Peckris

No way! Didn't you consult your copy of Pleck?

I'll certainly take the 1956 varieties off your hands 1956 varieties?? Freeman doesn't mention any of them! Ah, just checked Mr Gouby's website. Christ, I'm going to have to get another book... So if we're all getting blown out of the water day in day out, who are these people paying so far over the odds? Do they know something we don't, or are we in the know and they're mugs? Freeman is where I learned of them!!

If the date is on the reverse, then no. Put your £2 down to experience. Only completely undated 20p's are worth anything.

My first attempt involved fixing the tripod with the camera pointing downwards in Macro mode, as near to the coin as possible before it cast a shadow. The coin was resting on a table top on a brown cloth with sun shining in through the window and onto the coin. The coin nowhere near filled the screen (getting any closer would have cast a shadow) so I hoiked it into an image editor, selected the coin with oval marquee, inversed selection and deleted all but the coin. Due to shooting at 5MP setting the image was still plenty large enough. But probably those halfpennies were the result of much more experience and expertise

I agree, Peck. The actual price of copper might have a knock on effect with the bulk sale of low grade coins en masse, from any era. It would not explain the current craze for buns. However, apart from the very rare examples, like the 1869, 1875H, and to a lesser extent 1864 crosslet 4 and 1871, collectors are pushing strongly for the very high grades, which have a premium on them orders of magnitude greater than their pro rata value to lower grade examples would indicate. Maybe that's due to their increasing scarcity as more and more find their way into private collections and therefore permanently or semi permanently withdrawn from trade. You could argue that has always been the case, so maybe there is some other factor at work which we can only speculate on ~ or a combination of 2 factors only one of which we can readily indentify. That's a good point. I wonder if the same fever has extended to the commoner dates in high grade, i.e. 1887 - 1893 - anyone noticed?

Freeman only mentions a Kings Norton contract to supply blanks with the RM - he said nothing about The Birmingham Mint (Heatons).

In???

I'll certainly take the 1956 varieties off your hands

That was some car! Didn't it have a Wankel engine in it?

Wow, would you sell some stuff for me on the bay then??

Thanks Accumulator ~ that is something I will really look forward to listening to Although I wonder if they meant the half crown, as the Crown was not a circulating coin in February 1971. Technically we didn't say goodbye to any of those 3 as florins and shillings remained legal tender, and commemorative Crown-size coins continued to get issued. Nor did we wave 'bye bye' to any coins on 15 February 1971 as that was D-Day 1 and the overlap period lasted until D-Day 2 (August 31?). And even then, the only things we couldn't spend any more were the penny and brass 3d.

It had crossed my mind that Kings Norton may have been producing for other countries at that time on smaller blanks. I suppose that Michael is right and the RM would have to be the first port of call. Don't bother going to the RM unless they are expert on the Kings Norton output. Kings Norton produced their own blanks - not only that but, according to Freeman, they supplied blanks to the RM from 1912 - 1919, which I guess is why you sometimes see 'red pennies' that aren't 1918/19KN. The question is, who else did they do business for, and could a blank from another of their contract jobs have got mixed up with the RM sub-contract? Or, maybe it was just a duff item that slipped through their inspectors (or maybe they had RM inspectors on site who dozed off late Friday afternoon). Either way, I agree with those who say 'take it back' for a refund (unless of course, he sends it uninsured and "you don't receive it" .. now there's a thought!)

What will you do when your library closes? I will weep! But, having said that, I don't believe any city centre main libraries are under threat?

Can you not also tell if it is a Proof Issue if the edge is Plain as opposed to Milled? Or does that not apply to all Proof Issues? Some proof issues of some coins certainly do have different edges than the business strikes - but you've got to go back (I think) to the earlier 19th Century and earlier, to see those. Most modern era proofs have the same edge, but they are sharp and even and well-defined.

Definitely George VI, if you google "Edward VIII Threepence" and click on images you will see the rare one, which is a different design Actually, no. There are two designs for Edward VIII - the "other thrift design" which we've all seen pictures for, and which there are a few knocking about. But there is also the one with the same reverse as George VI (proof?) which is even rarer. Yes, I can just about make out RGIV which makes it George

I don't think the price of copper has any bearing on the current craze for high grade buns. If it did, even relatively low-grade 20th Century pennies would be doing a roaring trade, and they aren't. 1. No, not really. 2. Yes, that's more like it, but also factor in the 'craze of the moment' snowball effect - like property prices up to 2007/8. OMG Az, have you had a lottery win recently, or what?

