DaveG38

...and The Daily Mail, which does all the European thinking for a vast swathe of the population. At least they do slightly more thinking on Europe than the 3 'main' parties So you say. I vehemently disagree. The likes of the Mail have turned this country into a nation of Euro-phobes since 1975 (when we collectively voted to stay in), fed by a swathe of urban myths typified by the famous Yes, Minister episode about the 'traditional British sausage'. Just to throw one single fact at you : we, in this supposedly enlightened economy, have the lowest proportion of retirement pension compared to average wage, of any EU member. That makes you happy? It doesn't me. Nor do pro-Murdoch rants from the red-tops. In 1975 we voted to remain in the 'Common Market', what we have nearly 40 years later is something very different. We have the EU, as the name implies, a Union. I certainly don't glean my facts from the likes of the Mail and I can't see how the pension arrangements of this country have anything whatsoever to do with our being inside or outside of the EU. I'm not saying our pensions are good (they're not), just that I don't want this country ruled by Brussels. I'm not alone in that. The best guesstimate I have seen for the legal impact of the EU on the UK is that some 10-20% of our laws now come from the EU. That doesn't include busines impacting legislation which is thought to be around 50%. The problem is that there are plenty of directives and other impacts on the way in which we do things, not all of them founded in actual laws, stemming from a Commission that is wholly unelected and answerable to nobody. My objection is that I don't want people outside the UK deciding what should and shouldn't happen here, because I have no say in electing those who are making those decisions. Within the UK I can vote the party out and if I'm lucky I'll get another bunch of useless politicians in power. I also strongly object to an organisation that is so corrupt that it cannot even get its own accounts signed off for almost any fiscal year. In any business, the directors would be investigated by the fraud squad, but in the EU this kind of thing is the norm. That stinks in my view.

Interesting question. I am collecting CGS graded coins and as far as I know they did not change their valuation by grade „across the board“. Generally speaking they monitor the prices achieved on the market and then adjust prices accordingly. On CGS forum meeting last year I have personally seen their impressive computer database were are the achieved prices added (as well as prices of raw coins). For example 1/2Crown 1836 valued by CGS in grade 80 at 1000,- pounds at that time sold in Lockdales sale 103 in May this year for £1580,- (double the estimate) and subsequently the CGS price on their website changed to 1600,-. In the same sale Ghotic Crown 1847 (in grade 78, valued at 3500,-) sold for £ 4200,- and is currently valued at 4000,- (interestingly in December sale this coin in grade 70 sold for £ 3900,-). I have noticed this as I have been bidding on this coins (unsuccessfully – needless to say). On the other hand I owe 6d 1879 No Die Number in grade 80 – the CGS valuation recently dropped from £ 300,- to 275,-. For me, however, still applies that value of my coins is what someone will be prepared to pay in the future. And I always buying the coins for the price I am happy with. When you say that CGS updated their valuation from £1000 to £1600 based on the Lockdales sale price, was that based on the hammer price or the total price with premium? For most auctions that could make quite a difference. And when you are considering 'valuation' you also need to bear in mind the commission you pay when selling at auction - does the CGS valuation take this into account in some way? It was based on the total price with premium (hammer 1350,-). Their prices, as far as I know, includes what I would call dealers or buyers premium (my guess is around 30%). So if they value coin at 100,- pounds they believe that the coin might be worth to the dealer or auction buyer (without premium) around 65-70,- pounds. You can see it on their auction estimates and quite frequently on sales results. Obviously you can always find exemptions in both directions as mentioned by Sword or in my recent post. This is just generally speaking. M. Ok, thanks for this.

