Accumulator

I did notice these rather glaring gaps too. The collection was obviously put together in the 1960s, judging by the provenances quoted. I imagine that the 'lady' had inherited (though that may be seen as a sexist comment ) and possibly some of the star pieces had been removed at some point. Other omissions include a 1918H and 1919H, though prize coins like the 1919KN remained. I'm sure Spink would know the story. Have paid today, so waiting for my coins to arrive.

I don't yet have a 5 + G on my site, but if you could post pics I'm sure we could help.

Really? I'd not realised that was even known about pre-1971. Put it this way, I never saw it listed in a price guide until either the 80s or 90s. It wasn't in Seaby, or the "blue pages", or Coins & Market Values. I wish I'd not had a clear out of old books a few years back! While I'm not sure that 'Check your Change' (when it was 4" x 3" approx. in size and had a chessboard pattern on the front) listed it in the late 60's - early 70s, I do know that it was included in the competing pocket guide, whose name I have completely forgotten! Someone must have an old copy of this? Interestingly, from memory, it was the only variety of penny listed for the 20th century other than the H's and KN's. Strange I know. The guide was issued annually as a single volume, had a colour cover and was slightly smaller in size. It definitely wasn't in C.Y.C. - that listed almost no varieties at all, except the H KN and ME (from memory). I'm not sure what the other guide is you refer to; I do have a 1968 colour booklet with prices, but it contains some terrible inaccuracies, the most notable of which is a failure to differentiate the copper and bronze issues of 1860!!! and it doesn't include the 1922. But I'm not sure the 1922 variety was widely known in the late 60s? As I say, it didn't feature in the main guides and catalogues of the time and wasn't mentioned in adverts, nor in Coin Monthly articles. I'm absolutely certain it was listed in the other small pocket-sized price guide from the late 60s-early70s. Someone must remember it? The colour of the cover changed each year. I had an old copy until a few years ago but unfortunately had a clear out and it went I'm a bit of a student of coin prices and price guides from the 60s onwards. If you should find out what this other guide was, I'd love to know. (You're not thinking of COINS & MARKET VALUES, are you? That was an A5 size booklet with a glossy cover, published by Link House - it was once the COINS & MEDALS annual, but became an independent guide possibly in the early 70s. That came out each year, and its prices were always quite modest compared to Seaby/Spink.) If only I'd not thrown them away! This guide was slightly smaller than Check Your Change and about the same thickness. It was cheaper as only a single volume was needed, unlike CYC. I'm sure it was available in WH Smith. The two I owned had yellow and aquamarine covers with full colour coin photos on the front, but were monochrome inside. I had a feeling the name started with 'Know', as in Know your... money, change, coins, or whatever, though I may be wrong.

Really? I'd not realised that was even known about pre-1971. Put it this way, I never saw it listed in a price guide until either the 80s or 90s. It wasn't in Seaby, or the "blue pages", or Coins & Market Values. I wish I'd not had a clear out of old books a few years back! While I'm not sure that 'Check your Change' (when it was 4" x 3" approx. in size and had a chessboard pattern on the front) listed it in the late 60's - early 70s, I do know that it was included in the competing pocket guide, whose name I have completely forgotten! Someone must have an old copy of this? Interestingly, from memory, it was the only variety of penny listed for the 20th century other than the H's and KN's. Strange I know. The guide was issued annually as a single volume, had a colour cover and was slightly smaller in size. It definitely wasn't in C.Y.C. - that listed almost no varieties at all, except the H KN and ME (from memory). I'm not sure what the other guide is you refer to; I do have a 1968 colour booklet with prices, but it contains some terrible inaccuracies, the most notable of which is a failure to differentiate the copper and bronze issues of 1860!!! and it doesn't include the 1922. But I'm not sure the 1922 variety was widely known in the late 60s? As I say, it didn't feature in the main guides and catalogues of the time and wasn't mentioned in adverts, nor in Coin Monthly articles. I'm absolutely certain it was listed in the other small pocket-sized price guide from the late 60s-early70s. Someone must remember it? The colour of the cover changed each year. I had an old copy until a few years ago but unfortunately had a clear out and it went

I'm afraid I suffered from premature salivation. When I saw the fairly lengthy run of bronze halfpennies, I thought I might have filled a gap or two, but the gaps remain. There were a couple of nice W3 farthings in Warwick & Warwick last week around the EF mark. Ex Brooks too. PS. Based on some of your posts, your money should be safe under the mattress. Don't want to go there - God knows what one might find. It was interesting to note that the bronze was all sold under the heading of the 'property of a lady'. As far as pennies were concerned anyway, there were no 'competing' coins elsewhere in the sale.

