Peckris

I think I have a fake penny....see picture below. One is the real penny (Left) and the other of the same year is a terrible copy. It seems pointless to forge pennies. http://s45.photobucket.com/albums/f94/larsselleth/?action=view&current=coins001.jpg The one on the right is missing all teeth and stops, which is really weird. However, I don't think it can be a forgery - as you say, who'd want to spend more on the exercise than the "coin" is worth? What it MIGHT be (and hold your horses right here, I only said MIGHT) is some kind of pattern, released accidentally? Unlikely, but I'm struggling to find a possible explanation (my first thought was a penny struck on the wrong blank, but that wouldn't eliminate teeth and stops). Peck, have a look at the obverse of a 2008 shield reverse Penny or a 2009, 10. Compare the obverse to a 1998>2008 Penny obverse, the difference will be very clear and I'd put a big wager on that that is the 2 obverses in the photo. I hadn't even noticed that (modern decimals don't interest me one bit!) - I don't have one to look at, but Wikipedia confirms the ring of dots has indeed been removed.

I think I have a fake penny....see picture below. One is the real penny (Left) and the other of the same year is a terrible copy. It seems pointless to forge pennies. http://s45.photobucket.com/albums/f94/larsselleth/?action=view&current=coins001.jpg The one on the right is missing all teeth and stops, which is really weird. However, I don't think it can be a forgery - as you say, who'd want to spend more on the exercise than the "coin" is worth? What it MIGHT be (and hold your horses right here, I only said MIGHT) is some kind of pattern, released accidentally? Unlikely, but I'm struggling to find a possible explanation (my first thought was a penny struck on the wrong blank, but that wouldn't eliminate teeth and stops).

I appreciate the historic value of early Mediaeval pennies etc. but when you compare them with Greek or Roman and even some Saxon coins, they were rubbish. I agree absolutely. When you look at the technological and artistic achievements of the Ancient Greeks, Romans, Macedonians, and even the best of the Celts, Saxons and Vikings, the early medieval period is crap. It's only when you see the Renaissance 'portrait' coins of Henry VII, and then the earliest millled efforts from Queen Bess, you realise how bad they were.

No, peck is reffering to my image sizes O I see thanks for clearing that one up azda. Yes, that's what i meant I'm going to have to get used to the size of Dave's pictures, and he's going to have to get used to my moans

Well, ok. But a FAR better book would have been our own Chris Perkins' "Collectors Coins GB" book, (see picture above, which will take to you where they are on sale - Amazon? Or most decent bookstores), which is 1) cheaper than BCMV 2) contains a lot more information including obscure varieties and buying tips. In fact, if you buy the CCGB book anyway and compare the two, I think you'll agree with me.

Those two look perfectly good shots (a nice comfortable size, cough cough)

It's a bit hard to tell as the pictures are a bit blurry (or doubled?), but I think you may have them back to front? The reverse certainly looks like the legend is the wrong way round. At any rate, what you have there is a Roman denarius, between F and VF grade. I can't identify it right off, but they are nice coins to collect. Surprisingly easy to find and only of limited value (except for rare reigns and types), but a good focus for a collection. As to where to buy - get yourself a copy of Coin News and see where your nearest coin club is. There are also regular fairs, from York in the North, down through the Midlands, to London. What area are you from? And provincial auctions quite often have sales, but don't go buying from those until you are more confident - but great places to go and learn, and watch. There are reputable online dealers - Colin Cooke, Michael Gouby, and Rendel Ingram to name but three. Plus a few of the members here also have websites where they sell, and there are a few coins for sale to be found at the home page of this website. The most important thing though, is to learn more about coins. Read avidly. To drop a few names to go and hunt down at your local reference library : CW Peck English Silver Coinage Freeman's Bronze Coinage Spink's Standard Catalogue Dave Groom's two books on 20th Century silver and bronze varieties

Isn't that (theoretically) what PayPal is? Nooo... PayPal's just another bank, 'cept it's owned by eBay. Which is ultimately owned by the banks via venture capital I expect. Not "just another bank". There's no other bank I can use to pay for stuff online by merely logging in, and not having to provide a card number.

Ouch. But don't let certain punters here overhear that "only farthings" remark

I'd say it's worth retaking the shot at your cam's maximum res and posting here, whatever size it comes out. That picture Is ok for identification but there's a lot of softness and artefacts and general noise on it too. Well here's some more done with max res but resized after on my laptop also these were done with bulbs(flourescentant strip light+ daylight energy saving bulb in lamp) Apart from the colour (that would be the lighting used I'm guessing?) those look much better. A bit smaller but the detail is much much clearer, and leaves no room for doubt.

Isn't that (theoretically) what PayPal is?

I'd say it's worth retaking the shot at your cam's maximum res and posting here, whatever size it comes out. That picture Is ok for identification but there's a lot of softness and artefacts and general noise on it too.

That coin shows up the limitations of your camera (the first two are absolutely fine, by the way) - you've shown it far too large in relation to its original size and shown up all the softness and noise of hyping the resolution beyond its natural boundaries. FWIW, the picture (of the half farthing) doesn't need to be so large - we would still see its relevant detail if it was only 4X original. If you want it larger, you need to find a way of going 'close up and macro', assuming your camera can do that.

