Peckris

??? It's an ordinary commemorative coin. Here's one on eBay : http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/50-PENCE-COIN-2004-R...9#ht_500wt_1022

Mr Pain-In-The-Butt--Last-3-Seconds--Bidder must have taken the day off. It actually went for the £92 in the end!

Depends what you're talking about. What determines rarity is a combination of mintage, popularity, survival, etc. For example, Maundy sets are minted each year - around 1000 or so - which for a currency coin would be very rare. But because it's "only" Maundy, they fetch quite modest sums (there are many fewer collectors for them). The number of "undated error" 2008 20 pence pieces far exceeds Maundy, but look what they are selling for on eBay. A rough rule of thumb for modern currency coins would be that any mintage of less than a million makes it pretty scarce. But condition matters too : 1950s half crowns and florins were minted in large quantities but are often very hard to find in top grade, and can be worth up to £50 in mint condition, but nothing in ordinary worn condition. It's a more complicated subject than your question suggests.

Yes, I thought the date looked kind of 'in between' a wide and narrow date, but not enough to make me bid a fortune on it. You're right about the madness of pennies on eBay though. I got outbid for a high grade 1866 by Mr Pain-In-The-Butt--Last-3-Seconds--Bidder the other night, but if only I'd increased it earlier as it went for "only" £26, which is actually quite sane compared to all the others since then.

Actually scott, the 1902 Low Tide penny has never been rare (not like the halfpenny). It is scarce only, compared to the normal variety, but because it came out first, paradoxically it got put aside more at the time, so survives in fairly high grades more often than you might expect. The 1919H is another example of a coin that's common in low grades, but the 1919H does get rare in high grade, much rarer than the 1902LT. I suppose the LT is an example of a variety that just 'caught on' and became popular, but out of all proportion to its rarity. Strangely no-one, but no-one, seems to collect the varieties of 1956 halfpenny. I have to say I have never even seen one of them, and would dearly love to own one. They just never 'caught on', which is a shame really.

.........Not to mention scanning the lines of coins paraded in those "penny falls" machines in amusement halls, to see if there were any there worth trying to coax out (sad but extremely enthusiastic git that I am) On a saturday morning I would take my £1 2/6 paper round money and go into the Lloyds bank next to the paper shop and get £1 bags of 1d 1/2d etc until I could not make up the £1 any more Did you ever find any that were worth keeping, Gary ? (and have you still got any of them) Although my name's not Gary, I've only just caught up with the end of this convo. (By the way, I seem to remember those bank bags of pennies were 5/- not £1, I never had £1 spare in those days!). What pennies did I find? One 1953, two 1936 in EF, four 1946 mint dot, the usual hoard of 1922, 1926 (not ME!), and 1932, no end of Edw VII and Victoria Veiled Head, never more than AF, quite a few 1912H, a few 1919H, two not very good 1918KN, various nearly flat bun pennies ... nothing to disturb Glendinings over. I had slightly better luck with halfpennies : a 1938 BU, 1935 GEF with lustre, and 1909 GVF. I still have all the ones worth keeping, but have shed most of the dreck.

It is listed here (the reference you want is 1932.999.719) : http://numismatics.org/collection/accnum/l...available=false It gives the metal as AE (bronze) so it may be gilded bronze. Apart from the details listed, there is not much further information given (except that it does mark the Coronation) so you may want to research this yourself, using that link as a starting point.

That's odd, I see it fine. Anyhow, I'm sure Red won't mind me pasting his reply : It sounds as though your finds are mostly of historical interest only (unless - as Red says - their condition is really really top notch).

Also, I believe that the 1946 dot penny differs from a filled die in one very important respect : it's a raised flaw in the field of the final coin, rather than part of the design disappearing. A classic example of the latter was the 1961 halfcrown "E.F. designer initials missing" - remember that one? Now that's really gone out of fashion in a big way.

Scott, There are 13 minor types of low tide penny and just two for the high tide type, all based on the size, shape and pointings of the 0, 9 and 2 in the date. I have to say this is new to me. And having learned it, I really can't say I'm very much excited either. I believe many collectors have quite a low interest threshold for these very minor pointing varieties, as witness the almost total apathy towards : 4 different types of 1957 'calm sea' halfpenny various 1937 reverses 1928 silver 1905 penny reverses It's my own opinion that the more distinguishable a variation is, or the rarer it is, the more likely it is to become popular - which would explain the 1909 penny, the 1915 farthing, the 1920 penny (all hard to distinguish but rare). I did actually communicate with the seller of the 1903 penny ("Returns Not Accepted") to ask if he would make an exception as the picture wasn't clear enough to "tell which of two types it was". He replied saying I was "confusing the 1903 with the 1902 - there's only one type of 1903". I didn't push it, in case he started looking through reference books and relisting the item...

I'll stick to the lottery if you don't mind - the odds are better!

Apologies, old geek slang Been there, done that, got the T-shirt One useful trick of my Apple Mac is that I can selectively zoom the screen in on any part, so I've had some nice blurry screens full of particular coins! (A large blur beats a small blur hands down).

