Nick

The biggest problem though is reflected light from the slab. The best way to avoid that is to ensure that the slab is precisely 'face on' to the camera. I routinely take pictures of slabbed coins without any issues.

I believe that the usual cause for these second-chance scams is the real seller's eBay account has become compromised (probably via spyware of some sort) and therefore the scammers have full access to the seller's details of past buyers.

In Davies' book there are two die pairings for 1868 sixpences 2+A and 3+A with the 2+A being a bit scarcer. I've seen quite a few examples of 1868 sixpence, but never seen a 2+A. Davies suggests that die number 7 is a 2+A, but the only dn 7 that I have seen was a 3+A (although it is eminently possible that both 2+A and 3+A exist for the same die number). Does anybody have any information on the 2+A or which die numbers it has been seen on?

What in - Eddie the Optimist's price guide? £10 BU in CCGB 2010. May i draw your attention to the small fact that we're now in 2013 Peck. No womder we never see any recent purchases by you if you're bidding on Coins with outdated prices. I'm not saying it will be fantastically risen, but you need to update your Library a little, maybe Buy CCGB 2013 at the very least (scrooge) Spink 2010 had the 1942S as £15 in UNC, in Spink 2013 it's £25.

Who's WE exactly? Just curious, are you another auction house? London Coins. It's a direct quote from the lot description.

You can PM me with the details if you would like. Ah. That probably doesn't help if it's the pasting that is causing the trouble.

You can PM me with the details if you would like.

Welcome to the forum, jaggy. Always nice to have another sixpence enthusiast on board. An 1868 in UNC is definitely something to cherish, 1868 is certainly in the top 10 rarest years for Victorian sixpences. Many thanks for the welcome. I built up a small collection of sixpences in the 1980s and early 1990s. Then career and work intervened. I was transferred to New York but my coins didn't follow me until I retired two years ago. So now my plan is to resume building the collection. Of course, social media, message boards, online photos and internet auctions didn't exist when I was last active in this hobby so there is a new environment to get used to. Just seeing if I can make this photo thing work: I have a decent camera but do not have a macro lens for it. Not sure if that is a good investment or not. Works just fine and you got it right first time! Impressive. Just to clarify, the posting size limit does not apply to externally hosted photos, so you can post as large and detailed pictures as ImageShack, PhotoBucket etc will allow. Edit: You beat me to it by posting your larger photos. Lovely sixpence BTW.

Firstly, you will need to register with PhotoBucket. Once you have done that you will need to login and then you can 'upload' photos from your PC to your online library. Once you have the photos in your online library, selecting one - you will see the links generated for you by PhotoBucket. Click on the 'IMG code' link and the link will be copied into the paste buffer - you can then paste it into a forum post using <Ctrl>v or using <right click>Paste. If you want to check whether it works, use the 'preview post' button before you press 'add reply'.

Looking forward to seeing the products of your homework already...

Welcome to the forum, jaggy. Always nice to have another sixpence enthusiast on board. An 1868 in UNC is definitely something to cherish, 1868 is certainly in the top 10 rarest years for Victorian sixpences.

We each collect what we like and it makes us no better, no worse than the next man or woman - just different. Well done on having an UNC jubilee 1893. Sadly, my pockets are nowhere near deep enough for one - even if one was available. If you follow ESC and buy the updated edition when Spink publish it, I suspect you'll find most of the Davies varieties (and some new ones) will all be in there.

Hi, 1868 obverse 2 I know to be found on dies 1, 4 and 9 so far (I havent seen a die 7 with obverse 2 but I own one with obverse 3). These numbers also appear with obverse 3, which have all of numbers 1 to 17. Thanks for the reply and the information just.me, I was beginning to think that I was alone in having an interest in Victorian sixpences. I will have to keep my eyes peeled for an obverse 2 1868 sixpence.

You could try looking in the archive section of London Coins - they have sold lots of banknotes.

Best not to think about it.

Happens to the best of us! That's my bloody photograph That's the one thing that eBay are hot on. If you report the seller as using your photograph without permission - they will remove it pretty smartish. After all, it's a breach of your copyright.

Have you got a theory ? The only thing I can come up with, is that the reason for farming the mintage out to Heaton was the extensive work being done at the Mint (electrification?). Maybe the London pennies mintage was simply to test new machinery, and either was supposed to be melted down or, being kosher pennies, were released into circulation on the grounds that no-one would notice. Or maybe the 1882 (no H) pennies were produced at the Royal Mint in 1881 or 1883.

Just seen it in my catalogue. Absolutely stunning. Unfortunately, Neil doesn't put the new stock on his website for a few days, so we'll have to wait a few days to see a really good pic of it. edit: that's if it's not already sold by then !!! The coin in question is now on their web site, and described as 'Choice EF+/GEF pleasing and problem free.' Doesn't look quite as nice as it did in the catalogue. Don't think I'll be handing over £5.5k for that one.

Whilst NGC usually get it wrong to the benefit of a sharp-eyed variety collector, here is one that would certainly disappoint if you believed the attribution. Despite the crap pictures in the listing and on the NGC website, with a bit of magnification it is just possible to see that the J.E.B. is below the truncation and not on it.

On the nail, Pies. Although the differences between the two 1896 halfpennies that Scott highlighted in another thread are VERY slight, they are deliberate. Whereas the 1881 xi/ri florin, although recognised in all the literature as a variety, is technically an error. I'll keep asking the Why question though, particularly with micros like the 1896. Why did they make those tiny changes? Where do mules fit in then? Variety or error?

There are varieties for each and every 1953 denomination so they are all worth examining.

Duplicate post.

It looks more like a specimen set than a proof set as described in the listing. Either way, still a good price.

The wreath crowns were minted for collectors, so most won't have circulated. The half-crowns were minted for circulation, so most will have. Also, you cannot tell from the mintage numbers whether the coins minted in 1905 actually bore that date.

I would have expected more than that, £5.5k is just over Spink EF price. A genuinely uncirculated 1905 halfcrown being auctioned at a top London auction house would easily hit £10k or more.