azda

I've bought a few good bargains from this seller (probably from errors like this one), until I had a disagreement about postage! I bought two coins separately, about £20-30 each (Recorded postage charge on each)and, when I came to pay...Special Delivery charges for combining! I said, then please post them separately at Recorded Delivery, that would be much cheaper for me! I couldn't make them understand that I should BENEFIT from buying lots of coins from them, not be penalised, grrrrr! They did get sent SD, I didn't pay SD though! A shame for them, because a fair number of their coins would have burnt and died in the past, but for my enthusiasms (?spelling)! That's what you have to remember when you upset an ebay buyer, they could be making you money, even when they lose! I've used that seller.Never had a problem.If you didn't pay SD why get upset? I used that seller a lot so, in part, that was the issue! I could understand how the charge seemed logical for them initially but, in the context of my repeat custom, and email suggesting that it would be MORE logical for me if the items were posted separately (as I bought them separately, in the knowledge I'd be paying RD), in light of their desire to levy me 'additional' charges to combine! I'm sure if anyone bought a book from amazon, thinking the postage costs were fair, and then later went on to buy a second book, only to find they will now be paying nearly double postage on BOTH books, simply because they now weigh over a kilo when combined! Even if you argued the point and rightly only ended up paying the original charge per individual book, you'd still feel more than a little grumpy with the company principle, particularly if you'd spent a lot of money with them over the last couple of years! So, not upset, really, just irked by the tick-off on the invoice, and their general philosophy on the matter! The problem with the postage charge is, if a coin is over 46 quid, or you have bought 2 coins going over that price ebay and PP urge sellers to insure anything over that amount, its there to protect the sellers from ongoing fraudlent claims. I had 1 guy last week ask where his coin was, it turns out i had uploaded the wrong track number for the coin but still had the correct receipt for his coin, i checked it online and he had signed for it 4 days previously. I wrote back to him and said that it was my fault, i'd uploaded the wrong number and gave him the correct one and asked him why he tried to rip me off as it had been signed for 4 days previously, needles to say i never heard from him again and he's now been added to the arsehole list

Plenty here http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?searchterm=1739+shilling&searchtype=1&page=Pastresults

An 1895 Shilling, Large rose on the REV is R3 Rated by Raynor, can anyone explain why? I thought this would be a common coin, yet a 1708E* Shilling is only rated R2 After reading again, it's the 1896 Small Rose type.........Stand easy men.....

Really must get my eyes tested

I sometimes wonder if you read 2 forums at the same time Peter or if there's to much Bob Hope rolled up in the Cubans you smoke, definately of Jamacian origins though via Amsterdam lol

Looks like an upgrade is on the cards Peck?

Which edition do you have, |Dave? It's not in my 1974 edition. I'll report back tomorrow Peck, but its definately later than 74

I'll Never understand why anyone would slab such a common coin which costs more than the coin is worth. 1937 threepence, UNC spinks suggested price guide £12. This coin is AUNC so not UNC and its £45, really??? Its cost more to slab than its worth

Twas a typo, i did mean the ESC rayner

Lol. It shall be posted morgen, und danke für ihren Kauf

1895 i think the Rose size changed, so an 1896 to have a small rose instead of the larger type would have to be the wrong die used?

Yes Peck, i posted it to aid the topic. Did you just buy that Mr Accumulator? cos its gone now

A happy birthday to Mrs P. Was going to take a stab at warwick myself, but a few others came to light elsewhere

Its there in fleabay

My 1940 Single line

I guess that would depend on the comparative rarity of the one 1940 against the other! I think the modern micro-collector is a growing animal, and books like David's can only fuel the fire! For example, if you HAD one, and I didn't...well, you could still keep it anyways! It would only command a premium from someone who knew what they had, and advertised it as such. I've found a few but it took a while to get one in the condition I've pictured above. It's not for sale unless I find a better example 1863 open 3 Penny (described as such) offered on ebay, will it command a premium being that there is 5-7 known? Against a 1944 penny with a nats hair width in date from another 1944 regular penny, bets anyone?

I doubt it, mine was rather more expensive and clear date only

It's all about being a completist. As soon as a variety is found, everyone has a gap in their collection to be filled. As Peck says, they're not that rare (VR Court estimates 6:1 in favour of the more common variety) so can be picked up by the eagle-eyed at a very reasonable price. There's always a good feeling from paying standard money for a rarer variety. In that case i have an 1863 open 3 variety for sale 5-7 known

I'm not sure what sort of of Premiums People might think it would gain with a few microns wider in width, but for me its not worthy of anything other than a 1944 prices penny. I would'nt lose sleep at night if i did'nt have one in my collection, sorry, but each to their own i suppose. A missing colon maybe, but not a few microns in a date width on a 1944 penny.

Not sure it would command any premium though.

Horrible, definately seen oil somewhere along the line

It was supposed to be a Petition crown Peck

Hmmmm taken Down by the seller or eBay?

Fools and their Money are soon parted

You are correct about the word "hen" Debbie hen