Peckris

The seller's obviously had "2 or 3"

Good spot - that definitely looks like BRTTANNIA

Hmm. Looks a bit dodgy. Couldn't be... possibly... ...could it?

Message sent... Yes that's ridiculous, GF/NVF? I think you've rather underestimated it. I'd say minimum VF (the reverse a bit better). But yes, still overgraded.

I'm afraid it's been a long-standing issue. But the returns policy has always been 'no quibble' so I think it's fair enough, except where newbies are bamboozled into thinking they've got something better than it really is. On the other hand a newbie isn't going to shell out for a high grade 1905 halfcrown..

I think this lends credence to the theory that the Mint was so preoccupied with alterations in 1882, that a lot of its work - particularly low value denominations - was farmed out to Heatons. Yes - the particular obverse / reverse die combination for London 1882s does not occur on any of the Heaton pennies, so is a sure-fire indicator.

You can also apportion it - bank/home in whatever split you think best. That gives the opportunity to do research on a section of the collection whilst leaving the majority in the bank. Then rotate according to what you want to study as few collections would require the whole spread of material. It's not just research Rob - it's the simple enjoyment of taking out your favourite coins when you want to, examining them under a light, or just admiring the reasons why you bought them in the first place. divemaster - two points: 1. the greatest security is not to talk about your hobby to others, so no-one actually outside your family knows you have the collection. And if you have locked cabinets, even better. 2. as for insurance, I've interrogated my contents provider about coins, and asked whether the collection - either as a whole or as individual coins - would be covered under "valuables", and then increased the valuables cover to the max. However, given the value of some members' collections here, I can see that wouldn't be near enough, in which case £500 a year is NOT a high price to pay (IMO) for a collection worth somewhere either side of £100,000.

Just seen it in my catalogue. Absolutely stunning. Unfortunately, Neil doesn't put the new stock on his website for a few days, so we'll have to wait a few days to see a really good pic of it. edit: that's if it's not already sold by then !!! The coin in question is now on their web site, and described as 'Choice EF+/GEF pleasing and problem free.' Hmm. That obverse is barely EF (I'd even say 'not quite'). Not like CC to overgrade

Have you got a theory ? The only thing I can come up with, is that the reason for farming the mintage out to Heaton was the extensive work being done at the Mint (electrification?). Maybe the London pennies mintage was simply to test new machinery, and either was supposed to be melted down or, being kosher pennies, were released into circulation on the grounds that no-one would notice.

Don't rush - whenever you have the time and energy. I've just had that bl00dy virus, it's not nice. Ah, no. It was Coin Monthly from 1966 (which is when it started)- The Numismatic Publishing Company of Essex. The Coin and Medal thing was the Link House magazine I think? Which eventually turned into the annual Coins & Market Values, still produced by Link House.

That's interesting to know as my collection is largely complete and I was thinking of banking it rather than spend £500 on insurance, you can buy a couple of good coins for that. Can you explain that a little more please! I'm just upgrading really now, all the major obtainable holes are filled. Really just things like the 1935 gold crown, the old 1920's cupro nickel bits, unconfirmed varieties ect which I don't expect to find for prices I can afford. I intend to sell my collection in about 7 years time and paying £500 a year for the next 7 year so that it can stand in the corner of my living room. I can think of better things to spend my money on. The whole point of having a valuable collection in the bank and having it insured is so that its not sat in your front room waiting for burglars!! The whole point of having a valuable collection in the bank is that you can't enjoy it!!!!

I think it's perfectly good, a very nice example. Up to over £40 so good luck with staying up to win it

Well that didn't work how I expected. You will have to scroll down to my post where I attacked the picture. I wouldn't attack that picture Gary - it's very good, and so is the coin

I'd be very interested in a scanned upload (PDF?) of that Dave. I'd also be interested in something similar for the first issue of the regular magazine (but I realise that would be a major task so I'll keep looking for a copy of it).

Having worked for them in the 70s, I can truly and heartfelt agree with you Agreed Yet the dies are different...?

