Peckris

As a student of coin prices, particularly modern coins, I'm always interested to read these sort of articles. In my own coins database, I have one layout devoted entirely to Seaby/Spink prices over the years : 1966, 1969, 1980, 1985, 1997/8, and more or less biannually since 2000. (I'm missing the mid-70s, and trying to track down a 1976 Seabys; there is no need to have anything from 1985 to 1997 as there was a long period of stagnation in values, partly caused by Seabys becoming a bit out of touch with the real markets). From all this data, I can show that the grade that has performed least well over time is VF. This may be due to collectors falling into two broad groups : those who buy the very best (EF or better) and those who are 'completists' making date runs etc, who are more likely to push up the Fine coins more. But it may also be because the VF grade itself has slipped relative to other grades since those stricter times in the 1960s/70s. Back then, the top grades Unc EF and VF clustered together with only quite small differences between them; then there was a huge gap down to Fine. These days it is more of an even spread below EF, from which I have to conclude that the modern VF is slightly worse than the VF of yore. However it is true to say that buying the very best you can afford will not be a bad policy, and never has been (unless you were buying 1950/1951 pennies for "investment" in the 1960s ). It is equally true to say that it is impossible to predict the next trend / fad / fashion, in coins as in everything else.

Here's an interesting one. The 8 5 8 in the date look almost as if they are 'doubled', but there is no sign of any other doubling (not even on the '1', and not in the legend, nor the design). At first glance the 8's look as though they are overcut on 8's below to the left, but at this magnification, I notice the underlying 8 overlaps to the right also. The 5 too appears overcut on another 5. What I'm now thinking, it could be a small date punched over a large date. What do you think?

Oh, you meant 'metal creep' due to the repunching, not due to the strike! Ok, I understand what you mean now. I'm still slightly doubtful though - I would have thought (and this is not based on scientific knowledge) that metal creep due to numerals being repunched, would cause a kind of cone-shaped deformity? In other words, the date numeral would taper outwards towards its base? Whereas in these numerals, the overlying numeral has a clean edge, and the underlying numeral does too, as if providing a flat shallow plinth which the numeral sits on. In other words, all the edges look too 'clean' to be deformities, but that is purely a layman's opinion.

Yes I notice that Michael Gouby has a perfect 1973 set for well over £20. They really are rare.

I once made the effort to get all proof sets up to about 1993 or so. Then I looked at them all, sitting in their white packets and wondered "Why?" So I made this little list of sets I think are possibly worth collecting - whether you agree or not will depend on whether you believe that EVERY representative date and type needs a proof. So, for what it's worth : 1970 : common as muck but still a nice set, and the only proofs for that Mary Gillick obverse type (i.e. post-1953) 1971 : ditto, but hey, the first decimals! 1972 : worth it just for owning coins dated 1972 1973 : maybe yes, maybe no - debatable. But if you find an untoned set, they're RARE, buy it. 1977 : only if you think it's worth having the crown, but there is an inexpensive silver proof of that, so maybe not 1980 : only for introducing that frosted look, gorgeous 1983 : only for being the first set in the landscape mode green display packs Apart from that, from 1982 onwards the BU sets (much cheaper!) give the chance to acquire coins not issued for currency. It might perhaps be worth getting the 1985 and 1998 sets with the portrait changes, but as I say, it would be much cheaper to get the BU set instead. In fact, apart from Royal Mint profits, I'm having a hard time understanding why we even need proof sets these days.

Yes, zooming in shows more wear than at first appears evident especially on the obverse (a common failing with bun farthings, which often appear better than they really are). However it is still clearly VF and I wouldn't see those tiny green dots (which must be truly tiny considering it's a farthing!) affecting the value at all. So it would be fair to quote the OP a value of £5, with your sensible proviso that that is an "insurance value" only, and that such a coin could be picked up for less. rolling, when you are quoted a value, always ask if that means "book price" or not. Book price is what dealers and collectors use to insure coins, and also as a dealers' guide to price choice or rare coins at. Commoner coins, especially if not in the top one or two grades, can usually be found at well under book price. Bun farthings come under this heading - they are plentiful in VF, far more than bun pennies which came in for a lot more wear and were less protected by their rims.