Interesting question. I am collecting CGS graded coins and as far as I know they did not change their valuation by grade „across the board“. Generally speaking they monitor the prices achieved on the market and then adjust prices accordingly. On CGS forum meeting last year I have personally seen their impressive computer database were are the achieved prices added (as well as prices of raw coins). For example 1/2Crown 1836 valued by CGS in grade 80 at 1000,- pounds at that time sold in Lockdales sale 103 in May this year for £1580,- (double the estimate) and subsequently the CGS price on their website changed to 1600,-. In the same sale Ghotic Crown 1847 (in grade 78, valued at 3500,-) sold for £ 4200,- and is currently valued at 4000,- (interestingly in December sale this coin in grade 70 sold for £ 3900,-). I have noticed this as I have been bidding on this coins (unsuccessfully – needless to say). On the other hand I owe 6d 1879 No Die Number in grade 80 – the CGS valuation recently dropped from £ 300,- to 275,-. For me, however, still applies that value of my coins is what someone will be prepared to pay in the future. And I always buying the coins for the price I am happy with. When you say that CGS updated their valuation from £1000 to £1600 based on the Lockdales sale price, was that based on the hammer price or the total price with premium? For most auctions that could make quite a difference. And when you are considering 'valuation' you also need to bear in mind the commission you pay when selling at auction - does the CGS valuation take this into account in some way?

Hi Dave, that sounds like the one! Well done. Here's mine: Mmmm, that's very clear. My coin shows a shorter more blunt spur off the middle bar, but definitely a spur. And it has a very clear bulge under the upper loop of the '3'. I'm inclined towards it being the real deal, but still not 100%. Will have to try out the new camera and let you all see what you think.

Just received an EF 1893 penny and under a glass it seems to have a slightly odd spur off the centre bar of the '3' plus a small area of metal under the upper loop of the '3'. I'm thinking this might be a 1893/2 and in order to try and decide, I wonder if anybody has yet obtained a decent close up of the overdate. Michael Gouby doesn't have one on his site and the London Coins photos aren't enlargeable enough in order to be sure.

Ah, but mine is the signed with ISBN type.

Maybe firefox - I'm using versions 26.0.

Got a coin for Christmas for the first time - Elzabeth I milled 6d 1562 - excellent! Now to open the Dom Perignon. Best wishes to all.

That looks like a 1950 Proof set in the red box (centre right of pic) - if so then there's definitely some value there as these are popular.

11 bids though!

Another interesting aspect of this might be where the silver came from. For two decades, nearly, there was little, if any, silver issued, and then suddenly there's a large outpouring from the mint. I can accept that not all coins dated 1787 were necessarily minted that year, but even so, with the dearth of silver coins in circulation it does seem odd that there was this sudden unlocking of a vault full of silver. So does anybody know where it came from and why it was issued in 1787?

Perhaps we could get him on the £2 coin - just about anything or anybody gets their year of fame these days.

Sometimes it's not ancient information that comes as a surprise. I'm now 63 and my mother died 10 years ago now, but I've only in the past 5 years discovered that she was adopted and my entire life history of grandparents etc. has been thrown into disarray. Annoyingly neither she nor my father told me, even though a good many other family members on both sides appear to have known. However, I have delved long and deep into the records, plus I have put 2 and 2 together from information at my dad's house and I am pretty confident that I have tracked down who her parents were and what actually happened. It's not positive evidence, more missing evidence that gives the game away. That and a bit of creative thinking around the records that do exist. I still have to carry out an actual visit to the Staffordshire Records Office to see if I can gain definitive proof - that'll come next year sometime. And assuming I last that long, the 1921 census will be very helpful. Despite the secrecy, I'm not so much annoyed about the deceit, but rather I'm determined to find out what this was all about and see if I can overcome the veil they thought they had put up. I like a challenge!

Geordie, Thanks for the lead, that is a great site! Are we thinking MyHeritage is better than My Ancestry? Trouble is, I don't know what I want from a site?I went for findmypast.com for a few reasons. Firstly, they were the only site at the time (about 4 years ago) that offered access to all census returns - many other only gave you the 1911 census at a premium price. They also have a good many parish records in their database, and the number is increasing all the time - these can be cross-referenced against the Mormon database (free), so is very helpful. They also give access to military records and to the electoral rolls all included in their annual package. I've used them extensively, and although the annual fee might seem high at around £100 or so, when compared to the sheer volume of data I have accumulated and the costs that I would have had to meet if I'd travelled to Kew or wherever, I think I've had a pretty good deal from them. Conservatively, in terms of travelling etc. I reckon that my £100 fee would have been covered by a couple of trips to London at best. I calculate that I've had the equivalent of around £20,000 worth of data if you calculate that in days out to the records offices. Then there's the wear and tear on me of all that travelling plus time wasted and the delays in getting information, which mostly don't occur online, and as far as I'm concerned the online option has proved to be a fabulous resource.

