DaveG38

I'm not sure I agree that the impact of Brussels is just an urban myth, whipped up by the media. The amount of legislation that pours out is phenomenal and does have a very direct impact on the UK and its businesses. As for the budget audit fiasco every year, again that's not a myth, so I'm not very kindly disposed towards the EU. Perhaps the thing I object to most is the simple straightforward loss of sovereignty and the obvious fact that the EU is heading inexorably towards statehood. The latter is not something I would want the UK to subscribe to. The main reason is that the culture and political instincts of the UK and many of the European countries are totally different, which tends to mean that they can collectively impose their will upon us, whether we like it or not. As for what we get from the EU, I would like to see the 'real' figures that describe our relationship. Too many numbers that are questionable or are 'doctored' get bandied about, so I would like to a real dispassionate balance sheet before I make a judgment. However, the figures for the balance of trade deficit are official ones for 2005, and that does show quite a gap. When it comes to the French and Germans then I agree that they are probably exasperated with the wrecking of the Euro that Greece etc. have landed on them. However, the UK isn't in the Euro, so I really don't see any big deal in not being involved in whatever treaty the 26 decide to put in place. There will be a lot of time and trouble put in to writing this new treaty, which still doesn't address or solve the debt problem, and it may well be that we have better things to do whilst the eurozone try to put its house in order. I'm not putting money on a happy outcome to this for the Eurozone. In the case of David Cameron, I don't actually see that he had much option, faced with a demand to sign up or else with precious little negotiation from the Frence/Germans, and the problems with the eurosceptic side of his party on the other hand. Looked like catch22 to me. Heads he loses, tails they win! I also don't agree that the UK couldn't stand on its own two feet. I see this as the defeatist argument that can't countenance the idea that we have done it before and can do it again, and don't need the umbrella of the EU as some sort of protection.

Declan, Not sure I agree here, since there is no sign that any of these countries did anything other than fall into line behind the French and Germans as they were told to do. I can understand it for those in the Euro, since they are in the danger zone of the Euro meltdown, but not the Danes. I'm not sure I see what they get out of surrendering fiscal control when they have their own currency still.

I vaguely remember a similar situation with a bar stocked with lots of different single malts! On a serious note Britain needs to make its mind up, Join the club and play with the rules everyone else has agreed to, or get out. Sitting on the touch line complaining that everyone is playing football when we want to play cricket is nonsense David I have no problem with the principle of this, but I do with the practical applications. It seems that the UK does slavishly follow the rules (of which there are far, far too many), but then finds itself at a disadvantage because other countries don't. Then there's the problem of trying to get real reform in the EU. Almost impossible because of the vested interests of some of the players - France and the CAP for example. Then there's corruption and the fact that the EU finances never get audited and signed off properly - doesn't give any confidence at all in this as an organisation. Then there is the desire of the EU to milk the UK for all it can get - witness the transaction tax, which, whatever you think about banks etc. is no more than a means of getting the UK to pay a large portion of the bill for the borrowing of the other members of the Eerozone. Also the coming changes to pension funds which are likely to drive the remaining final salary schemes to the wall, all in the name of EU rules. Sorry for the rant, but sometimes I fail to see exactly what we get out of membership. Trade? Yes, but not that much when you consider the deficit with the EU was around £30billion per year in 2005. If we were not in the EU, I find it hard to see how they could stop trading with us, since it would be a case of nose cutting to spite the face. And if they did, there are some things that could be done to help - cancel the train contract with the Germnan company and award it to Bombardier for a start. Am I the only one whoc thinks that Britain is perfectly capable of standing on its own feet, repealing all the useless legislation from Brussels and becoming competitive again, selling into the wider world instead of worrying about the EU all the time? Aaah. I feel better now!!!