At least my 1827 isn't pitted, but it's no beauty:

So which one didn't you buy? None of the above. All a little too rich for me on the day. I was quite pleased with an 1912H, catalogued as full lustre, almost uncirculated with an estimate of £150-£200 which I picked up for £110. Certainly better than my existing one. Other than that, just a couple of nice bun heads.

We need photos!

Really? I'd not realised that was even known about pre-1971. Put it this way, I never saw it listed in a price guide until either the 80s or 90s. It wasn't in Seaby, or the "blue pages", or Coins & Market Values. I wish I'd not had a clear out of old books a few years back! While I'm not sure that 'Check your Change' (when it was 4" x 3" approx. in size and had a chessboard pattern on the front) listed it in the late 60's - early 70s, I do know that it was included in the competing pocket guide, whose name I have completely forgotten! Someone must have an old copy of this? Interestingly, from memory, it was the only variety of penny listed for the 20th century other than the H's and KN's. Strange I know. The guide was issued annually as a single volume, had a colour cover and was slightly smaller in size.

I'm another one who started collecting from pocket money change in the late 60s. If only I'd know then that grade is everything, rather than just focussing on getting one of each date! Occasionally, when money was tight as a lad, I sold a few of the higher value coins to buy trains or whatever but decimalisation stopped that from the 70s. I still have most of the coins, though as it was much cheaper to collect bronze I have far more of these. I never bothered with the decimal coins, apart from the obligatory year sets which I still have. As for a favourite, it has to be the 1922 penny with a reverse of 1927. I found it after searching thousands of pennies and it cost me just a penny!

Roman hoard in Jersey

....but every now and again the beauty of a coin catches your eye. This coin does that for me.

logically there ought to be 1915 recessed ears without the chipped tooth, yet to find one though! I suppose it's always possible that the RM used the chipped tooth as a positive ID to test how the 'recessed ears' fared in circulation? In that case they would all be of the chipped variety. You could always ask the Mint museum if they have a matrix or die to check this out. I could do one of 1949's Freedom of Information requests! I must get around to it at some point as the results would be interesting.

logically there ought to be 1915 recessed ears without the chipped tooth, yet to find one though! I suppose it's always possible that the RM used the chipped tooth as a positive ID to test how the 'recessed ears' fared in circulation? In that case they would all be of the chipped variety.

The 1943 three pence stands a chance, but only if it's a silver 3d and in high grade, and even then we're not talking megabucks! Damn! Couldn't they have found a non-recessed ear variety to engrave?? That'll be the exceedingly rare recessed ear variety without the broken border tooth then? I have no idea? It's a recessed ear anyway. I believe current wisdom is that all recessed ear pennies from 1915 & 1916 have the chipped tooth by the I of BRITT. I searched this forum and noted you had posted your own 1915 example which also exhibits the chipped tooth. There maybe those that don't, but certainly VR Court doesn't mention any.

Damn! Couldn't they have found a non-recessed ear variety to engrave?? That'll be the exceedingly rare recessed ear variety without the broken border tooth then?

What do you make of the toning on this coin? I just can't get over the feeling it's totally artificial, but otherwise a lovely penny.

After communicating with Michael Gouby recently and looking around his website I came across this lovely story. Not many of us have songs written about our lives (even if they're not entirely accurate)!

I agree than one can take steps to make it more difficult for 'the state' or other agency to track our every movement BUT why should we have to? The mass of information collected is so great and so diverse that none of us is likely to remain hidden for long unless we individually make it our life's mission, and who has the time and energy for that? Am I really alone in seeing a worrying trend in which all but the most determined of us will eventually lead a life in which our every movement and communication is tracked? Remember how this thread started. Did most of us even know that smart phone pics contained date, time and location information? How many of us read Google, Apple or Facebook's privacy policy ('privacy' is a joke). This recent article about Google's StreetView is just but one example of what is happening around us. Yeah, but you're not acknowledging my main point : there is SO MUCH data out there, no-one gives a sh*t or has time & resources to go through it all, UNLESS you're a suspected terrorist. And if you are, then I'm reassured that the security services and Special Branch find it much easier to track you down and stop you. For the rest of us, they don't have time; they don't have resources; they really don't care. I accept the specific point about terrorism but think you're failing to recognise the more general direction in which society is moving. There are many examples, outside of terrorism, where the state has shown it does give a s**t and one government department has accessed data held by another unrelated department and used it for its own purposes. Maybe that doesn't bother you, but I honestly think its naive to believe we are not on a slippery slope in which personal freedom and privacy will be the casualties.

