Coinery

$70, Croatia, eBay...I'd say I was speechless!

I've had a couple of W4 pennies in the past with similar colouration. I personally thought it contaminants in the metal, or a poor mix? I never properly investigated it however as it was never a series I was collecting, beautiful as they are. Maybe Rob or VickySilver could shed some light? I think I remember VS having some metallurgical knowledge?

Often used as a euphemism in the presence of unilateral wear I agree! Ultimately, when it comes to be graded, whether the wear happened in a Victorian's pocket (his storage facility) or 'storage' at a later date, they'll see it as wear, and grade it accordingly! EF/NEF for me...how that pays itself out as a number, where digs, dings, lustre, tone, ultimately eye appeal, come into play is anybody's guess! I'd be interested, though!

Cabinet friction is a term I think is valid, often putting the reverse at a disadvantage, but there was a rather long 'discussion' about it, if I remember correctly, challenging that wear is wear. I think I lost! I do love the big pennies, good luck with the grading, be interested to hear what it gets!

Just out of interest, what's your view?

I would say most people would be trying to sell it at EF, but the reverse says NEF to me!

.

Well done alabomb, good work on the spreadsheets! There are plenty of decimal collectors out there, and some on here, it's great you're getting excited about stuff, it's addictive! ?

A bit of a red herring to call it a penny, really! It was Lot 1757 the Edward I penny in NEF.

I bid £110 on a penny with estimate £70-£100 sold for £230 inc juice!

Hi Iain, Oh, I'm sorry, I've got to do it, welcome to the forum WC! As you say, if you're thinking of inheritance for the kids, you are FAR better off learning about the numismatic aspect of silver, rather than the bullion side. A lot of the silver junk coins will, more often than not, be released at a price which far exceeds their bullion value, so you'd probably have to reach your coffin just to get the outlay back! On that cheery note, you can move forward to the far brighter aspect of collecting historical coins. There is SO much to learn, but the rewards are great. To have a beautiful-toned Victorian crown, an Elizabeth I sixpence, or a beautifully struck-up Charles I halfcrown, made of sterling silver, is a delight that will far surpass the experience of owning just a lump of shiny old silver! There are some VERY experienced collectors, dealers, and all round good chaps on here! Enjoy!

Can I pay u with my winnings, ok!

Great close-up shot!

Do link us to the thread on your forum when you put it up! There are some collectors of French coins on here who'd be delighted with your link.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/NGC-VF-25-ENGLAND-SILVER-PENNY-1279-1307-EDWARD-I-/391682080045?hash=item5b32123d2d%3Ag%3Ao8QAAOSwUKxYgSwA&nma=true&si=C4E%252Fla%252Bgd88kDexFgH47QmdyYfo%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557 Identified by NGC as an Edward I (S1383) Class 1 Penny, rather than the Edward II Class 11 penny that it is - so, only 10 classes, a reign, and over 70 spink numbers out!

I guess we are all completionists, as much as it's possible to be, depending mostly on the extent of our collecting parameters. When coming to the end of a 'basic' run of Freeman pennies, I'm guessing there'd likely be a temptation to expand it further into the more recently published micro-varieties? Equally, one might opt for the pleasure of closing a lid on something, and beginning instead a new Davies run of shillings? It's human nature, particular the nature of males, to want orderly boxes, for everything, so a micro-varietal penny collector is no less diseased (well, maybe, lol) than the collector who 'closes the lid' on a simpler Type Set, only to immediately open the lid on a new box. We just keep going on, for as long as we can suffer the tension that an open-lid box delivers upon our delicate little male brains (and the delicate little brains of some very strange females too, of course ).

Very much so, Colin, I think it's the defining marker for all research, I just failed to make the link for a Monarch Type Set. As soon as you start adding varieties, you move into an all inclusive Monarch Set, simply because you can't add an open 1903 penny, without adding a normal date 1903, and then IF a 1903, a standard 1904 would be no less a variety. ALSO, for the record, it really p****s me off when I read back over things and notice my phone has not only changed words, but even removed, on occasion, extensions like 's from the ends of words! I'm not always inebriated, honest!

'Distinct design change,' that the one! I couldn't see the wood for the trees, that's why a 1903 wouldn't be included! Got it!

I screenshot the pictures on my phone, but need to get them on photobucket and link them across.

Just to keep the world informed...another mis-attributed coin. Not a surprise to many on here, I know. This coin is bearing a crown that clearly puts it in the reign of Edward II, not the early part of Edward I (NGC are saying Class 1d) 391682080045 (sorry, no ebay link)

I feel I'd definitely confine myself to a 'book' run, meaning, for me, Davies and Freeman, possibly Spink for a basic gold set (and you couldn't of course miss out the few extra 20thC coins of Groom), if I was going for a full monarch or date run, but that doesn't clear up where I'd draw the line in a Monarch Type Set. I think the best position is to either avoid varieties altogether, or accept you're going to have a serious problem with any underlying tendencies towards OCD. Many thanks for your insights, gents!

When it comes to extending some of the denominations to include the varieties, does that mean a 1902, 1902LT, 1903, 1903OPEN penny etc.? I have a feeling it would be difficult to draw the line between the above scenario and a Full monarch set? Just diggin' around for insights into how people might approach the addition of varieties to a Type Set?

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?

This is Laker bust D with PM Rose (Spink 2337E). The rose looks ambiguous on your coin, so I can see why you may have initially considered it a pansy, I would've done too. However I've found a die-match for your coin on a dealer site called Hammered Coins (picture below), which shows better detail, and confirms the PM as a definite rose. The website owner has marked this bust as Laker B (which is a typing error, but has entered the correct Spink reference in the description, identifying it as a Laker D). Roses tend to present themselves much rounder than pansies, even on worn coins...I've also included an image of a pansy for your reference. Value? I think £35ish.

Anyone attending? Did you finally decide in the end, Rob?