. I'd give it GVF but the wear on the chest and part of the laurel wreath and hair makes it too far off EF in my book. It is slightly weird in that it shows signs of wear in places that are inconsistent with its overall appearance. There is wear on the chest as you say, Peck, so I agree with your assessment of GVF.

OK, thanks Gents. Info much appreciated. That confirms my suspicions.

Yes, I always thought that verd was a copper, bronze & nickel brass issue, rather than a silver one. Had a strange experience with my uncirculated 1919 shilling a few months back. Took one of the shilling drawers from my cabinet, and noticed what ~ for all the world ~ looked like green verd at the base of the 1919 shilling reverse. On removing the shilling, and very lightly rubbing the base of the shilling, the green material just fell away as though it was powder. Obviously it wasn't verd, but quite what the hell it actually was, I've absolutely no idea. No residue was left behiind. Incidentally, talking about slabs, does anybody know if any form of spontaneous or continued deterioration, can occur in the slab ? Or does the act of slabbing arrest the action of any deleterious outside agent already on the coin ? Probably sounds a naive, simplistic question, but I'm no metallurgist.

That looks to be not far off EF, Declan, with shield virtually intact and good hair detail. Neat find.

Well done on the £100 offer. That's great news. We often see collections similar to yours, on here, and they are mainly, if not exclusively, junk status items. Interesting to sort through, as Declan said, but worthless for the most part. Sometimes though, you do turn up a rare item or something in a relatively unworn state. Most of us on here aren't experts on foreign coins.

I put a snipe on it, but came up way short. I would however consider something like that for a wide date. Agreed. For a wide date in that condition, it's the kind of end price one might reasonably expect ~ and be willing to pay, actually.

Notice how the bidding went from £255 to £333 in one leap? No-one is going to tell me that's not suspicious! No reason why a leap of that magnitude should be any more suspicious than small increments. If I bid on a coin at £200 and put a max of 400, then it will go to the next bid up from 200 (205 or 210 or whatever it is). If a second person puts in a bid of £450, then it will go to £400 + one increment with the second person winning. Far more suspicious is the anonymity issue where a shill bidder can beat the high bidder repeatedly without third parties being able to identify the person responsible. I agree, I would be more suspicious if the bidding crawled its way up a few pounds at a time. I wouldn't be suspicious with a jump of that gradient, if it were a different coin. But for an 1876H narrow date, which arguably, isn't even worth the lower amount, I'm exceedingly suspicious of such a jump. It showed the kind of activity which you might expect from the much scarcer 1876H wide date. Existing doubt is certainly compounded by the private bidder listings, but in isolation that would not necessarily lend itself to suspicion if the bids were closer to what one might have expected. Still agree with Peck on this.

Absolutely, Peck, I've always liked them, and they are a nice starter collection for the budding numismatist. Not too many years (31), no complex varieties, but sufficient mix of common and rare/scarce in high grade, to make assembling the collection interesting. Plus two attractive designs. Brass threepences seem especially vulnerable to verdigris. With four varieties of the 1937 currency plus two for the proof and a nickle flan. Three varieties for 1941 and two for both 1948 and 1949. Two varieties for 1953 plus proofs for 1950, 1951 and 1953, also 1970. Enough there to keep us variety hunter happy. Sorry, when you're in the midst of a bun penny collection, the above seems quite limited in the variety department

However, if you make money from it, then it's got to be good insanity ~ right ?

Insanity.

Notice how the bidding went from £255 to £333 in one leap? No-one is going to tell me that's not suspicious! Yes, very suspicious. When it first appeared, I was considering a punt on it, with a view to an upgrade, but soon changed my mind when I saw where it was headed.

Absolutely, Peck, I've always liked them, and they are a nice starter collection for the budding numismatist. Not too many years (31), no complex varieties, but sufficient mix of common and rare/scarce in high grade, to make assembling the collection interesting. Plus two attractive designs. Brass threepences seem especially vulnerable to verdigris.

The seller is certainly having a laugh now after getting what he did for this coin NIce coin, but there's no way an 1876H narrow date, even in that condition, is worth that much. I'm almost tempted to mention the "S" word, but I won't.