1949threepence

Bramah describes them as follows:- From what I can tell, I'd say the coin on the left (the a/UNC one) is probably a Bramah 10c. Not sure what the one on the right is. Unfortunately the coins are slightly too far away for the magnification to be as effective as it might be. I can say with absolute certainty that Bramah was spot on when he said of the 10b that the 7 shows very plainly beneath the 8. It's very obvious even with the naked eye. The one in this link is a very clear example of a 10b, whereas the one in this link is a 10c (both with effective magnification)

Have you got the original e bay link, Mick? Might be able to see if they are Bramah 10b and/or Bramah 10c 8/7 types. Of course, you may already know, in which case, apologies. The one with verd looks (otherwise) pretty much UNC.

I managed to get this 1856 PT penny in about NEF both sides for a best offer price of £280, which compares favourably to many of the LCA hammer prices.

I hope you manage to get the situation resolved. I'm very pleased to say there's a happy ending to my saga. I suddenly noticed through the frosted glass of my inner door, something lying on my porch floor, opened the door and there it was. Attached to it was a post it note saying "delivered to wrong address". Presumably just pushed through their door, possibly without even knocking. Considering they should take great care with tracked delivery items, this was just careless and slipshod. In the end I was reliant on the honesty and goodwill of a neighbour.

That facility could well be useful as I've had one go missing now. A nice 1856 PT penny sent by next day tracked delivery on Saturday, and when I went into track and trace earlier, marked as "delivered" at 12:44pm - but no package and no red and white card. I would have been in but had to go into the office today, so didn't return until about 2:30pm, when I made the discovery. Called Royal Mail and they said they have to give it until 9pm tonight, and if it still hasn't arrived, then to call back tomorrow. Well it's definitely not going to miraculously turn up between now and 9pm, so I'll be calling back tomorrow. I had two observations for the person who answered the phone, 1/ Website says "Delivered 12:44pm" statement of fact, so why the need to mess about, although I appreciated it wasn't her fault, and 2/ why wasn't a red and white card left anyway? I reckon the guy (not the usual as the writing on the scanner is different) either put it back in his bag without thinking, or left it at the wrong house. Either way, damned annoying. If I can't get it sorted then I've lost a nice coin, and possibly £287 down the shitter to boot. Yours, Highly unamused

Thanks Richard. It certainly seems to be a lot rarer than either Bramah or Peck gave it credit for. Although Cope & Rayner record it as rarer than 1843 (both types), 1849. 1856 (both types), and alongside 1860/59. No idea about Salzman as I haven't got a copy. Conversely, despite the cost, it's actually not overly difficult to obtain an 1860/59, nor an 1849, even if the condition is no great shakes. Dealers have them in stock - more than one of each in some cases. But it is, as you say, tricky to identify, and it's incredibly useful to have some decent images of the real deal. Not just for buyers, but also sellers who may have been as bamboozled as some potential enthusiastic buyers !

Deleted and re-done in Members Only

Interesting old thread on that topic, from 2006.

Many thanks to John & Richard for providing accurate images of the 4/3. Very much appreciated. I can kind of understand why there are so many mis attributions of this variety.

Now thought to be actually 1858/2. Truly these are not easily worked out images.

One of the pre 1860 pennies I've found particularly difficult from the identification perspective, is the 1854/3. I'm sure that quite a few of those touted as such are mis-attributed, and I still haven't got one. Bramah classes them as "rare" but in a "less degree" than some of the others which I've not found especially difficult to obtain. He describes the 4/3 as follows: "The die has been altered from 1853, the 3 showing chiefly to the right and left at top of 4, and in the space between its left base serif and the cross-stroke". That latter point "the space between the left base serif and the cross-stroke", appears to be crucial, because as far as I can tell it shows up quite strongly, whereas marks to the right and left at top of 4 appear so faintly, even under magnification, that you're not sure whether or not you're seeing things that aren't actually there. Some of the one's I've seen touted as 4/3 seem to be no more than the lower serif, downwards from the right hand side of the aforementioned cross-stroke, seeming to curl round in a sort of semi circular shape, as opposed to the straight lines you see on others. Not sure why there is a difference, but equally, I'm far from convinced that such specimens in and of themselves, are 4/3, as all the other indicators are invisible or just not there at all. So with this in mind, could those of you who might reasonably be described as way more experienced than me in this regard, possibly give your opinions as to whether or not this coin is an 1854/3? There is excellent magnification if you hover over it. Thanks in advance, gents, and sorry to be nuisance.

Just as a matter of interest the GPS tracking Pete refers to was introduced in May this year - you can read about it here

Well they shouldn't cheat. They've got form for it right down the decades, and you'd think it would be obvious to them by now that any wins they do get are tainted by association. Also as you say, East Germany when they were under Russian control, producing female athletes given shots of male hormones etc. Just outright cheating. How else would such a small "nation" have gained so many gold medals at the Olympics? Of course it never worked with football, nor could it. Hence their singular lack of success in that direction. Athletes should stick to altitude training. It's very effective and 100% within the rules.

Spot on - As you say the majority of these 1974 sets will still be with the original purchaser (or their families if they are now deceased) Other will have been broken open and spent. Others will be lost, and as you say others will be badly toned. So I suppose when demand does spike, there's going to be an immediate shortage as the supply will not be there. Hence prices will rise markedly. It'll be interesting to see whether or not the demand for 1974 50p's does spread to other years. It obviously won't take long for collectors to cotton on to the fact that the mintage was the same in 1975, and they too were never issued for currency, merely existing as a proof item.

Ah, that's not quite what you said, Pete. You said "23 years that did not have a currency 50p struck". That is not factually correct as every other year bar the ones I mentioned had a currency 50p struck - Royal mint mintage figures will bear out what I've said. They may not have included all the designs for any given year, but nevertheless a currency strike was made.

I make it 15 where there was a proof issue but no currency strike - 1971, 1972, 1974, 1975, 1984, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1993, 1994, 1995 & 1996. Westminster may not be the only ones who hype up the "scarcity". Others will probably get in on the act.

Not a surprise.

It is considering KB Coins have got a 1974 proof set on offer for just £15 !!!

However daft some of these 50p collectors may seem, chasing the 1974 50p for all its worth, it's still great news for the hobby of coin collecting.

Mintage was 6,705,520 - so no.

I get the distinct impression that some dealers/e bay sellers have caught on to this 1974 craze, whereas others remain oblivious.

Whereas this single 1974 proof 50p fetched £54.37 - crazy

I have to say though Chris, some people are frighteningly thick. Facts and logic seem to just completely go over their heads. I'm sure it's worse than it used to be, or maybe I'm just hyper-critical.

KB Coins has a 1974 set on offer for just £15....