Coinery

You're quite right, Gary: 1915 top, 1916 below.... So how did one die make so many coins? Now the debate heats up because, whilst I too proposed a block, your 2 images now make it unclear! Is it possible that the tooth was played with by the mint? - your 1916 image looks far less sharp, which would concur with an overused die, but ALL the teeth look shorter, and their appears to be some differences in angle on a couple to the left of the 'broken' one. Also, the O looks wider on the '16, maybe recut, but doesn't look it and, of course, the gap between the colon dot and O appears different between the two! So, is it the same die? Or maybe they really were playing with the beads (or was it a matrix issue, of which I don't fully understand that proccess), which still does surprise me, as it would be more of a challenge to block a die, than engrave it? Can you see anything else on the two obverses that might further confirm a die match or not, Declan?

which also suggests a single die variety..? Possibly - do we know what the estimated numbers are compared with the mintage expected from a single die? On the other hand, the tooth may have been deliberately damaged to monitor the die, if the Mint decided the change was otherwise undetectable? That's a good thought - the deliberate marking of a die (and thus, potentially, more than one) Numbers: 1915: 11.4% of 47m - loads more than one die could do 1916: 18.7% of 86m - well that's conclusive then. It's more than one die, which means that the broken tooth has to be deliberate. Wouldn't it be more logical to 'add' a mark to the dies to identify them, like a hairline or something, which would appear raised on the coin? Breaking a tooth would actually mean blocking the tooth on the die wouldn't it? I of course have not actually looked to see how the broken tooth appears on these coins, but will tomorrow!

which also suggests a single die variety..? Possibly - do we know what the estimated numbers are compared with the mintage expected from a single die? On the other hand, the tooth may have been deliberately damaged to monitor the die, if the Mint decided the change was otherwise undetectable? I haven't got the book to hand, but didn't I read that it's 'most' manifest the broken tooth, rather than all? I'm not sure though????

Oh, my God, you're ALL at it! Even Rob with his C1 halfcrown micro-varieties, if I remember rightly! I only ever recall Richard in denial of this micro-disease! Once I have the entire G5 set, I too will likely seek out the micros, and add the occasional proof coin as and when they appear! Having said that, I do have the flat AND hollow neck farthings!

I think I was more chuffed they had actually listened to me, than annoyed that they had made an error Does anyone know off the top of their head what our DG added to the Freeman and Davies catalogue? Just out of interest, Steve, do you also draw the line at the F numbers, or do you fish out the extra Gouby's and Groom's? 1959 1/S 1944 1d 1918 farthings 1915/16 recessed ears 1912 halfpennies 1911 6d 1911 1d 1911 halfpennies 1911 farthings 1906 1/- 1904 1/- 1903 1/- off the top of my head (kinda). Sorry if I missed any, Dave! Declan's actually wrong about the 1915/16 recessed ear varieties - they have been known about, noted and collected as long as I have been, which is more years than I care to admit! I just knew he wasn't perfect! Despite his Superhuman reflexes in responding to the enquiry, and his bright yellow jacket, he's just a man beneath that lycra exterior! Just out of interest Peck, where were the recessed's first documented as an official variety; as I'm guessing, in view of the previous posts, that it must have been officially recorded somewhere to have been officially collected?

Thanks its one of my best i think, prob paid alittle to much for it at £24 but im happy to own it. I'm away without the bible to guide me, but I'd feel pretty happy shelling out £24 for ANY top-grade E7 (poor old farthing excluded...though even they must come close in my mind, if you really want the Uncs!)! I like it, nice addition!

Some companies offer 75% Spinks so I guesss it comes down to you to prove the grade of the lost coins. I think I need to think seriously about photographing my collection. I think the company I'm with offer 100% Spinks. If they use Spinks as their benchmark where does CGS come into it. Yes, that's the bit that would worry me! How many people could really prove that? Even in-hand there are indifferences but, with photography, how many can take a picture of a coin that captures tone/lustre/grade/perfection all in one snap? I'm fearful that a coin payout might meet with the same disappointment I've experienced in the past.

Has anybody ever had to make a claim against coin loss? What was the outcome in financial terms? I often wonder how they'd pay because, if it's anything like motoring claims, it's been my experience that you never get close to the value you're insured for!

