Peckris

Reminds me of that great sketch with Ronnie Corbett... ("it's frozen.." "..have you tried rebooting it?")

Secret dealers...........We KNOW your secrets Peter I've got a bath full of Baked beans and mushy peas to dive into later...Mrs Peter is on a leash. You're Roger Daltrey in disguise? WHO? My wife comes from the family Moon.I have a picture of one of the Moons who recently died, in his sixties. The picture was taken in his 20's, it's uncanny. You would say it was Keith. THE family Moon, or A family Moon ???

Yes it does resemble the 5 used on Charles II farthings, there are a few different dies that are recorded as 3/5, see items 712 & 713 http://www.colincooke.com/coinpages/ccc_charlesiicurrency.html Thanks, Colin! I tried to view the enlarged images on the site, using my I-phone, but the pop-up image kept jumping below the window of my phone browser, so will check them out tomorrow on the laptop. The back-sweeping top arm of the possible 5 is slightly raised above the level of the underlying raised 'numeral,' though it is not so clear on the photo! I should have tried photographing it with a different light angle...maybe tomorrow, if the overdate grows in possibility iPhone, dear boy, iPhone

Secret dealers...........We KNOW your secrets Peter I've got a bath full of Baked beans and mushy peas to dive into later...Mrs Peter is on a leash. You're Roger Daltrey in disguise?

Strangely enough, I'd had a high grade 1937 halfcrown for yonkeys, then examining it closely one day I was struck by the slight mirroring in the fields, but even more by the razor sharp rim. I've now provisionally reclassified it as a proof. However, I do accept that it must have come from a broken set, and as for being rare Having said all that, I think George VI proofs are the most difficult to tell apart from normal issues. They're not very good, let's face it.

Did you actually manage to sell it and make a profit? Mind you, at that rate all those 1967 pennies are beginning to look worthwhile!

Staining of some sort - certainly not natural toning. This is where you could try a gentle wash in warm water using pure soap. That may help, though you should dry it by dabbing with a towel, not wiping of course. If that doesn't work, you COULD try dipping... for NO MORE THAN 10 SECONDS!!! If that doesn't work, give it up as a bad job and live with what doesn't actually look disastrously disfiguring.

Most of them you will see the link in the signature, e.g. Derek's (Red Riley), or in their profile. Other safe bets are Colin Cooke, Michael Gouby, Mark Rasmussen, among others who other members may recommend.

Surely, Peter, you meant www.photobucket.com/WOW

Ah, but now you're back Chris, have you seen this brilliant scheme we've all joined? You buy silver bullion coins from them and if you then recruit others to do the same you get your coins for free!! We're all going to be millionnaires...!! Just sign here .... ...this time next year!

LOL the world's commonest coin! Still, if you like it, and you're happy to buy from a company that spells "wholly" as "wholey", who am I to criticise? Are you now enrolled in their £40 per month scam scheme?

I've not seen the Jubilee crowns, but I always likeed the currency obverse - it's punchy and fairly realistic too. My pet hate is the Maklouf portrait which I find is not only very shallow but also boring. It's the only portrait I don't like at all.

LOL the world's commonest coin! Still, if you like it, and you're happy to buy from a company that spells "wholly" as "wholey", who am I to criticise?

That explains things. Norton have become the archetypal "software from hell". When my Mac was in the repairers I was stuck using a little HP netbook running Windows 7; I got tired very quickly of all the Norton popups telling me my free trial (i.e. shipped with the computer) had come to an end and my machine was now unprotected. This seemed a constant intrusion and no way to turn it off. I'd be tempted to clean your machine of Norton and try McAfee or something similar to protect against viruses etc.

You don't explain it very well. The normal 1922 penny is slightly scarce in high grades, but not by much. However, there is a very rare reverse which is called the "1927 reverse" because it's very similar to the modified 1927 reverse used between 1927 and 1936. There's no such thing as a "British reverse" - all pennies from 1797 until 1967 feature Britannia on the reverse, perhaps that's what you mean? As azda says, you can post pictures up to 150k in each post. It isn't a lot, but if you reduce the size and resolution in an image editor, you should be able to post a picture of the reverse without problem.

Either there's some determined shilling going on (suspicious bidding pattern, yes?), or else someone desperately wants it for the date. But I agree, it's a weird one. You wouldn't raise that for a regular EF halfpenny of that series, so your guess is as good as mine. Richard is not a shiller, so we can put that to bed. Is it lost on you that the date does not exist and does not turn up among forgeries? The price is high because it is contemporary, rare and in good condition for a series that is regularly very poorly produced. No mystery just simple supply and demand. As you see John, that's what I said!! But on that basis, a unique date of a "To Hanover" gaming token or faked spade guinea, should command a similar value. All we're saying is that it's a weirdly high price - albeit a unique date - for what is, at the end of the day, a forgery.