Best quote I've heard about the crisis (can't remember who it was) when asked about Britain being isolated, the interviewee commented 'What, isolated like the guy who missed the Titanic's maiden voyage?' From my perspective, the problem with the current situation is that, as Menzies Campbell commented, it takes two to negotiate and when you see Merkel saying, "We had to get some sort of agreement and we couldn't make compromises," it's pretty clear to me that the French and Germans had no intention of negotiating anything. In that situation, there was no prospect of any deal. It was a case of sit down and do as you are told or get up on your hind legs and say 'no', 'non' or 'nien'. Sadly it was the latter, but that's how things go sometimes. As a result, what they have is a convenient scapegoat in the UK. However, I have the feeling that it's still not going to be easy for them and I wouldn't put money on the Euro surviving with its current 17 + 9 countries for very long. How long will all the people of those states that are having to go through the real pain of austerity put up with being dictated to by others? For Greece, its decades and I don't see that happening. Nor for Portugal and once one leaves, the others will follow. Eventually, there will only be a core of states with the Euro and the rest will I expect return to their own currencies and will then prosper as in the past. In any case, what's wrong with managing our own financial affairs as opposed to having to submit budget proposals to an unelected bunch in Brussels, and to go cap in hand to be told whether you can afford a penny for the loo or not? Because this is what the sheep in Europe, including all those others who are not in the Euro have signed up for. Somehow, I don't think they realise what they have let themselves in for and will wake up one morning to the awful reality, particularly if the Euro goes completely belly up. Interesting times ahead I think.

As an Oxford man, I always like to remind people that Cambridge was founded by a bunch of Oxford drop-outs, so when it comes to the pecking order........!!

I've noticed a fair difference in the thicknesses of 5p pieces, but whether that is down to what you have seen I can't say. If the collar is slightly loose then you will get a higher rim. There are also differences in the 10p too. A 1992 I've got in my change at this moment is notably Thinner than the 2003 or 2010, though whether this is normal I haven't a clue. Further checks on a sample of 2010 5ps (5 actually) shows three rim thicknesses - narrow, intermediate and thick. Nothing rare then, but mildly interesting as the raised rim is very obvious even with the naked eye.

Hi all, Unless I have missed it being reported elsewhere, I think I've found a new variety of five pence piece (stop yawning!). The date is the 2010. I now have two types. When viewed edge on one is very clearly thinner than the other. When viewing the obverse, it is clear that the thicker one has the rim raised much higher than the other - ditto on the reverse. Also the obverse rim is wider on the raised rim than it is on the other type, but this is not the case on the reverse. However, the raised rim is very obvious to the naked eye on the reverse. I don't have access to my camera at the moment and scanning really doesn't show the differences up very well. If I get a chance I'll see if I can take a pic or two. In the meantime, has anybody else noticed these two types?

I can remember when I was a lad in the 70's my grandparents had a US airforce lodger who left behind a pile of playboy magazines 4ft high.I wanted them but my parents disposed of them. I wonder how much some of those would be worth now? The average going rate for 1960s/70s Playboy mags on eBay seems to be around £4.99. I've no idea of the price per foot in height!

Applicants can pick five universities to apply to. I think each of her choices has a good reputation and offers positives. Oxford has the advantage of being known worldwide, handy as she's doing languages and wants to travel. Plus accomodation is cheap(er)! Personally, I liked Nottingham as they seem to have thought more about how to arrange the year abroad and charge less for it. But in the end it has to be somewhere she feels comfortable, I guess and the few days spent at interview will give her a chance to find out a bit more from current students. I'm an Oxford man myself - matriculated in 1969 and went down in 1974 and, apart from Cambridge, I don't think that other Unis can hold a candle to these two. The reason for me is the college system, which makes each college a very personal and friendly place as compared to a large sprawling campus. Furthermore, it was a requirement for freshers to live in college in the first year, something again which bonds you to the place and the people in the formative first year. Oxford Uni IS largely the city centre and so you are right in the heart of things, plus there's access to the beautiful parks and the rivers etc. and many other facilities. It also has much rich tradition, something that may seem quaint and old fashioned, but is taken on board by students as a badge of pride - its difficult to explain unless you have been. Even the buildings inspire awe - my college was founded in 1314 and parts of it date back to the 1400s. Plus there's all the well known people who have gone before you - I was at Exeter and famous alumni included Richard Burton, Tolkien etc. In my first year I had the room previously inhabited by Tariq Ali - doesn't cut much ice now, but back then wow! Since then, I've done some courses at Kent Uni and believe me there's no comparison. So, tell her to go for it and remember that its totally unlike any other Uni.