I would definitely try to find at least two examples,to class something as a variety,however as you mentioned you have now found what is a probable pattern,so were would you stop collecting that date? I personally wouldn't - but our friend 1887Jubilee is something of an expert on that date, and it isn't at all surprising that there are so many 'patterns' as this was the first major change in the silver coinage (excluding florins) since the beginning of Victoria's reign. That's one hell of a long time, 50 years in fact. I'd agree with this. A mule may not have been intended, but it's a result of human action (someone placed those two dies together) rather than a clogged, broken, or flawed die. Therefore it's a human error, several examples got minted, and it's of great interest to collectors. In fact, you could say that mules - e.g. beaded/toothed 1860 bronze, 1926ME pennies, etc - are among the most collectable varieties. Do you think someone decided not to put the hearts on? Or forgot? I believe the thinking is that someone forgot, and around half of them had been minted before someone noticed the error ... so error or variety? I suppose it would have to be an error then! A common-ish one, perhaps, but an error all the same. Imagine if half the 20ps in whatever year it was had been undated. Would it have then become a variety, or remained as an error? Are the numbers involved important, or just the intention? The respective values - i.e. identical whether 'with hearts' or 'without' - I think shows that numbers are indeed important. If one of the varieties was much scarcer it would command a premium. I think it depends on the error? I have a 1964 sixpence where the I of GRATIA is missing due to a clogged die. You'd think that would make it very collectable, but as the OP said, you need more than one to make it so!

Complete collection? What does that mean?

I don't like that one at all. Try and get your money back - it looks gilded and there's a lot of wear on the obverse. It is a common date (1758 not 1754) so there will be much better examples out there. It's also a fact - I'm not sure exactly why - that some sellers with 100% feedback, sell some of the worst examples of coins on the 'Bay. I can only put it down to a combination of buyer ignorance or inexperience and seller's policy of prompt refunding where buyer not satisfied.

Way too high indeed! (EF only). The odd thing is how he arrived at such a non-standard opening bid? His buying price plus eBay fees and commission?

I agree. Coin 1 looks better. Out of interest, how would you grade coin 1, did I do ok for £180? I personally would rate it VF+, especially the reverse. And yes, I think you did absolutely ok for £180. Those aren't rare, but all early milled has increased substantially the last 10-15 years, and it makes a good type coin.

This is a point I've made time and time again. It's a fact that "a few" beats "one" whenever there's an error - we don't go huge on misstrikes in the UK but we do on varieties, and to find something which can be quantified in some way attracts completists who go all out to find another example. You can't do that with a 'mere' misstrike, for all its uniqueness, which is a bit of an irony. I had an unknown 1887 wreath reverse sixpence but no-one had heard of it even though the characteristics were fairly evident (I put a thread about it in the Varieties subforum). Fortunately, this forum has a member who is expert on 1887JH coinage, and now has it 'in custody' for research and a place in a book, as a probable pattern (of which there are very many in 1887, apparently).

I agree. Coin 1 looks better.

I think that's what I said! Except that "a function of demand flux" is just a posh way of saying "believing the hype". ALL Ed7 halfcrowns are difficult in UNC apart from 1902. No-one is going to tell me that the '05 is THAT much harder than the '03 in UNC or that both are THAT much harder than - say - the '08 or '09. Again, that was my point. I think that was a very sensible strategy.

I think it's not the proof set looking at the case and the coins - you still got it for a good price though. Check the farthing in particular : if the + above Elizabeth's head, and the T of farthing on the reverse both point to the same thing (i.e. a space or a tooth), then you have one of the scarce varieties 1+B scarce or 2+A rare; if they point to different things, then it's one of the two common varieties 1+A or 2+B.

I would have expected more than that, £5.5k is just over Spink EF price. A genuinely uncirculated 1905 halfcrown being auctioned at a top London auction house would easily hit £10k or more. Like the 1934 crown, it's overvalued IMO - it basks in the light emanating from its own hype, as the rarest of a rare group. If you go back a few decades, when its rarity was actually GREATER in relation to commoner E7 halfcrown dates, you will find its value was not the same multiple over them.