Coinery

Now we're getting somewhere on the big slab debate! Give it another few decades and the truth will out! Get your shares in pliers and acetone while you still can!

Bugger! I'd all but written a dissertation then, and my phone battery went flat! Probably a good thing? Anyway (briefly, now), I think point 4 is nothing without points 1,2 and 3! So, I was just about to break down my own values, based upon the remaining 3 points, when I realised that surface preservation was my most important feature of a coin, and deserved at least 60%...but then there was lustre? Well, that's surface preservation, in my humble opinion??? I gave up, then!

Double struck edge lettering! Too many howlers for one coin! Also, a couple of features that highlight it...for example the stop after D of England wouldn't have been entered into the arch of the letter itself! Edit: sorry, the 'upright' of the D

I think there's a tendency to think that you devalue the coin by being brutally honest? However, the types of collectors that buy at this level are hardly going to miss such a significant problem...why don't they just say it as it is!

And Davies!

Dave Groom's a member of this forum, and I know he openly offers a discount for members here. It would be worth sending him a message. CCGB belongs to Chris, the owner of this site and forum, as you probably know, so you can also get that direct from his homepage. Happy hunting!

Welcome aboard, Kev! My own personal preference between Raynor and Davies is Davies! Davies only goes back to 1816, however, but I do find it a gem from that period on. Groom has added a few extra varieties to the pot from 1900 onwards. Either way, get some pictures up as soon as you see anything interesting, as that's where it all begins! Nothwistanding the fact that these forum pages are probably the best education you will get in coins! Staggering amount of information!

4! The squiggles between the front legs are an eagle if you look closelyAh, an eagle! Yes, of course! Lovely to find ANY medieval copper in an uncorroded state! Very nice!

I'm surprised you didn't value it higher than the other one? I thought it was infinitely better.

With all that tin on it, I didn't think it to be a detector find? Least not a traditional soil-found coin?

I'm not sure if my post was either written correctly, or read correctly? My point was this ISN'T a RR coin, it's nothing more impressive than a B with either broken top and bottom loops, or a filled die chiselled out. The reason for flagging it was that someday someone's going to come on here with a worn farthing, claiming a new variety of RR! It was my thinking that a record of this very clear repair could be useful to someone as a die record for any future comparisons/negations, etc.?

Just thought I'd share this! The B in Britannia has either been repaired on the die (top and bottom), or a blocked die has been dug out as a quick fix? Either way, it would be easy to see how some of the worn examples of this die could start to look a little like a RRITANNIA coin? Might be worth saving the image, if you're a variety collector, just as a rule-out coin? 381141242626

Oooooooh, someone got that cheap! Colin? 191497832231 Original tinning too! £180 the other week, £80 this! Goodness knows how cheap it would've gone for if I wasn't the underbidder?

I love these big young-Vicky coins!

Just out of interest, was this an LC purchase? It's a lovely coin, but It's been very much contrasted out (if that's the right term) on the reverse right field! Only of relevance if it's an LC coin and we are maybe beginning to see a photographic bias on their part? Yet another conspiracy!

Get rid, Goom! Too much money! That isn't the coin we see in the sellers photos, which, I may add, was probably not meant to deceive, just how photography works sometimes...just not a class coin by your images! Sorry!

Virtual drinking?

Cheers, Peck, I'll make that my first Roman purchase!

If you cracked it out of the slab, you'd probably get £1.00 for it on eBay. If you recycled the plastic at your local tip, you might even cover the eBay fees?

This is special! Misattributed NGC slab! Cheap, though! On the obverse, am I seeing the pointed crown of a Type 3 Rose farthing, rather than the rarer Type 1 (S3201). Crown and rose proportions are all wrong for Type 1 http://www.ebay.com/itm/1636-44-England-1-4P-Farthing-Copper-Coin-S-3201-Charles-I-Fine-Dtls-Env-Dmg-AKR-/191173161427?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c82cef1d3

I think the most important feature of goom's coin (regardless of how it's came about) is that there 'appears' to be no significant lustre in the fields! You can see some toned-lustre around the devices but, the tone that can be seen in the central fields, is not the luminous-looking tone you'd expect to see over big lustre, which a coin of this grade should be showing bags of! Then the question comes regarding how that could've come about and, most importantly, can you live with it? I don't know how much Dave paid for his, but I'd rather add whatever I had to to your £107 to have one like that instead? I'm thinking you probably would too?

He did take his own images, they can be found in the 'coin acquisition' thread.

Not sure, Charlie, to be honest? Having found acetone does a brilliant job I've never ventured further. Also, a quid's worth of acetone will easily do 50-100 coins, so it's always been cheap enough to use anyway.

I wonder, with CGS taking 9 weeks to process a coin (Paulus recently), how you'd then stand re opening a case against a seller?

That's what I'd do to be honest! It's unfortunately had a mixed and limited response re the 'clean' and retone on here, so you really have to take stock and review the coin using your own judgement (or get someone else to look at it in-hand). What do you truly think about the surface?