azda

I don't know. But it occurs to me, what's the point of designing a system of classification and then publishing it for everyone to read about if not the hope that people will find it of assistance? The assistance element would be if you had an unclear 7/6/5 date, for example, you could hopefully find a 6/5 die to match and confirm, or quite simply being able to rule out an overmark because you have found the die match in the 'solo' marks, meaning you can give it the full BCW title! And surely, part of finding something useful will be that you will want to adopt it yourself, no? This is certainly the case with collectors of the shillings of Charles I, in that Michael Sharp's system is much more useful than Spink's numeric one (such as S.2793 which doesn't really differentiate within a type group) or Grant Francis' (1b2 etc ..) And Michael's introduction to his paper seems fairly clear that he designed his system for reference and in the hope that it could develop if any further types or varieties were found. The fact that we call a coin Sharp C2/6 effectively gives MS credit. Similarly it seems to me that by using BCW (or Peck or Spink or Freeman etc) notation we are acknowledging their work. But can I publish material stating "BCW Shilling A-b (Die G1)" with the G1 being my own extension to their cataloguing? As to a new system, while it's your area and you have the expertise, not I, my personal feeling would be that if BCW classifications are adequate, why re-invent the wheel? I'd love to use BCW, it's a superb system, just uncertain whether I can or not? My thoughts on a new system were about avoiding red tape (if there is any) That's what Roy Osborne tried to do (again with the Charles I series) but to be honest he went into so much detail that the result is just unwieldy and inelegant. While it can be helpful if you can't access or send a photograph, but want someone to be able to recognise an individual coin by description (down to the style of harp and beard shape), for the most part simplicity equals functionality. IMHO . Thanks, Richard! I have marked above in your text, just because it would be simpler to follow (I often think it can look rude, you know it's not)! I guess my key point here is, can you use the numbering systems of Freeman, Spink, BCW, Sharp, etc. (and add to them using brackets) provided academic acknowledgement is given? Whilst I believe it's courtesy to contact the authors of these works, notwithstanding their endorsement would be an important part of the process, and not to mention I'd feel it akin to meeting Keira Knightley should either BCorW as much as give a passing interest in what I am doing, I wonder if it's legally neccesary? Essentially, what is the correct process/etiquete/presentation when taking a BCW Shilling A-2 and sub-dividing it by the 10 different dies that potentially make it up? Do I have to get consent (other than as a courtesy)? Can I numerically add to their system without consent (if clearly and academically noting the division)? Have a look at Chris Perkins book CCGB. Chris adds peck and freemans if i'm not mistaken. He's not making his own numbers to add to his book, just a reference for people who bought his book. In time, all these books will inevitably need redoing, some form of reworking because authours pass and more discoveries made, such as ESC which i think Rob is doing something about? Its a daunting task, but one day will be needed eventually. Also with the aid of better photography and clearer images, people such like TPGs in America might just get a coin attribution correct eventually Just saying. My personal view is, stick at it Stuart, your references, pictures and knowledge will be helpful in the near future and a collaboration with Rob might be in the offing. How about a book on fakes...............Collaborating with Seuk

Why do you think he calls himself the ring master Stingmaster might have been more appropropriate

Lol, straight to the point as usual Peter As i mnetioned earlier, this just Shows that whatever a TPG grades at, it can be wrong and can be a fake regardless of what they say and should be very worrying for slab collectors. The American slab colectors should be the most fearful, they'll fall on their arse eventually. Mind you saying all that, Paulus bought that mickey mouse Northumberland earlier this Year, from an auction House via the bay, whatever happened about that Paul?

Why?

Its the wee elephant that does it Scott. P.s, i was only kidding about the bid

I have £756 on it

If you think about it logically, how would auction houses photograph major collections to sell if they could'nt take the pictures

Hilariously the seller has named himself The 'Ring' Master!! Yes, bend over after i've sold this coin to you, you have been screwed

Interesting that the main bidders have 91%, 30% and 15% bidding activity with this seller. Yep, same 2 for quite some time

1917 Sovereign, 5hrs to go...........55 bids so far, where will it go? http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/221105836262;jsessionid=C7F05995884D4B61D22629695A33845E?ru=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.co.uk%2Fsch%2Fi.html%3F_sacat%3D0%26_nkw%3D221105836262%26_rdc%3D1

Open a photobucket account and you can post till your hearts content

The likeness is uncanny Although he's now taken it down

Geez a CC for gunmoney??????????