Well, it's very nice to see people acknowledging that not everything in their collection is EF+. Sometimes, I get the impression that everyone on here collects only top quality material and anything less than UNC is be discarded (metaphorically speaking).

Garrett, The simple answer is no, some of us just collect by date. I started collecting all denominations by date when I could get coins from change and have continued to do so ever since. Although not all in top condition by any means, I find there's a certain satisfaction in date runs, especially when a long-empty gap gets filled. It was nice to finish a run, when for instance I recently obtained a 1686 halfpenny and completed my milled halfpennies. Ditto, a 1689 farthing to complete that series. Still working to complete the sixpences and shillings in the early 1700s, but it's coming along. There are frustrations though. Obtaining a 1839 or 1841 halfcrown will be prohibitively expensive. Ditto maybe a 1823 halfcrown first bust. Ditto a 1816 3/-. I console myself with the thought that I'm not a date collector of 5 guinea pieces!!!

I'm assuming that you've tried to find the Chairman and Treasurer - looks like Cecil Douglas and Michael Gas? - who are named on the above certificate. If not them, (it was nearly 50 years ago) then their relatives, who may be able to help. Even if they are dead, it isn't difficult to get hold of the death certificates to see where they died and who reported the deaths. This may then give you a clue as to where any living relatives might be. From there the electoral roll will likely help you. After that it's a bit of luck. If you need any help looking anything like this up then let me know, as I have full membership of findmypast.com and this gives me access to just about all their records. I've also done a good deal of research on my own family tree, but also for a few others, so I sort of know my way around the electronic material available online. Going to Kew or Companies House would be another matter for me!

He might just about break even if he interprets 'express delivery' to be first class, which is, of course, anything but 'express'.

Out of interest, how is 'bronzing' done? Is it a plating process, or a surface copper changing process or a striking process like Barton's metal?

Looks quite nice, but.........First item on ebay from this seller and from China. Assuming its a fake, what should we be looking for? http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Britain-1812-Georgius-III-DEI-DRATIA-SILVER-COIN-/281221504719?pt=UK_Coins_OtherBritish_RL&hash=item417a1b9ecf

A silly question maybe, but if you are based in Surrey, why are the coins in Cambridge?

Historyincoins is a reputable dealer as I recall, so I'd be surprised if it's a dud. Andrew Howitt I believe. Or have I got the wrong dealer?

What's the laugh?

I've just finished writing my 10th song and that's enough for an album - sounds very grand doesn't it? The real problem is that I have written the lyrics, the title and the backing. I've got a CD designer, a mastering company and CD production firm, but try finding a singer. It's becoming impossible even when offering financial rewards for learning the songs and taking them into a local studio to record. Even professional singers won't quote me a price for the work!! I'm beginning to think that it can't be done, not locally anyway. When and if I can get just one of them recorded, I'll post it here and you can all fall about laughing at it.

For me, I really like the leather box and I guess I would be prepared to pay £20 or £30 to buy one if I have a set in cardboard box. (Having said that, I do worry about the ribbons used to lift out the coins and the way they can tone the coins). I think sets sell for pretty much the same money regardless the type of box. In fact, I think one might even get more money by separating a set and selling the coins individually. I think my set is in the leather case, well they were before I put them into my cabinet. I'll have to go up into the loft and look it out, I have a bag with all the cases in somewhere. If mine were in the cardboard case I'd jump at an upgrade for £20-30. I think £50 would be closer. Fine - anywhere from £20 to £50 then. Considering the sets sell for well over £500 these days, I'm not really tempted to upgrade my card case! I want a case for the 1893 short set. Anybody got one spare?