No problem for me. (eBay.com / category Coins > UK Coins / Match by : Ending soonest)

I said it was a LEGAL pyramid, not a scam or illegal. But unlike all your other examples, such schemes involve recruiting people whose own recruitments end up giving you a share of their commission, just as your sales and all your recruits end up paying a proportion of commission to the person who recruited you, and so on up the line. That's the pyramid. Unlike L'Oreal who produce hair care products based on public demand partly generated by advertising but also from reputation. The products are shipped out to wholesalers based on specific orders, and they in turn supply the supermarkets who put the product on their shelves based on public demand. And those supermarkets are all in competition with each other. As for customers, there's nothing to prevent them from going to Asda one week, Tesco the next, Sainsburys the week after. No-one is tied in. L'Oreal sink or swim on the basis of public taste and continued demand. Wholesalers will find other products if necessary. Ditto supermarkets. As for customers, their profits go to the supermarket, plus a portion to the wholesaler and the manufacturer. On the other hand, if L'Oreal decided to supply to person X, who then decided to recruit people Y and Z to generate more sales, and they in turn recruited more people to supply and sell to ... THAT would be a fairer comparison with your scheme. Normal manufacturer / retail practices are not real pyramids.

Either there's some determined shilling going on (suspicious bidding pattern, yes?), or else someone desperately wants it for the date. But I agree, it's a weird one. You wouldn't raise that for a regular EF halfpenny of that series, so your guess is as good as mine.

When I was still dealing I picked up a lot of those 60s blue fivers (around a dozen) for about face value, perhaps a bit more. When I got them home, I saw that one was prefixed M ! Small provincial auctions have their uses - I bet that wouldn't have been missed in London or W&W.

No matter how it is dressed up, it is pyramid selling, it relies on additional layers of sellers beneath you for you to recoup your costs. The people at the top of the tree, and the odd good seller will make their fortune, and use the evidence to convince those further down to join. Inevitably it doesn't take that many layers before the numbers of people required to continue the pattern becomes mammoth. The last ones to hop on board have no chance of convincing others and the bubble bursts leaving them with products for which they have overpaid. The names may have changed but it is the same principles that have been used in previous schemes. That's what I was trying to say. I think "recoup your costs" could be replaced with "make real money" but otherwise you are spot on. It relies on you being emperor at the top of your own pyramid, raking in the commission from your 'subjects', while you yourself are in turn a vassal of someone higher up the tree than you, who is raking in even more. Like you said, a pyramid. A legal pyramid, but a pyramid all the same. You apparently get a $40 commission for each new member you can bring in. Which is presumably why Will was here touting for business. Well, he gets 10 out of 10 for trying!

No matter how it is dressed up, it is pyramid selling, it relies on additional layers of sellers beneath you for you to recoup your costs. The people at the top of the tree, and the odd good seller will make their fortune, and use the evidence to convince those further down to join. Inevitably it doesn't take that many layers before the numbers of people required to continue the pattern becomes mammoth. The last ones to hop on board have no chance of convincing others and the bubble bursts leaving them with products for which they have overpaid. The names may have changed but it is the same principles that have been used in previous schemes. That's what I was trying to say. I think "recoup your costs" could be replaced with "make real money" but otherwise you are spot on. It relies on you being emperor at the top of your own pyramid, raking in the commission from your 'subjects', while you yourself are in turn a vassal of someone higher up the tree than you, who is raking in even more. Like you said, a pyramid. A legal pyramid, but a pyramid all the same.

The thing is, all those past peaks and troughs were each for differing reasons - decimalisation (+ then -), the oil crisis and inflation, the silver bullion bubble, Thatcherism (which I feel sure caused the stagnation from the early 80s to the mid-90s - people had lots of other investment opportunities), the internet. Experts still seem to think the British coin market is undervalued compared to the American market, but is the latter overvalued? It's certainly a different collecting environment compared to ours. However, even if ours is undervalued, it may be seeing weird eBay-induced peaks that will "correct" in the short to medium term, even if the UK coin market as a whole continues a steady rise. No coin bet is entirely safe, though the advice to buy "the best quality you can afford" has never been proved wrong, especially in the long term.

I've got Peck and Freeman on the shelf! It's the Spink pricing, rather than the ID that intrigued me as, presumeably, these prices have come from actual auction sales of type? I'm always up for viewing die and punch information at a deeper level, so will certainly try and dig out the 51 Will PM later, thanks again! Ouija board, I'd heard?

logically there ought to be 1915 recessed ears without the chipped tooth, yet to find one though! I suppose it's always possible that the RM used the chipped tooth as a positive ID to test how the 'recessed ears' fared in circulation? In that case they would all be of the chipped variety. Very well, judging by the diminution of ghosting, the fully struck up reverses, and the preservation of hair detail. I always wondered why they didn't persist with it.