Divemaster, it's nothing to do with you mentioning Proofs, it's to do with fakes and fake slabs that are kicking about........Calm down and take a breath.............

Totally agree Peter, many people here who give their expert opinions and don't take any BS either. I for one am glad i joined this very forum 2 ish years ago, it's been a great learning curve, although hammered still eludes me

I was checking through the James Workman collection to see if it had one for pies to compare and came accross that Blazing BU pullava that CC is now throwing into descriptions and got annoyed sorry. Anyhoo, nothing in the Workamn sale for a comparission for you pies. In their Edinburgh sale they also have an 1875H for 1350 quid, i personally think the one i sold was better for 400

I see CC are now using other forms of words to exagurate a coin such as "BMC 1670. F52. Dies 6+G. Blazing BU Full Lustre, exceptional......Ran out of things to say and now using ebay text

Just goes to show, if you're a British coin collector, and a fan of slabs, then go with CGS.............Simple, you just cannot trust an American grade or slab now as the slabs are now being faked to.........Its a small warning for the future of this hobby, also a good heads up from Stuart (Coinery) just goes to show that when you know your onions it's good knowledge, so hats off to Stuart for picking up on this coin

Luckily for the people living in the following countries - Africa, Russian Federation, Albania, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Republic of, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Svalbard and Jan Mayen, Ukraine the seller is not willing to flood the market with the copies. Leaving aside the question of NGC's competence which it appears is a given, I actually wonder about the seller here. We have a listing that is priced in US$. The location of the item is Paris. The ebay id has a stop in the middle of the name which is very reminiscent of a number of Yorkshire and Lancashire based purveyors of this crap who ebay refused to deal with. Can't help wondering if there is a connection. Lots of things have been bought from China too. Given the coin has been physically handled prior to submission and they obviously feel and look wrong, any person submitting a coin will know that a pitted flan will lead to an environmental damage label, so the only reason to submit to the TPG is to accord the coin a genuine status - something which the Negligent Grading Committee have duly obliged. It now has an official seal of approval. I always wondered why the American TPGs withdrew their guarantees on world coins, but I thought they would still guarantee a coin as genuine. Methinks a large pointy hat with a big D on the front is appropriate. Why has he submitted this to NGC if he's in Paris, PCGS have an office in Paris now, why not send it there? Is he actually Fu Man Choo posing as a Frenchie?UPDATE..........Coin has been taken down

Ah ha, so NGC know sweet FA about what they're slabbing in other words The saddest thing of all is that this is a glaring fake in-hand, really obvious edges, thicker, and soapy enough to take a shower with! You've got to feel sorry for the eventual new owner because, as you said (and maybe this is part of NGC's gameplan), who's going to break it out and 'chance-it'? Best you can do is watch it and see if someone buys it, or send NGC a detailed email about the slab and hope that they'll change the details on their website and list it as fake?

This is the worrying thing, they have! NGC actually have the image of the fake on their website. The only glimmer of hope they have is that this is the original the fakes were cast from. Actually it can't be the original, as my fake has more outer-edge beading at the E&T of Elizabeth...hung, drawn & quartered! I've just realised it's the ebay coin 30/06/12 from the thread "Elizabeth Fake Groat on eBay" http://www.ebay.co.u...cvip=true&rt=nc NGC are over for me! Our very own argentumancoins (John) has sold to this guy as well. Wonder if he's gonna sell it onwards, page 3 of FB (Ireland 1604-7 James I Sixpence, Rose mm, bent flan. (#261071692744) Nothing untowards with John i might add, just curious if he's buying to make more cash, or if he's selling off more fakes and replacing them with genuine and cheaper articles

Ah ha, so NGC know sweet FA about what they're slabbing in other words

So the New seller bought it, shipped to NGC had it slabbed and stuck another 250 quid on it?

I think the whole thing is more worrying for the slab collectors. They would'nt dare liberate it so really won't know any better and basically keep it until they in turn come to sell it. I just wonder now how fake slabs are going to affect the TPGs market and what they're going to do to combat it. Without pictures of authenticity plus serial they might be on a sticky wicket.

Wait Till Peckris finds that spelling error