Grr, my guide dog didn't point me to that one.

Thanks for that - I'll listen to it when I have an hour to spare! (Warning - your link is a double http:// which needs one of them removing, then it works)

You've had some welcomes and advice syorks, so let me add to both! Welcome to the forums I personally wouldn't touch modern RM Issues with a barge pole as they are such a drag on the market when you come to sell. Having said that, you struck lucky by choosing gold and buying before the mad recent increases, so your investment has turned out well. Nice work! I wouldn't care to speculate on the attitudes of collectors choosing to have their scarce proofs melted down : you could guess right, or wrong, and no-one can predict, or we'd all be millionaires! If you like your sets, keep them and they will prove good in the long run. But if you want to cash in, that would be cool too as there is a whole world of old coins out there, just waiting for you!! But, forget dealer prices - the only way you might get close to that is by selling on eBay, and that' a chancy business. Whereas a dealer would pay you between half to three-quarters their selling price, depending how likely he is to make a quick sale.

That's the one! Yes, I did notice that there were a few mistakes in there as well. I think that it is handy little guide as it gives you an idea on the Mintage figures. As they are taken from the 'Coin Yearbook' it will save me having to carry that around with me as it contains the same information. I think that is a great little Booklet! Yes, and a nice little historical document to boot

Both are very attractive coins Nick, but neither appears to be a proof. But you can do a check yourself - one of the defining qualities of a proof is a sharp edged rim, all round. Unfortunately the 19th Century is awash with coins that are 'prooflike', i.e. mirrored fields. Many of these - especially if accompanied by a strong well-defined strike - will be early strikes and therefore should command a premium over the regular 'bog standard' strikes. But only a modest premium in Britain compared with the States where they go ape over early strikes. Some early strikes are even struck on ordinary blanks using proof dies, causing great difficulties to modern collectors and dealers. It's my opinion that yours aren't proofs, but see what others say.

An online Spink (which could be subscribed to - e.g. you pay a fixed amount per year for e.g. up to 250 prices, more up to 500, more still up to 1000, say) would be a boon. It would save me the hours spent hunched over Spink in the library, manually transcribing prices onto my database printout, only to key them all in when I get home. Ok, it's free, but I'd happily pay £10 per annum to access all the catalogue information plus prices for 500 coins.

Oh I think I picked that one up a few years ago! Does it have nice photographs on a black background? If it's the one I'm thinking of, it makes a few glaring errors, the main one not distinguishing between bronze and copper dated 1860, and mixing up the illustrations for the two types. But as you say, a fascinating read.

I don't think splitting the references into pre and post decimalisation would be very sensible from a publication point of view. The current book weighs in excess of 1kg which is a significant price band with Royal Mail, but splitting it in half would bring it back to say 6-700g including hardback covers. I do think that a division in 1662 would be very beneficial by now. It is very close to half way as things stand and would give the opportunity to include more varieties in both halves. Coupled with the fact that many collectors specialise in either hammered or milled, and if they do cross the boundary an extra book costing say £20 would pale into insignificance compared to the cost of pre 1662 milled coinage and would result in few lost sales in my opinion. In all probability it would result in a significant uplift in sales for Spink because most people who currently buy one would buy both if necessary. Crucially, it is a handbook and needs to be comfortably portable. The weight is now becoming an issue. I was being vaguely satirical Rob, but you make a good point. There's only one snag - I'm not tempted remotely by hammered, but I do like a Roman or two (coins! I'm talking about coins ), so the 1662 division wouldn't help me much. On the other hand, Roman values don't change much, so Spink could lump the ancient - including Celtic - into a separate little book they would only need to update every three years or so. I agree Derek. And Spink are becoming the exception now. ESC, Coincraft, the Year Book, CCGB, Freeman, C&MV, they're all by denomination not monarch. And people who collect date runs don't stop at reign boundaries. Storage systems are designed around denomination too. It's a rare collector who prefers a monarch to a denomination or two. But I suppose it would take too much of a major redesign for Spink to change it now.