I agree than one can take steps to make it more difficult for 'the state' or other agency to track our every movement BUT why should we have to? The mass of information collected is so great and so diverse that none of us is likely to remain hidden for long unless we individually make it our life's mission, and who has the time and energy for that? Am I really alone in seeing a worrying trend in which all but the most determined of us will eventually lead a life in which our every movement and communication is tracked? Remember how this thread started. Did most of us even know that smart phone pics contained date, time and location information? How many of us read Google, Apple or Facebook's privacy policy ('privacy' is a joke). This recent article about Google's StreetView is just but one example of what is happening around us.

Surely she meant to say (new) 'wife' not life, John?

Don't worry, I'm not a mason! What I'm saying is this. Unfettered opinion and genuine freedom of speech is being slowly but surely sidelined from mainstream communication and everyday life. This results in it being forced 'underground' and nowadays appearing on the nether reaches of the internet. The government is clearly not happy with this situation and has demonstrated every intention of wanting to police all such communication (witness the recent moves forcing ISPs to make data available). That's one step closer to allowing governments to open our mail, in my opinion. Whilst I most certainly don't agree with many opinions expressed, I will fight for the right to express them (to paraphrase Voltaire). You have in effect agreed with me. Why should we all have to 'sidestep' monitoring in everyday life. The UK is already the most surveilled country in the industrialised west, by the government's own admission. Ah, I see what you're saying. You're talking about the SOPA stuff (is that right acronym?). What you forget is this : if everyone who is worried about such stuff, whether or not they have anything to hide, set up several online identities, each one centred around a hotmail address containing fictional personal details, then anyone who was serious about monitoring us citizens would soon be chasing their tails. In actuality, if enough man hours were expended, such fake identities could be traced via injunctions served on ISPs (provided that the courts were presented with the evidence to furnish an injunction). However, this expenditure on man hours would entail more staff working on it than the entire Civil Service employs. For myself, I am endlessly grateful that the more limited effort that Government agencies expend, is to track down the activities of terrorists. Mike is quite correct. It only takes a little nous to sidestep a perceived lack of anonymity, and anyway the Government is neither interested nor has the resources to spy on the likes of us. As for people 35 or under, many hurl all their personal details into Facebook, so the lack of privacy there is self-inflicted and I have no sympathy with anyone who falls foul of scammers, government spies, or anyone else, if they don't have even the basic idea of personal discretion. I agree that may be true today, BUT the data is being collected and from more sources than most of us imagine (CCTV everywhere, Facebook, Twitter, border control, credit card use, mobile phone automatic tracking and use, Oyster cards for travel etc. etc. The list is almost endless and expanding daily). Whilst it would be impossible to provide enough manpower to collate and use most of this information it is inevitable that such work will eventually be undertaken by artificially intelligent computers. That really isn't science fiction! How long before a camera clocks you driving at 33mph on your way to the airport for a holiday and the passport check won't let you through customs until you pay the fine which appears on their screen? Or your Facebook account mentions support for the Freedom Party and you go on line to vote in the 2020 election but are automatically denied access for having unacceptable views?

Certainly looks that way Looks like sandpaper to me The only upside is that whoever did it got what they deserve. I.e. a massive devaluation of their asset.

Don't worry, I'm not a mason! What I'm saying is this. Unfettered opinion and genuine freedom of speech is being slowly but surely sidelined from mainstream communication and everyday life. This results in it being forced 'underground' and nowadays appearing on the nether reaches of the internet. The government is clearly not happy with this situation and has demonstrated every intention of wanting to police all such communication (witness the recent moves forcing ISPs to make data available). That's one step closer to allowing governments to open our mail, in my opinion. Whilst I most certainly don't agree with many opinions expressed, I will fight for the right to express them (to paraphrase Voltaire). You have in effect agreed with me. Why should we all have to 'sidestep' monitoring in everyday life. The UK is already the most surveilled country in the industrialised west, by the government's own admission.

20 bids and up at £642 ($1,000) with 2 days still to go. I just don't get it.