I've received 3 in my change, so I wish only 25,000 had been minted !!! Actually the true figure is 3,903,000 ~ see Royal Mint mintage figures here Which makes them more common than 1981 10p's - wonder how often those come up on eBay?

Ah you've fallen into the classic trap! ONE bidder is offering £50 for ONE example. Your remaining 4 would be ... surplus. You'd end up with around £70 in total.

I'm not trying to start an argument here and should perhaps decline to answer your question as others have done, as this is a bit of a touchy subject, but the above is not correct. The United Kingdom is the combination of the two kingdoms of England and Scotland and was created in c.1707. The English portion consisted of England and its two provinces of Wales and Ireland which had been acquired by England sometime after the Norman invasion but before 1707. Both are geographical areas and were never counties as they consisted of many independent tribes, much as England had been prior to the Norman conquest. Today neither have parliaments, rather regional assemblies. Further correction. Wales for centuries has not been a 'province' but a 'Principality'. (Viz., the Prince of Wales). I'm not sure what Ireland's status was in 1707, but Northern Ireland has certainly been a province since the formation of the Irish Free State. The status of the government of N Ireland has changed several times : the parliament at Stormont was suspended in the 1970s during 'the Troubles' and direct rule from Westminster was imposed. But now government has been reintroduced from Stormont with direct elections. The British Isles includes the whole of Ireland (merely a geographical entity). Britain refers to England, Scotland, Wales and the islands. Great Britain refers to the same with the addition of N. Ireland.

That's been increasingly true since early 20th Century. The circulating coinage has become a smaller and smaller part of the 'money supply'. A workman's wages before WW1 would probably have been less than £1, and most working people never saw a sovereign or a banknote - decisions made by the Royal Mint in those days would have been important, significant. Even up to the late 60s, the 50p was still a 10/- banknote. In 1971 a tin of beans would have been around 4p. You'd have paid for it with a 5p or a 10p. A cup of coffee or a bag of crisps or a bus fare was 2p. Modern coins are like 'toy money' and worth not much more. But I'd hate to see them disappear altogether - it might be fatal for our hobby.

It's not uncommon with missing or tiny stops due to metal fillings (die block). But are you saying that you have a shilling with stop between ET like this Sixpence? I have 30 different reverse dies of the shilling, none of these have a stop between ET I'll have to have a look. Never studied my 1787s that close.

That's the fellow, Mr Accumulator... I've never found one before, and I've looked at a darn sight more than 5, so I'm with you on that one. Then 6 turn up in the same Jiffy bag. I must do some number crunching of Mr Court's paper - I do have it, but I haven't given it the attention it deserves! I recall being at a W&W auction in the 1990s where one of the lots was a collection from someone who had clearly pulled a number of near Unc coins from circulation in the 1950s. Included was a haul of 1957 halfpennies, most with full or nearly full lustre - the majority were 'calm sea'! That may be the origin of your 1944s, retrieved from circulation at the same time and ending up in the States still together. Possibly, although I think Declan does have a point. Where very small numbers of identifiable coins have been produced, it has been possible to trace where they were issud e.g. 1950 penny - Northern Ireland; 1951 penny - Bermuda/West Indies. The same should therefore be theoretically possible of coins with certain identifiable die traits. I say should, but really I meant 'would' as it is far too late now to do anything other than speculate. That's certainly true Derek, but it wouldn't apply to 1944 pepnnies in the USA surely? Unless they were issued in the W Indies maybe.

That's the fellow, Mr Accumulator... I've never found one before, and I've looked at a darn sight more than 5, so I'm with you on that one. Then 6 turn up in the same Jiffy bag. I must do some number crunching of Mr Court's paper - I do have it, but I haven't given it the attention it deserves! I recall being at a W&W auction in the 1990s where one of the lots was a collection from someone who had clearly pulled a number of near Unc coins from circulation in the 1950s. Included was a haul of 1957 halfpennies, most with full or nearly full lustre - the majority were 'calm sea'! That may be the origin of your 1944s, retrieved from circulation at the same time and ending up in the States still together.

Agreed. If anything it may even be a slight OVER-estimation. If your coin has no lustre VS, I would put it somewhere between £100 and £150 depending on crispness and eye appeal. The halfpenny is much scarcer of course.

It's very close but looks slighly different than my 'first' obverse I think this is normal for the series. I have a 1787 shilling where that particular stop is MUCH smaller than the ones on either side.

The good ship Venus. (All together now : "The figurehead / Was a nude in bed ... ")

A real waste - an EF coin that's been ruined Good call scott - in that case it would have to be Reverse H due to the close numerals

http://www.museum-security.org/?p=4392 http://www.ngccoin.com/news/viewarticle.aspx?NewsletterNewsArticleID=90 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1302005/1933-penny-coin-valued-80k-offered-eBay-suddenly-withdrawn.html http://www.secretleeds.com/forum/PrintMessages.aspx?ThreadID=1849 Take your pick.