Does anyone know off the top of their head what our DG added to the Freeman and Davies catalogue? Just out of interest, Steve, do you also draw the line at the F numbers, or do you fish out the extra Gouby's and Groom's? 1959 1/S 1944 1d 1918 farthings 1915/16 recessed ears 1912 halfpennies 1911 6d 1911 1d 1911 halfpennies 1911 farthings 1906 1/- 1904 1/- 1903 1/- off the top of my head (kinda). Sorry if I missed any, Dave! That's just got to be worth a

It's a shame these figures can't be meaningfully gathered, as Tesco's might gather their percentage customers buying Tetley against PG Tips! Are you going to have a table in September?

What I am curious about, and now making reference to the list that Declan put up, is the number of people who actually collect those particular additions, to determine the number of people who are actively collecting the newly catalogued varieties of the 20thC? As we have loosely established that varieties only tend to be collected when catalogued in print, I was thinking the number of collectors of the new Groom additions, for example, would not likely exceed the number of copies distributed. A correlation must exist between new publications distributed AND the number of active collectors of the new varieties contained within it? Everson might also be another good contender here. I wonder how many farthing collectors actually collect the E numbers? Or do they collect the BMC varieties and list the E numbers just because they are available, much like SKI does by adding the Groom die-pairings? I'd pay for an app. Dave!

Justorum semita lux splendens. Sorry, that was my school motto... Semper in Excretio, Solum Profundum Variat Not sure if I've remembered this correctly, but this was on the the wall in Frenchay Main Theatres Recovery...and it was true!

Does anyone know off the top of their head what our DG added to the Freeman and Davies catalogue? Just out of interest, Steve, do you also draw the line at the F numbers, or do you fish out the extra Gouby's and Groom's? 1959 1/S 1944 1d 1918 farthings 1915/16 recessed ears 1912 halfpennies 1911 6d 1911 1d 1911 halfpennies 1911 farthings 1906 1/- 1904 1/- 1903 1/- off the top of my head (kinda). Sorry if I missed any, Dave! Crikey, Declan, that's an impressive response time! Thanks for that!

Happy daze!

Does anyone know off the top of their head what our DG added to the Freeman and Davies catalogue? Just out of interest, Steve, do you also draw the line at the F numbers, or do you fish out the extra Gouby's and Groom's?

And if you ask him nicely you might get a signed copy!

There's a forum member with one on eBay presently!

I'm guessing the micro-gurus, Nick, Declan, Bob, & VS, could also have some ideas based upon their sense of competition for the coins?

Wow, this begs SO many questions! 3. Do publications create variety hunters on their own? Yes, this is kind of what I'm driving at, but more succinctly put by you, do publications create the variety hunter? If they do then, for the 20thC, there would only be a number less than the number of books Dave has sold, at least for the extra varieties he has identified, presumeably? I guess micro-variety could be defined as anything that sets it aside from its primary classification though, as you say, it's a very wooly boundary? From a collecting point of view, I'm thinking a variety collector would feed from a book, say Davies, and then expand on that further with the extra Groom's, and if a further catalogue arrives with even greater reduction, then I'm sure someone will collect them too, as a completist? Something I've noticed, which is quite bizarre, is that an unrecorded variety attracts considerably less attention than a catalogued one, even though you might speculate that the unrecorded is potentially rarer!

If you look up the post title 'Mr David Groom' you'll be able to PM him and get the book at forum member rates!

Grading Coins, Davies, ESC & Groom if you are looking at silver/CuNi only. Do you think ESC has anything to add to Davies in the 20thC? I haven't been won over by the micro-stuff (yet), but always take a quick scan through Groom to make sure I'm not giving any micro-rarities away, as we all know there are collectors out there looking for them!

I've just got to tell you this, as it only ever happened to me twice! Two summers running in the late seventies, as an 11 year-old, I 'helped' the local farm staff by stacking the bales into sixes...the reward...and this honestly happened...I was allowed to sit beside the tractors at lunch break and share in, and this just sounds too twee, and you'll never see the likes of it again, but I shared in cheese, bread, pickled onions, and farm cider! Unbelievable, but true! It really was the done thing back then! Now they really WERE good old Somerset days!

On G6 I'm always pleased if I can find the horizontal flick of hair, just above the ear, coming to a nice sharp triangular ridge!

Hah, allow me to expand (it was my own attempt at a pun/humour)...Dr Crippen!