markn

I agree with your sentiment about collectors educating themselves and being reliant on others for authentication isn't the best idea. However, there is no escaping the fact that a large number of collectors DON'T choose to do this and will happily spend money on essentially worthless coins. Witness a recent example in Australia where a supposed "numismatist" with deep pockets spend over $10,000 on a 'finest known' Australian overdate threepence that wasn't an overdate at all! He chose to not even bother viewing the coin despite being willing to spend $10k on it!!!! I am not sure of the market situation in the UK but down here in Australia at least, the majority of dealers are nothing short of scandalous in terms of their grading and their general numismatic knowledge. Dealers down here have made a lot of money selling to uneducated buyers who are simply buying for investment purposes and who have been (nothing more) than hoodwinked into spending thousands of dollars on cleaned, over-graded rubbish. This problem is only becoming worse and the better grading companies are at least helping to educate collectors down here as to what is a cleaned coin. That is nothing but a good thing as far as I am concerned. With regards to this coin I was perfectly happy that it was a genuine, uncleaned coin. But if I'd taken to it to any number of dealers down here they would have instantly undergraded it, called it tampered with, or dismissed it as worthless. By submitting it to PCGS I have an instantly more marketable commodity that I have a much better chance of realising the real worth of when I choose to dispose of it. As to the cost of getting it done, it wasn't exorbitant and the high Australian dollar has made it even cheaper.

No, they don't know everything and it's crazy to expect them to. That being said I know they do listen if you make contact with them and explain your reasoning and supply the documentation to them to support your arguments. I know of quite a few cases where they've changed their thinking about Australian coins based on local literature that has been sent over to them to read.

Have they recorded the coin as A over V or just simply recorded the date/type I had it slabbed under their error service so they've described it appropriately on the holder.

I sent it to them because they would have seen every possible method of either adding, altering, or manipulating mintmarks or other coin elements given the sheer value of some American varieties. I was mostly interested in getting them to validate that it wasn't something man-made as opposed to verifying it as a British variety.

For what it's worth I sent this coin to PCGS in the USA for authentication and to make sure it wasn't some sort of alteration or fabrication. They've sent it back with a grade of MS63RB, probably restricted by the scratch on HM's face. I'm sitting on it for now, completely unsure what to do with it.

Thanks for the replies on this guys, much appreciated! I found this auction result (from someone here in Australia too): http://www.ebay.com/itm/GREAT-BRITAIN-1854-HALFPENNY-EF-BETTER-VARIETY-/150639843588?pt=AU_Coins2&hash=item2312d59904#ht_579wt_1396

Hello from Australia. I found the coin below at a coin show this weekend and it is not noted in Spink (the dealer I got it from didn't notice it either). Can you tell me if it is a known variety? Any idea of the scarcity?

No, the camera and lens are not broken, it is in very very good condition It's just a matte white/grey colour that doesn't look like a circulation or proof coin of that year!

Hi There, Thanks for the reply. It's a Dinolite AM411T microscope, I bought it down here in Australia (where I am). It was a few hundred dollars but I think you can get them quite a bit cheaper online. Mark

I'm a new poster here so be gentle with me I picked up this 1887 shilling at a show on the weekend because it reminded me strongly of a 1902 matte proof set I'd seen recently. The coin is virtually a matte grey/white colour with absolutely no lustre at all and minimal bagging. I've examined it closely under a loupe and with a Dinolite looking for lacquer residue or some other explanation as to why this coin looks the way it does. Anyone here have any ideas? Here's some detailed images I took with a digital microscope (large images). Detail Image 1 Detail Image 2 Detail Image 3