DaveG38

Personally, I don't give stuff for the grading system, as I am more interested in what the coin looks like in the hand. Obviously, the general F,VF,EF grading system, with qualifiers, is important as it gives an indication of wear and, hence, likely price or value, but beyond this I don't see any value to me in having a numbering system. I wouldn't care if a coin was a 54 or a 58 if the differences are so minute as to be difficult to distinguish them. What matters is how it looks and whether its got the qualities I want to see. One of these qualities is a lack of edge bumps, something I occasionally have to accept, but actually loathe in a coin. I'd rather have a VF coin without damage than an EF with edge damage. Ditto holes. Ditto bends. That's it. I feel better now! On a slightly different tack, I have never really understood how any coin from the distant past can be said to be in UNC condition. How does anybody know this for sure? How do you know it came straight from the mint to a collection and stayed that way through its entire life? We don't. What we mean is that there is no discernible wear and, therefore, it wasn't in circulation long. So that makes it A/UNC surely. If you then try to grade by number the minutest of imperfections then I just think it gets silly. In other words there aren't enough hours in the day or lifetimes for this. I know some people are terribly interested, but its not for me.

Sorry, I forgot to put the date up. Its nothing special - just a 1987.

Am I right in saying that all the post 1992 "bronze" is magnet attractive, whereas pre 1992, not at all ? Somewhere around that year, anyway. Up to 1992, all bronze coins 1/2p, 1p and 2p were literally bronze. In 1992, the Mint produced both the 1p and 2p in copper plated steel for the business strike circulating coins. However, for the uncirculated sets and proof sets, the mint used bronze as in previous years. As the bronze coins were only produced for the sets, it is unlikely that you might find a bronze 1p or 2p in change, even though some will have been broken up. For 1998, the Mint produced 2p coins only using both bronze blanks and copper plated steel blanks for circulating coins. The proportion is roughly 45%/55% steel/bronze, so it is much easier to find the two kinds in circulation. There are two tests. The most reliable is to use a magnet, when the steel type will be attracted and the bronze won't. The other lies in the colour of the coin. The copper plated type is distinctly pink, whilst the bronze is more orange. However, as the coins wear and tarnish this colour difference becomes more difficult to distinguish.

I'm still looking for a 10p and a 50p.

Do you think our Gordon is one step ahead of you Has anybody noticed the latest spin off from the 2008 error 20p? Namely the escalated and fantasy prices for the much scarcer 1983 twopence with the new pence reverse. A couple have gone up onto eBay yesterday, at, I think, £5,000 and £7500. Pretty obviously the owners saw the overblown hype about the 20p and some of the silly prices quoted and thought it would be a good idea to cash in with their 2ps! Won't be long before any 2p with the word new on it will be going for silly money I suppose.

I've just been reading a bit of Davies' excellent book on silver coinage, where he comments that the 1965 Churchill Crown was issued to commemorate the death of Winston Churchill and that his portrait was only the second commoner to appear on the coinage since 1066. Lawrence Chard, on the other hand, says that Churchill was the first commoner! So who is right? And if Davies then who was the first? I have racked my brain till it hurts and the only commoner I can see is Cromwell, although his status at the time suggest that as 'head of state' he was hardly as 'common' as the rest at that time. Any ideas anyone?

I thought the same, so I watched a couple of auctions, last night, with only minutes to go, on both the highest bidder withdrew within the last minute with the excuse 'wrong amount entered' Ah, so there's a 'fiddle' going on!!

Leave aside being gobsmacked at what is going on with this error coin, I am puzzled by the major differences in prices that seemingly similar coins are making. For instance, there is one on at the moment which is due to finish in 2 hours, which is currently bidding at £200 from 9 bids, yet there is another due to finish in 2 days or so, which is currently at £510 from 59 bids. There isn't a hair's breadth of difference between them, so I cannot see how the price difference arises unless its a case of 'fixing' the bids to push the market. Any ideas anyone?

Thanks all. I'll settle for Cromwell as the second commoner. Nice to think that the old grey matter can still function even if a bit slower than in the past.

I cannot believe what is going on on eBay at the moment. There are now 1530 items for the 'undated' 20p coin and some of these aren't even the error coin at all. For instance there is a 2008 new type 20p, accurately described by the seller, as having no date on the reverse (why would it) but with 2008 on the obverse and there are many idiots bidding it up to £50!!! Its a normal 20p and worth exactly that. Similarly, there's two 2006 20p coins, both attracting bids from multiple buyers, in one case over £30, and again the seller is advertising them absolutely accurately. And these examples are on the first page only. Goodness only knows how many others there are in amongst the 1530 items, but there are going to be plenty of disappointed punters out there. Still, as they say fools and their money are soon parted!! It does make me wonder exactly what kind of collectors there are using eBay, since understanding this error is so simple that you would have to be a moron not to be able to identify it, yet plenty of people seem to fail to grasp it. I'm just so pleased that I bought mine for about £30 a month or two ago and haven't got caught up in the current spiral which can only end in tears.