I've heard anecdotal evidence about fake 1905 shillings where a 5 has been transplanted onto a higher grade 190x shilling which has the final digit of the date removed. So I would avoid any 1905 shilling where the position of the 5 looks a bit off, or has surface/tooling marks around the 5, or has heavier toning around the 5. There is one on eBay at the moment that I think looks a bit questionable. I just had a look on Ebay and there are several. The dodgy one wouldn't be the one for sale on Saturday at 1:24pm ? It certainly looks a bit iffy around the 5 itself. Some scratches, plus dark toning and the top arm looks the wrong shape to me.

I can never see the point of all those sellers who put 'happy bidding' on their listing. Wtf does that actually mean? I'm only happy when I've won something, preferably cheaply, so too much bidding would make me unhappy!

Is this one of these? http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/HENRY-VIII-GROAT-SILVER-HAMMERED-COIN-/290633233622?pt=UK_Coins_BritishHammered_RL&hash=item43ab1734d6

I don't think its anything more complicated than somebody omitted to type the 'V' between 'G' and 'F', especialy when you look at the estimate, which is likely to be on the low side at £1750-£2500.

The question is how you collect your coins. All of us are on a limited budget, it is just a question of scale. A low ranking local government worker from Steeple Bumpstead may have £1,000 to spend on coins; he could go for one corker or 10-20 middle grade coins. If he goes for the forer then he has a coin, the latter a collection, which would tell him far more about coins and history in general. Mid-grade coins may get hit in a recession but most of those collecting them aren't investors, so it is of little moment to them if they're in it long-term. And if he manages to hang onto his job through the lean years then he will be able to expand his collection exponentially. Collectors of low-grade coins can, in my experience, also be the elderly who are on a very limited budget and want an absorbing hobby for their twilight years - it doesn't cost much and can give many hours of pleasure. We are all different and there is no right or wrong way to collect. Just go with what suits you. Well, I'm in the middle grade category - that is, I'd rather spend £100 each on ten coins than £1000 on one top grade one. However, you also have to remember that price increases with age broadly speaking. So, I would expect collectors like me to mostly go for high grade 20thC coins simply because they are plentiful and hence fairly cheap, whilst 19th less so, and 18th C even less so. This means that I tend to have a grade gradient - my 1967 halfpennys are UNC, my 1884 is EF, my 1735 is VF, my 1701 is fine, but my 1689 is poor at best. It's not a hard and fast rule, but top condition older tends to be most expensive and if I want a comprehensive collection, then I still have to spend a lot more for a lower grade the older it gets. From memory the 1967 cost all of £1 whilst the 1689 cost £450. To have got a 1689 in NVF would have cost around £2500 or so, and so I have had to compromise on grade. What all this means is that, in my opinion, older scarcer coins in middling grades (GF-VF) will hold up in price because there are still plenty of collectors out there wanting specific dates to fill gaps and will pay a good price, even with a premium to get them. For instance, I still want a 1686 halfpenny. If one comes up in UNC (ho,ho) then its out of my league, but in GF I'm in the running and going for it, almost at any reasonable price.

The one from Sleedzef in Greek or whatever script is used has just reappeared and needs removing urgently as it is associated with a dangerous and intrusive site. My anti-virus software blocks any access to it automatically, but if anybody has a PC running without the latest versions of anti-virus from a reputable supplier then whatever you do, don't try to enter the site using the link in this post.

I'm a date run collector of just about every denomination, so that means eventually I get to a point where I'm waiting to fill that nagging gap in a series. In just a few odd cases, there are some coins I don't think I've ever seen for sale - anywhere! For instance, I need a 1853 Groat. I know the mintage is low and may not relate to the date on the coin, but has anybody ever seen one? Ditto the 1728 shilling with the roses and plumes reverse. Spink always says that the plain reverse is the rarer (and more expensive) but I've seen loads of plain ones in varying condition, yet never a R&P type. Do they actually exist out there? I wonder and if so why don't they come up at all. And finally, the 1686 halfpenny. The 1687 is scarce but not too difficult and I managed a 1685 of somewhat dubious date, but never a 1686 - again where are they all?