In hand, under magnification, what is very clear is that there is no underlying '1' at all, and the '5' does not creep in the same direction as the '8's (the top horizontal is below, not to the left, and the right hand side of the large loop has virtually no underlying numeral). And the 'creep' is different on each '8' - quite a lot of the underlying showing to the right on the 1st 8, but very little on the second. From this I would have to deduce that this is more than simply metal creep or the underlying numerals would be consistently offset relative to each overlying numeral. No, this looks like a recut date, with possibly the '1' not being recut.

Well no - don't forget that on the die, what you see on the coin as raised surfaces are actually incuse. So just imagine a small incuse date, then imagine a larger date cut into the same die - it would make what is simply a hollow space, a larger hollow space, and therefore it would be impossible for the previous, smaller incuse detail to survive. Enlarge a hole and the previous hole disappears entirely!

Only that it is interesting - I've not seen that before, nor does it seem to be recorded. It MIGHT simply be one-off damage to the loop of the 9, but at the same time the inner loop looks smaller too. Worth keeping out of interest. Thank you, I was wondering if there are any variety types on the 1926/1927 farthing please? No. 20th Century farthing varieties are few and far between. In fact, after 1915, there is only the 4 die pairings for 1953, and that's about it. This is true of small coins in general - you will also find very few varieties of silver 3d, or even sixpences, after around 1893.

Very nice! This error was noted in 2008 ( Large date over small date) (CC 2009) I dont know anything about coins but I brought collectors coins 2009 - my bible lol Ooh yes, you're right - I have CCGB 2009 and didn't even realise I had this variety! (I only recently saw it when looking through a glass - strictly speaking, shouldn't it be described as "small date over large" rather than the other way about?). Mine is AU, much better than the scan shows, a glorious even tone and glistening fields. very true, might be worth a mention to Chris Perkins for inclusion in the next CCGB. Possible large over small AND a small over large types ?? I'd be quite surprised if there was a "large date over small" variety - how on earth would you tell? Purely by comparison I suppose, the one thing I have learned from sorting my fathers coins is to expect the unexpected You need more examples first. No, what I meant was, if a large date is cut over a small date, it would swamp the smaller date completely, wouldn't it?

Only that it is interesting - I've not seen that before, nor does it seem to be recorded. It MIGHT simply be one-off damage to the loop of the 9, but at the same time the inner loop looks smaller too. Worth keeping out of interest.

The good thing about bun pennies is that you can build up a fairly complete collection quite quickly and cheaply, whilst retaining a long term plan to improve the qualty. Only the obvious (1869, 1871, 1875H and a few varieties) should cost more than a few pence in low grade. With the advent of e-bay you are unlikely to lose much more than postage on an upgrade. Bargains can be had too - 4 years ago I bought an 1875H in GVF+ for £31; looking at Michael Gouby's website, I notice he has a very similar coin for £750! Wow, I'm now regretting more than ever not pouncing on the GEF+lustre specimen on eBay for £550 a few months back ...

Oh yes - thanks for that. I couldn't remember the engraver's initials beneath the head, but now you've said, I remember - it was SGO.

Very nice! This error was noted in 2008 ( Large date over small date) (CC 2009) I dont know anything about coins but I brought collectors coins 2009 - my bible lol Ooh yes, you're right - I have CCGB 2009 and didn't even realise I had this variety! (I only recently saw it when looking through a glass - strictly speaking, shouldn't it be described as "small date over large" rather than the other way about?). Mine is AU, much better than the scan shows, a glorious even tone and glistening fields. very true, might be worth a mention to Chris Perkins for inclusion in the next CCGB. Possible large over small AND a small over large types ?? I'd be quite surprised if there was a "large date over small" variety - how on earth would you tell?

