Peckris

Thanks for the bigger picture. One thing that's possible - a private company may have made up some card boxes to sell souvenir specimens of the Jubilee coinage, and taken BU examples to put in them. (There are other precedents for this - one obvious being the "First and Last" sets made up by Sandhill in 1968-69, and also currency cases for 1953 complete sets, and I have one for a 1967 set with room for a sovereign). Could you put up a larger picture of the box lid also?

"2nd finest known (that's slabbed by CGS)" - rather takes the gloss of that particular claim.

Looks like it stopped a bullet! Interesting WW1 story behind that perhaps?

The 1935 Crown is well-known as being issued as a specimen also. I have to say I've never seen other 1935 denominations likewise, so my first impression is to say those could be quite or very rare. I'm actually quite surprised that only the Crown was issued for Jubilee purposes and not an entire set. But he did die at the very beginning of 1936 so it could be his impending death put such plans on hold. Are those your own or did you see them somewhere? The pictures are very small - can you either post larger ones or a link to where they may be seen? Thanks.

Just looked at all my dates for this period, and I've noticed the extra part linear circle on my 1883, in exactly the same place. Not on any of the others though. I don't think it's an error. If you switch back and forward from obverse to reverse images on that 1892 eBay example (above), it looks as if it must be ghosting of the base of Victoria's bust - which is quite a heavy raised design at that point. It is in exactly that place. It could be that ALL examples - especially if they are all in the same place - are ghosting not errors.

I hate to say it Dave, but that looks decidedly suspect.

Well done Declan. Good specimen with lots of lustre. You're one up on me - once I got the proof I stopped looking for a currency strike.

Coins maybe. Land certainly. They aren't making it any more and if the right quality allows you to grow your own fruit and veg. The amount of money that is being printed has to result in inflation for the future. That's going to affect your food prices dramatically and food is something you can't do without. If you double the money in circulation, then prices must necessarily follow when there is no increase in physical assets held. There's a section of The Liberal Party who believe the only fair tax is a land tax. When you look at what the Duke of Westminster gets away with, I can see their point. What's fairer, a tax on employment (income tax and National Insurance), or a tax on land? Obviously if the land was being used for productive purposes, e.g. farming, then that would be taken into account. Apparently it's all been costed out and would bring in far more than income tax.

If, as the news seems to think, we're into a 'double dip' (or is it 'dead cat bounce'?) recession, then prepare for the flight into alternative forms of investment e.g. coins to continue.

Convention has it that if you use a hyphen between stated grades, it applies to the overall coin, i.e. both sides are the same. Otherwise, as I'm sure I don't need to tell you!, it's a / with the obverse first and reverse second.

There was a great Coin Monthly advert, late 60s - INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITY, THE RARE 1951 PENNY, Buy ONE, or Discounts for Purchases of 10 or 100. Wonder if any of the buyers of 100 ever saw their money back? They created their own markets by hyping coins...Top 10 investments etc which with hindsight were all damp squibs. Hang on - are we talking about Coin Monthly or a fairly well-known issue from opposite the BM?! Definitely Coin Monthly! Or rather, the advertisers therein, one of whom may well have been a forebear of a certain chap whose shop is opposite the BM... Those late 60s days were utter madness, all subsequent periods - 1980 Bunker Hunt, current eBay fads notwithstanding - paling by comparison.

It's only the proof 1937 1+B proof that I've found difficult. The differences in the two 1905 varieties are somewhat subtle, but whatever lights your fire Without help you could spend some time playing spot the difference! Here are my two: To those who know, the difference is obvious!! But I still maintain that the difference is more significant than the 'bead/space' issue on the 1937...

LOL Gary - didn't you try it on with that picture once before?