Anna, In making this decision, you have to understand a little of the history of this error coin. When they were first discovered some months ago, examples were going on eBay for initially £250 or so. As more and more were found, the law of supply and demand took over and prices started to fall, until around a week ago you could get one for £25, which is probably the going rate. Then all of a sudden the Times 'broke the story' and suddenly the world and his wife goes mad trying to find these error coins and prices on eBay rocket to, as you say, £5800 - there is one on there at present for £8000 on a 'buy it now' basis. However, for a coin to be worth this kind of money it usually has to be extremely rare. Take the 1933 penny, for instance, of which there are about 6 examples. These go for huge money if they are ever available, but precisely because they are so rare. The question you need to ask is whether this coin is truly rare and the simple answer is no, as there are currently some 250+ examples on eBay at the moment. Also, there has been a steady stream of these on eBay for months now, and the Royal Mint seems to think that there are 200,000 examples out there. If you consider that the 1913 third farthing had a mintage of 288,000 only, yet you can buy one in very nice condition for £50 or less then you will see that this error coin whilst scarce and interesting is not rare. So what do you conclude from this? Firstly, the current bubble will subside when people start to realise that there are not fortunes to be made from this coin, just a modest profit, if you are lucky enough to find one. Secondly, to get any kind of premium price, you need to get in quick whilst the bubble is still expanding. Thirdly, forget the sort of four figure sums seen on eBay. If you look at the £5800 coin you will see that the anonymous bidders who took it up to £5000 or so, all have virtually no feedback and are, therefore, in all probability fake bids to try and push the price up or 'fix' the market in peoples minds. I doubt very much whether they were genuine bids and I also doubt whether the winning price will be paid. More likely the seller will claim a refund of fees from eBay from a non-paying bidder.

There is one on there at the moment bidding at £4000!!!!! with 9 minutes to go. Mind you looking at the bidders, of which there are 25 or so, there is something odd about this which suggests some ghost bidding to get the price up, possibly for a future sale or to panic somebody into a late very high bid. Certainly, many of the later bids are from bidders with no history and next to no feedback, so it all smells to me.

Yes that is both sides and I'm thinking slabbing it may increase it's value, the value of which I have no idea at present. Gary Gary, What's the story behind the existence of the double tailed penny? Was it made from two different dies. This seems likely as the two reverses are slightly different. If two dies were used then this could mean that there are two different minor varieties of the 1970 proof penny. The difference that I can see is in the pointing of the centre prong of the trident. On the left hand picture it seems to point directly to a bead, whereas on the right it seems to point to the right of the bead. Can you confirm this? If so, can anybody else confirm that there are two minor types of 1970 proof penny? That's interesting, I hadn't looked past it being a genuin error. The are no signs even under my works 20x microscope of any join either around the edge or inside the beading so I believe it's mint error. I will look closer at the pointing this evening when I get home. Gary Gary, I wasn't suggesting in any way that it wasn't genuine. Only that however it was made, it appears to have used different dies for each side, unless, of course, something about the photographs is deceiving me. If two dies have been used, then it seems reasonable to me to expect that there are specimens of the normal coin with either of the two reverse dies out there somewhere. Just had a look and both sides are as identical as I can make out. Must be the photo. I guess I should send it off to the Royal Mint for authentication. Perhaps I will keep it in my collection although it would be nice to get it published as a known error. I saw a double sided brass 3d recently in an american auction with an estimate of something like $3500. I assume the only way my penny would be worth anything like that would be if it had been through a few auctions to get it noticed. Gary Gary, Not a new variety then! Whew, that's a relief as I always worried about a whole lot of new ones appearing as soon as the print dried on my book

Yes that is both sides and I'm thinking slabbing it may increase it's value, the value of which I have no idea at present. Gary Gary, What's the story behind the existence of the double tailed penny? Was it made from two different dies. This seems likely as the two reverses are slightly different. If two dies were used then this could mean that there are two different minor varieties of the 1970 proof penny. The difference that I can see is in the pointing of the centre prong of the trident. On the left hand picture it seems to point directly to a bead, whereas on the right it seems to point to the right of the bead. Can you confirm this? If so, can anybody else confirm that there are two minor types of 1970 proof penny? That's interesting, I hadn't looked past it being a genuin error. The are no signs even under my works 20x microscope of any join either around the edge or inside the beading so I believe it's mint error. I will look closer at the pointing this evening when I get home. Gary Gary, I wasn't suggesting in any way that it wasn't genuine. Only that however it was made, it appears to have used different dies for each side, unless, of course, something about the photographs is deceiving me. If two dies have been used, then it seems reasonable to me to expect that there are specimens of the normal coin with either of the two reverse dies out there somewhere.