£22 postage looks a little excessive!!!

LOL To be perfectly honest the whole thing irritated the hell out of me years ago. Why, oh, why did we not go the whole hog and properly adopt the metric system instead of retaining mph, pints of milk and beer (isn't a litre of beer better than a pint? Of course it is!) I used to ask. But now I'm older I kinda like the eccentricity of a system based on 12s and body part lengths. I actually do wonder if it didn't keep us all more mentally agile having to work in feet and pints and ounces. And most certainly, as I watch for the billionth (US) time the checkout assistant looking to see how much change the machine says I need, I think we've gotten used to not having to use our brains. Whether £SD would make a difference I'm not sure. (LSD might!) Maybe there's a good case for cashing in on our british eccentricity and reverting to a monetary system nobody else uses? Then when the EU says "You vill be oving us der twohunnert million Pfunds" we can reply "so, that's ... (licks end of pencil and scrawls on back of ciggy pack) .. 400 Guineas, fifteen groats! No problem Guv, the cheque's in the post, or if you're willing to forget the groats you can have cash?" I'm with you all the way on the ability of checkout assistants and change. When I were a lad, back in the 60s and working for J Lyons, I often worked the till at the end of the long self-service counter. One hot august bank holiday monday, I was doing the lunchtime shift, when horror of horrors, we lost mains power. I've got a queue a mile long anyway, and now I've got to add up every tray in my head in LSD. So that's a steak and kidney pie at 3/11, a portion of chips at 9d, peas at 7p a cup of tea at 3/1/2, a piece of bread at 3d and butter at 2d, and then work out the change. And that's just one tray. The real problems came with the customer who suddenly said, 'put all three trays together'. Worked wonders for my mental arithmatic!!

I don't think that the coin market is much different from any other in real terms. back in the 1980s, an old nice condition V8 classic Aston Martin could be had for around £15K. Then suddenly during the housing boom and collapse the prices rocketed away, until wrecks could be had for £20K and a good example fetched £80K. The increase merely represented the entry to the market of investors looking for somewhere for their money, and as with coins, the better the example the higher the price. Those with sense knew it wouldn't last and sure enough by the turn of the century, prices were back to more manageable and sensible levels i.e. £15K again. Now, its happening all over again. A nice soft top in superb condition could have been had for £17K a few years back. Now its £60K. Once the latest financial crisis is over and investors return to the stock market for thei profits, the prices of V8s will again decline (and I might be able to afford one!). This won't happen any time soon, but will sometime in the next 5 to 10 years in my view. It will take that long to stabilise the UK economy and to turn round the current financial mess. As far as I can see this pretty much mirrors the situation with coins. At the moment, investors are buying into the hobby. Many may stay, but many won't. They'll take a profit and move on. Some will sell on the downturn in prices and make less than they expect. Others will hold on and lose considerably more. So, I expect prices to rise for a few years yet, but once the world's finances are sorted out then prices will start to decline. The only factor in here that is difficult to figure out is what impact the global reach of the internet will have. It may be that this will stem the loss of investors with a wider range of genuine collectors and this may help to bouy the market. Time will tell.

And don't forget the guy who can buy anything at any price and to whom a huge differential makes no difference. For instance, the guy who has just won £100 million can buy any coin he likes and if he pays over the odds well he won't worry about that either. It's silly money to you and I but not to him - its just indulging a hobby!

Post some pictures here. There are plenty of farthing experts who'll give you an opinion. Also of the letters from Peck and the RM.

My take on the current market conditions is that the general economic situation means that for the many ordinary' collectors cash is being squeezed and so purchases have to either be fewer or in a lower grade. For the series collector who 'must have' a particular coin to fill a gap, subject to the above, price probably isn't so much of an issue. And for the wealthy, and this must include 'investors' then price probably isn't an issue, but condition is. The net result, if I'm right, is that top grade will hold its price and maybe even accelerate, as will rarer pieces even in lower grade, but for more run-of-the-mill dates in middle range condition prices will likely stagnate at their present level or will ease back as the 'ordinary' collector slows down on his purchases.

