Coinery

Great idea re the ticket resource...we could definitely do with a logical online reference/resource! Equally, it would be great to have a digital record of all these tickets and the coins they relate to, if only to preserve the collectible history of the coins. The OP coin is a class example of potential lost heritage, in that had I not emailed the seller asking whether there was an old ticket with the coin, the Elmore connection could've been lost forever, given the coin isn't a plate coin in the catalogue. Having said that I haven't received it yet!

Ha, yes, the boat is getting smaller and smaller! The seller is sending me the old ticket, so I'll be interested to see where that points me? I'd definitely be interested in a copy of the catalogue if I can make a reasonable link between the two, though!

Does anyone have the Spink 2017 VF price for Class 1d handy?

Hey, thanks, m'friend! Yes, I was really pleased to win it! It was one of those delightful moments where you chuck £150 bid on in the last seconds and then get a really nice surprise!

Not sure what's going on with my ability to post! I've had something glitchy going on since last night! Anyway, many thanks, Rob, much appreciated! Was that Part 1 or Part 2?

Ahh, sadly it's the Anglo Saxon part of his collection - described as 'nearly all coins in plate' so would've been good! Hey ho!

Emailed seller asking whether he had any ticket with it? There's now one on the way for the price of a PayPal beer...best beer I've bought! I'm wondering if it's Elmore-Jones'?

Not as straight forward as that, sadly...there's literature arguing one way or the other across a small window of types, so ultimately you'll have to find a place you're comfortable with, and accept it's the best you can do in light of the evidence! In reality, the primitive method of minting coins and cutting dies of that period are always going to overlap. Consider this: when the great recoinage potentially includes coins that have covered many, many, hundreds of year's circulation, I can't imagine for a second that a monarch's changeover could be distinguished by just a few die/punch details, even when their own vanity is taken into account? The great news is we'll know one day, simply because collectors are constantly asking the questions and digging ever deeper into the dies and historical documents! For the moment, however, I'm personallly happy with the Bente/Withers division. If this ever definitively changes, my coins won't...I'll just move one or maybe two coins along the page, nothing more!

That's very much of use, thanks, Pete! ?

Brilliant! Many thanks, TG!

Inspired by @coinkat's post and some of the answers given, how would you define what makes up (for example) an Edward VII type set, to include known/documented varieties...how would you go about creating a wish list? For example (and I haven't the books to hand) how would you set out the pennies for Edward VII? Would you just go for 1 example of a penny, say 1902...oh, and maybe a Low Tide? But is that it, or do you have to ask the question about an open 3? Do you then include some of the Groom findings for a given date? Do you then have to have a normal 3? What do you do? I confess that date runs interest me, for the same reason any other collection appeals. But equally Type Sets and full monarch collections appeal. I even once thought I would collect every die example of an Elizabeth I Martlet shilling, and then move to another PM...it's essentially a completionist, probably Aspergers thing. So, just so I don't miss out on the Monarch Type Sets, how would you define one in the context of Ed7?

Not sure I feel convinced on that one? If he used the drawings he would also have included the dot below the S and the pellet within the O I think? How/why would he have included or even known about the accurate die crack, unless he had access to an actual coin itself...then the image would've been superfluous to the counterfeiter's deceit, wouldn't it?

Oh, dear! Never been one for the easy road! I'll give it an hour or so, under enlargement on a PC, and come back to you with anything I spot!

The main problem with trying to remove verdigris is that it's merged with the copper surface of the coin; it needed the copper in order to create itself! So, the big issue then is, to remove the verdigris is also to remove some of the coin, and what you get left with isn't pretty! If you have a verdigris spot in the field that sticks out like a sore thumb, then sure a pitted brown spot will look much better. However, if you have a completely green coin (as in Rob's example), you'd better get to likin' green pretty quickly!

My first instinct is to say your 2nd image is the youngest coin, basing that on the clogged denomination numerals and what looks to be a chipped A in Caro... also, the PM is looking pretty butchered too! As for the others...I think it can be done!

Love the description! For this rare coin he has had many customers, and they've presumably had replacement fakes to swap with the 'genuine' encapsulated coin before returning? What naughty crooks, trying to rip this honourable eBay seller off, I honestly don't know what the world's coming to! Thank goodness he and eBay have a good working relationship, and are able to halt these fraudulent customers in their tracks! "Accept all the returns without any question and for any reason but in the same status I send, over all the authentication box must be unopened. Some customers have opened the box, returned me and later ebay and me have catched them selling the coin again. So, no exception."

Possibly? At least you're there now! In my example I shared the 'direct link' and the 'image link' incidentally, @F8met the groat picture I posted is counterfeit, presumed contemporary! Interesting coins, and utterly breathtaking in the very top grades.

You can see them now then? What's changed?

Ha, yes, absolutely! I'll save our usual seat!

What about either of these @Rob? %5BURL=http://s1270.photobucket.com/user/coinery/media/MG1resize.jpg.html%5D%5BIMG%5Dhttp://i1270.photobucket.com/albums/jj620/coinery/MG1resize.jpg%5B/IMG%5D%5B/URL%5D

You certainly know your stuff, Kal, many thanks for the info., really interesting! It's a very convincing piece on the surface of it, I'm surprised the counterfeiter went to such lengths to produce the die-crack, only to spoil it all by leaving out significant detail like those you mentioned? The dies even had pitting. An interesting coin regardless...I wouldn't say no!

Trouble is, Peter, I'd end up taking you to the pub! I've just started a new job this week! Back to nursing! Work means £s...and £s means coins!

Very acceptable loss! Years ago I used to have that information, but have since misplaced it. I used to buy the silver off eBay, calculating how much the coins would weigh, based on the wear, and then bid accordingly! Not an overly successful silver buying project, but I did develop a good feel for acceptable weight loss at the time! As was mentioned above, it's a valuable exercise to weigh a few and build a small database!

Is there any chance at all that die clogs could be the answer, rather than it being a forgery? Is there any evidence of clogs developing on the other examples? Also (a massive long shot), could it have been a pre-1921 smart Alec removing devices from a genuine coin to generate an undocumented variety? I only offer the argument because it looks so good, and appears hammered! Making new 'original' fake dies is one thing, but making fake dies that replicate known issues and positioning of devices is an altogether different animal! would certainly love to know more!