I think the fame of the 1933 and 1954 pennies makes them "special cases", i.e. you couldn't put a catalogue value on them, and there would be general craziness if they appeared at auction. The 1926ME is popular enough with collectors, and rare enough in high grade, that I think you can forget that £1k+ plus figure - one with a green patina which was no more than AEF (Weak strike) made well over £300 ten years ago against a prediction of £150 maximum. You could probably save your £1k for an EF with bits of lustre, an UNC would go through the roof. The 1920 is less well known but prohibitively rare (just one in the BM, or is there one other?), so to collectors would cost a small fortune if one ever even appeared - you're looking at a coin that would made the 1863 'narrow 3' price look silly. And a high grade 1903 'open 3' and Gouby X are unknown in high grade so again, in the right auction, would make silly money. But your general point is sound - you're just conservative with your estimates! I obviously need to look harder for the 1937 1+B proof, unless you'd like to part with one for a fee? There are actually collectors for those tedious 1937 varieties?? Funny how no-one talks about the two varieties of 1905, yet those are - despite not being earth-shatteringly riveting in themselves - way more interesting than those 1937s Having said that, some people probably feel the same way about 1953 farthings and would not understand my glee some years back at being offered a proof set which contained the 2+A. I paid a fair price ... for a 1953 proof set.

whooo sorry guys......has this happened before?.........sort it out.....sheeeeeeeeeet if only i knew how Yup, that's fine - thank you thank you

like all coin collectors peckris......i crave more than pics....i have to say though, this forum has given me a few pics lately, but you know how it is, the real thing, in the hand is what matters, anybody got 1 for sale? Ski, what's going wrong with your "Quotes" when replying to posts? They all seem to be missing a [ or a ]. Which means that when we try to reply we get an error saying the opening quotes don't match the closing quotes. Sort it out, there's a good chap!!!

There was a great Coin Monthly advert, late 60s - INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITY, THE RARE 1951 PENNY, Buy ONE, or Discounts for Purchases of 10 or 100. Wonder if any of the buyers of 100 ever saw their money back? They created their own markets by hyping coins...Top 10 investments etc which with hindsight were all damp squibs. Too right. Other contemporary fizzlers were 1960 Crowns 1953 sets avge circulated "key dates" (1946, 49, 50, 51 brass 3d; 1923, 1952 6d; 1959S, 1961S, 1965S 1/-; 1932, 1926 1d; etc) BU 60s coins in bulk 1956 farthings blue decimal wallets "Last and First" sets in Sandhill cases Whitman folders, Sandhill cases, Coindex filing systems Mint sealed bags (mostly dated 1966 and 1967) And probably many more too numerous to mention

cmon who you kidding ha i do recall something about needing a licence to hold an amount of gold, im too old to remember exactly though, how has this changed? im assuming you can have as many gold sovs in your collection as you want...right? but i have still ask......why the karzi??? I can't believe Google has let me down I tried every form of words to confirm this, but the nearest I got was this quote : "Baird & Co was established as a numismatic coin dealer in 1967. As government restrictions lifted in the 1970s," I definitely remember the restrictions coming in, it was the late 60s and I remember the figure of "4 gold sovereigns" as a maximum. Nor do I think the restriction was to HOLD gold, but to BUY gold. (Existing collections weren't affected AFAIR). I think the restriction may have been lifted sometime during the Heath Govt 1970-74? (A far longer restriction was lifted in the US in 1975 apparently). Nowadays there is no restriction on buying sovereigns as a collectable, but I don't know what the rules on bullion are. karzi? Explain. Also explain how you got your post past the "opening quotes don't match the closing quotes" error???

There was a great Coin Monthly advert, late 60s - INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITY, THE RARE 1951 PENNY, Buy ONE, or Discounts for Purchases of 10 or 100. Wonder if any of the buyers of 100 ever saw their money back?

You read it here Accumulator Sounds like an offer to buy, to me

Our friend 1887jubilee might help you out with a picture :-)

That's unlucky scott. They are extremely common even though only a fraction of the even-commoner 1967. I have some in UNC with lots of lustre (I got a whole tub of them in a Lockdales auction lot, there's still a small number left).

So THAT's what happened to the unsold ACCURATE GRADING GUIDES, only 6/- plus p&p from the Exchange & Mart, late 60s...

No, I'm not that old , but I DO remember the restrictions on modern gold coins in the late 60s (I can't remember the cutoff date but I'm pretty sure it was way back in the 19th Century). Basically, you couldn't buy more than ?4 sovs without a special licence.

I notice the pictures of that bun penny were supplied by www.mintstate.co.uk Ah, the Chas milled coinage. That's the kind of hammered that I like I think the topic moved on to the best coin Peck, regardless of hammered or milled. Do try and keep up my old bean I'm wishing I had even the faintest idea what you're talking about Dave. Could it be you misunderstood my little joke? I think you must have