Peckris

Mmm .. I think I did mention controversy Mynki, though I didn't quite have this in mind! Anyway, welcome to Predecimal and, yes, there are a lot of interesting threads. And plenty of expertise in British coinage, so feel free to ask any questions you like. It isn't always like this I can assure you! Good. I have however been on internet forums or bulletin boards as they were in the beginning for some time. I've seen the best and worst they have to offer many times. I'll look forward to joining in the constructive debates going forward. To summarise very briefly - for US coins, PCGS have a much greater worldwide exposure, for British coins I would go with CGS. Hope that helps.

On a maintenance grant between £400 - £500 per annum??

My understanding (I may be wrong ) is that tokens were not legal tender, but were usually issued by companies and traders for spending on the premises owned by the issuer. Of course, some were issued specifically for collectors etc, i.e. should be regarded as contemporary commems - those quite possibly had no commercial basis whatever.

Ah, the good old "found while out walking" ploy! Conjoined with a "don't no anything about it" - that always gets the enthusiastic semi-informed bargain hunter's pulse racing, as I'm sure the seller knows perfectly well..

waves to the right of the shield differ, a bit like the two types of 1896 halfpenny really need an 1897HT with similar lighting to Bernie's 1926 Cb for a better comparison probably all these designs were kicking around the mint as rejected dies since 1894, Sorry David - I missed your previous post about the 1897 reverse. But it does show that if two people independently had the same thought, it might be worth considering? Meanwhile, can someone answer the question about there being TWO kinds of 1922 ME penny?

I spent an absolute age tracking down a truly UNC 1901 farthing! I still haven't got the full denomination set in UNC (Florin anyone?)!The larger 1901 silver isn't as easy as you might think.

The results will be better if you Google 'Tony Clayton' Nah. Google will just ask "Did you mean Tony Clayton? Showing the results for Tony Clayton."

You could be persuaded to identify that as VicOH rev C from 1897! so if we call that Cb:- Freeman and Gouby die identification now needs a complete rewriteBernies examples added in red Are you saying that 1922 is known with the M.E. and with TWO different reverses? I thought there was only one 1922 ME in existence? On the picture above, is the reverse Cb shown with a small area beyond the rim included on the left hand side? If so, and ignoring that extra bit, I'm thinking that reverse Cb looks rather like the 1897 High Tide reverse - has anyone made a comparison between the two?

I quite agree because believe it or now there is nobody at spink who really knows anything about coins, one of their ex staff freely admitted it ;-)

Those both look very nice scott. What's the date on the Vicky?

The 1965 crowns were issued in very large quantities through the banks and Post Office, so there would have been no cases, just mint bags of crowns for doling out at face value. Some of the 1960 crowns were issued at the special New York Exhibition (so-called 'polished blank' specimens); whether they were before, during or after the regular issue I don't know, but the cases I've always seen for them (and 1953) are the clear plastic slide-top holders that were also used all the way up to the Charles and Di 25p's (and beyond?). Those were not RM issue cases but presumably manufactured en masse by perhaps the same firm that made the Sandhill cases for sets. Because the crown had become a commem-only denomination by 1953, it may have been felt that even the Festival of Britain card cases were too much trouble and expense as people could buy the damn things for face value from banks etc?

In the Beginners Forum.

Very nice! And the only way to get cheap Edward VIII coins. Interesting that it's dated 1936 : some UK coins were already issued dated 1936 for George V, but he died early in the year. UK GV 1936 continued to be issued post-mortem while Edw VIII designs were being prepared and proofs struck. Then there was the Abdication crisis, so all through that GV coins dated 1936 continued to be struck. Then late '36 (early '37?) George VI takes over, and in the rush to mint new coins, most of Edward's designs are lifted lock stock and flipping barrel, including the new brass 3d. The portrait too was hardly touched. That whole 12 months from early 1936 to early 1937, must be a numismatic treasure trove. You could write a whole book on it! (No. I'm not..)

I just had a look and all they have is the 2013 edition. It still costs £17.99 What's more, it's advertised as a hardback. Wonder how THAT gets down the phoneline? I had the same problem when I downloaded a couple of books to read on holiday. I almost clicked on the 'hardback' download for £21.99, before I noticed the £4.99 'paperback' alternative! I wonder how many people have thrown money away on that? Am I missing something here? I have never downloaded a book to iTunes so I probably am, but what the smeg is the difference between a 'hardback' download and a 'paperback' download?! "From" not "to", surely?

Seeing that just gives me goosebumps. That's not your coin by any chance Bernie?

I just had a look and all they have is the 2013 edition. It still costs £17.99 What's more, it's advertised as a hardback. Wonder how THAT gets down the phoneline?

LOL - I couldn't even see what it was meant to be, until I translated the French! Yes, very good.

You're right about that...I'm very surprised that London Coins are still in the quill pen age...it must affect their business by not being online. Yeah, but all their computers are in slabs.

You were dead lucky - the only bun pennies I saw as a kid were flat washers! Though when I started on 5/- bank bags, I did find the odd date in VG - usually in the range 1890 - 92 more's the pity.

For me, I really like the leather box and I guess I would be prepared to pay £20 or £30 to buy one if I have a set in cardboard box. (Having said that, I do worry about the ribbons used to lift out the coins and the way they can tone the coins). I think sets sell for pretty much the same money regardless the type of box. In fact, I think one might even get more money by separating a set and selling the coins individually. I think my set is in the leather case, well they were before I put them into my cabinet. I'll have to go up into the loft and look it out, I have a bag with all the cases in somewhere. If mine were in the cardboard case I'd jump at an upgrade for £20-30. I think £50 would be closer. Fine - anywhere from £20 to £50 then. Considering the sets sell for well over £500 these days, I'm not really tempted to upgrade my card case!

It's interseting that the colour on that coin exactly replicate the tempering colours for heating metal.Tempering_colors_in_steel.jpg Bloody hell The heated coin looks like it could clear $200,000 I shall have a chat with my plummer tomorrow. Final hammer: $411,250 I just think of the potential for a decent collection of gold 5 guinea pieces that this kind of money would bring - far more interesting and superior to this overheated tat. Quite! The phrase "too much money, too little sense" comes to mind for some reason

Excellent. I was just wondering why it wasn't featured in Sealy's great varieties listing (1816-1968) in the 1970 Coins & Medals annual. But that of course would have been put to bed for printing somewhere around November 1969, so a Big Announcement in January 1970 wouldn't have made it in there. Shortly after that I went up to Uni and rather lost interest in coins for a while under the affluence of incohol (or more accurately, sex'n'drugs'n'rock'n'roll).

Just to clarify, the digit is punched on the die individually, not on the coin! I assumed that was what was meant?

Perhaps it's psychology - collectors who missed lots in the first one would rush off to bid on something in the second or third one?