This might seem an odd question, because despite having a large collection of coins, I have never attended a coin fair. I am considering going up to Coinex in London next week and wondered if anybody has any general advice about it. For instance, now that the cheque guarantee card has been withdrawn, cheques are more risky so are traders less likely to take them? Is cash best, but if so carrying a couple of thousand (or more) might be foolish? Do dealers take cards using the stand alone machines or connected to a phone line at the hotel? I guess you get the idea. Also, how busy will it be? A rugby scrum or a pleasent experience? At my age the occasional sit down is nice - any chance? And possibly most important, is it really worthwhile or is it masses of the usual material. In other words, am I likley to find any of the missing rarities I need or is this pipe dream - e.g. a 1686 tin halfpenny - or even a more minor rarity such as a 1728 R&P shilling? Thoughts and advice much appreciated.

I don't think it does, Gary. Obverse 1 & 2a do, but not obverse 2 for 1903. See Gouby's website. Reading Gouby's site I take "1903 to 1906 - 3 Obverse dies" to mean that it does. So is the general concensus that it doesn't Mr Groom's book only refers to 1 and 2a - not straight Obv 2 Declan, All I can say is that I never came across any reference to obverse 2 being found on the 1903 shilling whilst researching the varieties book. However, I also never came across any references to varieties for the 1907 to 1910 series of shillings, yet an examination of a fair number of these showed that there are certainly differences between them for the same date. Mainly these relate to the shape of the legs of the 'R's in 'BRITT' and 'EDWARDUS', so I guess it may be possible that there is a obverse 2 for 1903.

In the case of the 1693 you already had a guide for VF-gVF, so the only questions that needed answering were 'how many are available and what grades are they?' If all are similar in grade then a reasonable assumption would be the date of the last sale, the price achieved and a multiplier to account for across the board price changes since that date together with a mark down for the lower grade of this piece. If something is sought after (and it's probably fair to say a 1693 is sought after), then maybe half the VF price would be a reasonable target. There are more than a handful of serious farthing collectors out there, plus the esoteric always appeals to someone who wants a quality collection in numismatic terms. Not everything has to be in high grade to appeal if rare enough, though it does help if it looks ok. I would have thought £3-4K incl. premium would not be excessive. At £2K I would have been over the moon if bidding and won it. I know where you are coming from on the question of certain key dates, but the problem with these is that the price is likely to be determined by the number of serious collectors present on the day and hence volatile. On the plus side, if Spink quote say £300 for a coin in their annual tome and you know full well that they always exceed that at auction, then it's clearly time to monitor their website and the Circular closely as you may well pick up one cheaply. They may list higher prices on their site than those quoted in the book, but are unlikely to exceed them by a vast amount. Do the spadework and it will pay off. I would have a problem paying 4k for a coin in F when a GVF would cost 9k. 4k for a farthing and it would have to be unique (and have eye appeal) The grade was VF-gVF. I don't know which side was VF and which gVF, but I use the assumption you use the lower graded side as the base rather than the higher and with only a handful known, I think £3K plus premium would not be so far short of the mark if genuinely rare, after all it is only a grade up. It would need eye appeal though if low grade and certainly not have any faults. Personally I think 9K for a VF-gVF farthing is a lot of money anyway, but if that is where the market is then so be it. At the time, my thinking was that the price ratio of VF:F for coins of that age and general rarity e.g. the 1689 halfpenny or the tin farthings was around 4:1. on this basis a £9k coin in VF equates roughly to £2.25K in Fine, so allowing for premiums my £2K limit was around £2.5K actual which is over the 4:1 ratio. Allow too for the slightly higher grade of the VF coin and £2k looked about right to me. However, it wasn't to be. I'm not too worried though, as although I have a complete date run of farthings, I don't actually collect trial and other non-currency pieces, so I don't include Queen Anne even though they circulated, and this wasn't a currency issue albeit some obviously circulated. At the time of the sale it looked an interesting buy, but the shine went off it at £2k, especially when it's authenticity was a little unclear.