Very nice! This error was noted in 2008 ( Large date over small date) (CC 2009) I dont know anything about coins but I brought collectors coins 2009 - my bible lol Ooh yes, you're right - I have CCGB 2009 and didn't even realise I had this variety! (I only recently saw it when looking through a glass - strictly speaking, shouldn't it be described as "small date over large" rather than the other way about?). Mine is AU, much better than the scan shows, a glorious even tone and glistening fields.

It looks like a double exergue line. But do bear in mind, although only about 1 in 15 of the 1940s are single exergue line, that doesn't make them rare! Probably between 1 and 2 million according to Freeman. Where they are rare however, is in BU - all 1940s are scarce in BU but the single line is really scarce.

Good point. My own scanner also makes coins look far too red, I have to Photoshop them before uploading.

Hm, you must have sharp eyes Peter. I don't see any verdigris, only the slightest dink, and it doesn't look cleaned to me (many Vic farthings have that reddish appearance I'm thinking?). I'd want to value it somewhere between £5 - £10. But no two punters will ever agree on a coin!

The first four are minature medalats by Joseph Moore, I'd need to see images, they came in boxed sets usually of six but the content varied between the first issue 1844 and the later issues up to 1848. The last could be a model fractional farthing, either and 8th or 16th, not seen a 18th. I have a similar thing. On the obverse is a baby's head with the legend HRH ALBERT PW, and the engraver's initials below, on the reverse it simply says 12 PENCE MAKE ONE SHILLING. It's copper, a little smaller than a 5 pence but thicker. I used to have two, identical, but I lost one of 'em.

No problem - I used to live in Cirencester, and have excavated on Roman digs there too. The local lore is "Dig in your back garden and before long you will turn up a mosaic", and that's not so far from the truth. I'm wondering if you need to bother with farmers? In Ciren, all you need is any old grassy bank, or bed of nettles, or riverside walk, or deserted garden or other property, and just take it from there. If you're really serious, get some advice from the Corinium Museum in the town centre, they will have experience of what you're asking. And while you're in there, look out for a bronze clasp containing a set of manicure instruments in perfect condition - I found that!

Actually, the 1919KN has the same red colour too - I think Kings Norton used a slightly different metal alloy which made the blanks turn out that colour. And you will see the same colour on some RM pennies from 1912 to 1919... coincidentally the period when Kings Norton supplied blanks to the Royal Mint. The Heaton pennies also have some appalling quality strikings too. My 1919H is EF for circulation (this is obvious from the reverse, and from the obverse legend), but the portrait has hair detail that would barely qualify as Fine. I think it was maybe because the Heaton and Kings Norton mints used dies way beyond the point at which the Royal Mint would have jettisoned them; or maybe the RM supplied x number of dies and said "we need y number of pennies from these".

If you were to get any decimal proof set, then I suppose the 1971 was intended to be the official issue and there weren't any immediate plans to add to that, well not for about 3 or 4 years anyway! (but I still think the 1972 has a certain je ne sais quoi about it...). And I do believe that the 1971 sets predate (not literally ) the 1970 sets?

Very good luck with the bun journey 1949! I have few of the rare varieties, if any, - not even an 1865/3 (I'd like one in VF at a reasonable price but they don't come up too often). If you're after quality first and foremost, then I would begin the hunt starting from 1883 - 1894, where you can get specimens in EF or better at very reasonable prices. Also, 1860 - 1863 are fairly easy too in good grades as long as you don't go for the rarer varieties.

It depends : if these are raised cracks, then yes they are die flaws. But if they are surface cracks, then it is most likely the inferior metal used for the blanks in wartime (for similar reasons the tin? zinc? content was reduced for pennies and ahlfpennies giving a different appearance when they wear).

No, I think you're on a loser here VickyS - the wide date / narrow date bun pennies are so obvious (not remotely like border teeth - we're talking huge difference in date spacing), that most people would / do notice them even if unaware of which are rare. These date spacings are far more noticeable than, say, the tide height on a 1902 or 1895, the single or double exergue line on a 1940, the two different 1953 obverses, and pretty much nearly every bun variety.