Yes that is both sides and I'm thinking slabbing it may increase it's value, the value of which I have no idea at present. Gary Gary, What's the story behind the existence of the double tailed penny? Was it made from two different dies. This seems likely as the two reverses are slightly different. If two dies were used then this could mean that there are two different minor varieties of the 1970 proof penny. The difference that I can see is in the pointing of the centre prong of the trident. On the left hand picture it seems to point directly to a bead, whereas on the right it seems to point to the right of the bead. Can you confirm this? If so, can anybody else confirm that there are two minor types of 1970 proof penny?

Hi all, Some of you may recall about a year ago, I was threatening to produce a book on 20C varieties, mainly because I was getting confused in my advancing years by the plethora of descriptors used by different sources for different varieties. Well, the first part of the job is done and the book covering bronze varieties is ready. Its 142 pages long, has 139 B&W illustrations and I believe I have covered pretty much all the varieties of bronze that are currently known, including some decimal. However, as soon as I say his, somebody is bound to find a new one or one I have missed!! The book is available from me at £6.99 plus £2.50 P&P or you can take your chances on eBay as I have started selling them on there. If anybody is interested then please get in touch with me, Dave Groom via email at ukc801988231@btconnect.com asking for a copy of the book entitled 'The Identification of British 20th Century Bronze Coin Varieties'. If you want some ideas or views about the book before committing to buy then both Gary D and Clive at HistoricCoinage have copies and can give you an (I hope) unbiased opinion or recommendation. That's it - please help support my bid to become a numismatic author! DaveG38

Given the lower than usual weight, which is unlikely for a blank at the time, the most probable explanation is that somebody shaved off the obverse for reasons best known to themselves. Indeed on the picture there seems to be signs of the obverse beading at the bottom, suggesting that the planing off wasn't done perfectly.

Gary, This is a subject I brought up many years ago, when the Royal Mint ran a forum, but then closed it never to reopen when some idiot started posting all sorts of rubbish on it. I have a 1937 proof set, the coins of which I understand to be standard proofs i.e. polished finish all over and not cameoed (not sure if this is a word!). The crown in my set is exactly like this one, i.e. it has frosted devices, as has the Scottish shilling, unlike all the other coins. I tried getting an explanation for this, but opinion on the forum was divided over whether mine was a VIP proof or whether it was a fact that the early proofs were cameo and as the dies wore, the effect was gradually being lost. I don't personally buy this latter explanation but have never been able to figure why my set has a combination of two styles, unless, of course, it was a re-constituted one. However, this would still imply that the mint was producing both standard and cameo coins at the same time. Anybody got any ideas? DaveG38

Hi Chris, According to Royal Mail, airmail to Germany, including postage and packaging would be £3.00. Surface mail would also be £3.00 so I think its a no-brainer. Yes, I have published this myself, using a print on demand service. I do also have an ISBN for the book but the problem with this and Amazon is that the print-on-demand company charge such a lot for postage for a single order (even through Amazon) that its cheaper for me to buy say 20 or 30 at a time and sell them on myself. The P&P charges for a single item from Amazon or the printer would be £4.50 to the purchaser on top of the book's retail price, whereas when I buy them myself, I only pay the print costs (with small profit to the printer) plus a small increase over the cost of printing of about 25p for postage. Thus to buy from Amazon the total cost to a buyer would be around £14.50 each (including p&P) whereas I can do the same deal for about £9.50. Hence, its cheaper all round if I take on the job of distributor. Hope this makes sense! If you want one then by all means let me know. And if you like it and can see a way to market them further then I am sure could come to an arrangement, although there isn't much profit on an individual book!!

Hi RLC35 Royal mail quote £3.00 for surface mail to the US and £4.50 for air mail. Both costs include postage/packaging etc. DaveG38

Hi Hussalo, I am seriously considering putting many of my coins in the bank, and I wondered what you had to do for security and storage. My bank is perfectly willing to take them, provided they are in a secured box to which I obviously have the key or combination. The difficulty I have is finding a suitable container. You wouldn't believe the problems I am finding in getting a metal container made. Any advice? What sort of box did you use? Who from ? etc. etc.

Maybe somebody has taken to forging these mules for profit and that accounts for the battered look, although quite why they would then be in circulation I can't explain.

Its not a forgery. Its an error coin made by the Royal Mint, where they used the new reverse die paired accidentally with the old obverse die, giving a coin with no date. When these first came to light, they changed hands for a hundred pounds or so. Since then, more have been discovered and the price has dropped on eBay to around £20-25 each. If I were you I would get it on there quick before the law of supply and demand lowers the price still further!! Alternatively somebody on this forum may be interested. I already have one I'm afraid.

I have checked through my copy of Coincraft's catalogue of the coins of Scotland, Ireland etc. and as far as I can see there were no denominations minted in 1957. A few either side in 1956 and 1958, but not 57 I am afraid.

Try the following http://www.galata.co.uk They have a large library of books on Tokens That's brilliant. Thanks very much for this. I'm just not sure which to go for, but still they do have a really good selection to choose from.