Yes I just spent a fruitless hour or so on eBay chasing some upgrades to my bun penny collection. These were nice grades, but rather 'glossy' (I got the distinct impression they had been rubbed or even lightly polished). They went for silly money in the end - more than Spink, many of them. I could understand the VF 1869, but the others?

Unfortunately I couldn't reject this one as the seller was one of those "No Returns Accepted" guys (I normally don't buy off them, but in this case I thought I'd take a chance). BTDTGTTS! frustating trying to decide whether an "I" points to a space or a tooth on a blown up photo, or else nice coin but no picture of the side I'm really interested in BTDTGTTS ?? I know what you mean about those damn sellers who only display one side though - they irritate the hell out of me. But I did get a laugh from the guy who couldn't tell the difference between 1927 and 1928 obverses, and put up one of each penny with the wrong obverse - I thought I'd found a rare mule ! ... briefly

Do try to persuade ChrisP to include it in CCGB! I've tried but so far, no luck (oh well, time will tell...). I did persuade Spink to include it in the Standard Catalogue, so that's good at least. Peckris, Chris has a copy of my book and I am happy for him to include any of the varieties I have described, either in CCGB or the new 'Peck.' I guess its up to him what he wants to include. One issue through is what constitutes a 'genuine' variety and what has been accepted as one, even though its technically arisen as a flaw. It may be that Chris only wants to include those types which have arisen through design changes or where dies have been repaired following damage. Sure, but if "The Bible" sees fit to include it ... and after all, CCGB does feature the 1897 version of "the dot", so for consistency sake it could go in I'd have thought. Still, as you say, it's up to him.

I just saw this on the front screen here in the Pre-Decimal Forums : Cool ! Or as they say in the States, WAY TO GO HistoriC !!

Do try to persuade ChrisP to include it in CCGB! I've tried but so far, no luck (oh well, time will tell...). I did persuade Spink to include it in the Standard Catalogue, so that's good at least.

BMC 2214. F 164A. Dies 1*+C. Near Fine, buckled. Rare - 17 bids and now up to £480 - anyone here ever seen one of these? Well its a fairly rare variety, although Freeman only classifies it as R5. The latest version of Freeman (2006) gives a price of £300 for one in fine condition, so allow a bit more for it now being 2009. However, would you pay £400+ for that coin in that state? I'm not even sure its as genuinely rare as is claimed for it, since Freeman R5 isn't exactly rare. There are probably a good many out there still in the boxes of unwanted well worn junk that nobody can be bothered to sort through. My recommendation would be for forum users to go through their boxes of junk - you never know. Are you sure it isn't that extra variety that Gouby records - the intermediate obverse? If so I understand it is VERY rare (Freeman R5 isn't really rare at all).

the easiest way to spot the reverses is to look at the wave below the shield on the right - if there are 3 ripples, it's Reverse B. Also you tend to find that Reverse A has hardly any rim at all and the teeth are disappearing off the edge, compared to Rev B.

For very valuable coins, I'm not sure I would take the risk, but otherwise it looks ok. And if you are really concerned, the home page of Predecimal sells accessories, including coin envelopes that the owner guarantees are PVC-free. You can place an envelope into a pocket in an album - that's what many people do. I've never found WHSmith the cheapest retailers - you could compare their prices with the home page here?

I got the information from Freeman.

Quick rundown : Obverse A (1911-13) : high but narrow rim, head in sharp detailed relief, colon after IMP points to a tooth, lower colon dot between GRA BRITT nearer the A Obverse B (1913-21) : lower but slightly wider rim, head less "sharp", colon after IMP doesn't point to a tooth, lower colon dot between GRA BRITT almost touches both letters, more border teeth Reverse A (1911-13) : very similar to final Ed VII reverse Reverse B (1913-26) : design very slightly smaller and rim slightly wider, more ripples above wave bottom right of shield, date numerals slightly closer, more border teeth; (Britannia's face, breast, shoulders and upper arms are nearly always not properly struck up on this reverse - due to the high relief of the obverse) It's important to note that these variations are very difficult to separate at a glance, especially if the coin is less than EF. The differences are quite subtle, which is quite possibly why they are not collected as enthusiastically as they might be. And as none of them is truly rare (like the 1915 TT farthing), they do tend to be overlooked. If you have a high grade 1911 and a high grade 1913-1926, you could use them for comparison. (You can see from this picture how difficult it is): (Oops sorry DaveG - you hadn't posted when I began preparing my reply )

The 1889 Crown in Fine condition is worth about £12 - £15. Yours is Fine.

£2 would be fair for that variety in that state - I would go for it scott! (I have a 1+A and a 2+B in high grades, so they are enough for me.)

And when you see that the standard annual and totally unnecessary proof set is now 40 quid... As for the price for 16 silver proof 50p pieces - £425 ??? That's some inflation when you realise that the silver proof anniversary decimal currency set (1996?) was under £100. And even worse when you realise that in 5 years' time, you'll be able to pick them up at auction for probably £250 - £300. Or less.