Paulus

Does any one collect/have an interest in/know the value of coins/tokens/medals like these? I would be interested to know more about it, thanks for any help

Thanks Rob! I will investigate further ...

From the Philippines too! No way I would risk that one ... Pardon my ignorance (again) but does anyone know why the 1850 is so rare/valuable, the mintage wasn't particularly low? The mintage figures back then were for total minted IN that year, not OF that year. Many's the time the Mint used up a previous year's dies but they were still recorded in the figure for the year they were struck in. Is there any information out there, for example Royal Mint Annual Reports, that would allow more accurate mintage figures to be compiled? Unfortunately not, not official figures. The Mint would refer to their own records which would show the wrong figure. You'd have to rely on a Freeman doing a large survey, but those become less and less reliable over time. I am partially enlightened, thanks ... does anyone know how many 1850 shillings were minted then? (roughly?)

From the Philippines too! No way I would risk that one ... Pardon my ignorance (again) but does anyone know why the 1850 is so rare/valuable, the mintage wasn't particularly low?

That would of course be great, but if we want it free who would do it! And if it's all on Wiki it looses a bit of mystique and we can lose an edge and there is misinformation ... IMO we have a great resource right here, maybe the best for English pre-decimal, I for one would like to see a members' area for coin collections with photos and comments, links to a photo site like photobucket can provide this for free! Any other opinions?

No, I bid well over the guide price but still got way outbid! Looks like most of the winning bids were well over the guide price to me!

I have the coin below, and know very little about it ... I have no reason to doubt its authenticity, but how can I verify this? Thanks for any pointers.

Brilliant, thanks Peck

It's S456 - a Julius Caesar denarius, elephant obverse, and reverse priestly emblems. Spinks also give a RRC number 443/1. This refers to Crawford's Roman Republican Coinage. The value in F would be between £75 and £100. Here's mine (different design): Thanks Peck, I will be selling all my Roman coins I think, need to fund some very expensive purchases! Any reason to think my coin is not genuine? Were these forged a lot do you know?

Do you have any photos Garry?

I will be listing a few items on here at the price I paid, plus postage, before I list them on eBay, to give members a chance to purchase if interested £77

At a guess I would say that CCGB (correct me if I'm wrong Chris) and coin yearbook both take their lead from Spink. Spink will only quote FDC prices because they are a bit sniffy about things and tend not to think that anybody would want anything other than FDC and of course most Spink clients wouldn't. Can you recommend a guide that perhaps reflects real prices achieved at auction? I am intrigued for example why decent gold sovereigns often go for 220-240 at a brick house auction and 280-290 on eBay, seems bizarre to me!

Seeing as this eBay Laughs thread has turned in to a discussion about proofs, I have a question for the assembled masses. I posted the link to the worn 27 florin because I thought it was a bit of a joke, I mean who would want a proof coin in that condition?? But as has been pointed out, proof is a method of striking, not an indication of condition, so, as has also been pointed out, perhaps those YEAR collectors only have one way to fill that gap, a low mintage proof in any condition - I guess I just didn't imagine that many, if any, proof coins would be circulated. My question is, I have 3 price guide books (Spink, CCGB and Coin Yearbook) and none of them quote the price of proofs in anything other than FDC - why is that? Please pardon my ignorance

Hi Simon, yes it is, I have learnt to take better pics and will post some later

Get your bids in quick on this one, Azda this one is a must for your collection surely? http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1927-King-George-V-Proof-Florin-circulated-very-rare-reasonable-grade-/250970454183?pt=UK_Coins_BritishMilled_RL&hash=item3a6f0138a7#ht_1328wt_1397

Thanks Debbie, and I thought you might!

Thanks Debbie, I have just placed my first on-line bid at a non-eBay auction!

I am in the process of preparing many of my coins for sale to fund my 1540-1946 silver 'type' collection, would anyone mind venturing an opinion as to how I should grade this coin for sale? Any opinions appreciated

It has been a great thread, does anyone know if we can access the grading companies photographs at all? 60 quid is an aUNC price for my 6d so it's a fair price, but I think I will be hanging on to it as my best example of an Eddie 7 6d type, thanks all the same!

spinks is only a guide in terms of price , eye appeal is as important as grade to a buyer.....if Paul is happy with the coin at the price he payed.......then thats a good buy for Paul and looking at the pics, a nice addition to a collection. we may all pay a little over the guide price for a piece for different reasons, to finish a run, to upgrade or simply because of eye appeal. the bottom line for me is.......is Paul a collector or investor/. if collector....hes got himself a damn near unc tanner with a great look to it. I am a collector Ski, through and through, I get enormous pleasure from acquiring and looking at my coins ... the only occasions (so far) when I sell any coins is when I have duplicates or (as is the case now) I change my focus (essentially from date runs to types), when I need to sell a few to fund the purchase of some rarer missing types, such as: Northumberland shilling Crown/half crown/shilling with elephant /elephant and castle Anne Vigo Anne Edinburgh Cromwell William III different mints Various Charles I (? - do I really want to go down this road ??)

I wouldn't class those as anything more significant than bag marks, which on some more modern UNC coins look far worse without affecting the technical grade. Remember that's a sixpence shown at around 10 times real size. I think the obverse is a strong strike, which counts in its favour, especially considering there are UNC Edwards of different dates that have less hair detail than that. And don't forget how large the picture has been 'blown up' which ALWAYS affects how it appears. Grading, as you've seen from this thread Nick, is always a highly subjective art. As for your coin, it's a gorgeous example of an Edward sixpence and anyone who says they wouldn't give it space in their own collection is being economical with the truth. Whether you define it as AUNC or UNC makes little difference in the end. Appearance is everything. There are precious few bag marks on that coin. As for the rim nicks - yes, there's clearly one on the reverse at 6 o'clock, but the others I'm not convinced about, particularly when you appreciate just how small the coin really is in relation to the picture. You don't get perfect edges on business strikes, and some of what you are calling rim nicks, don't look like 'cuts' or 'dents' to me, just the way the rim is slightly folded in places. And maybe not even visible at normal size. If we are going to judge everything on super-size enlargements, then we might as well all throw our non-proof coins into the trash. Debbie - there are many factors to take into account. Not the least of which is that small coins are less collected and popular than large coins, precisely because their detail is much harder to make out without using a glass. However, if you used the same glass where it wasn't needed - e.g. on crowns or pennies - you would soon see a plethora of apparent horror stories, which when you see the coin at normal size would NOT be apparent. But, you still need that glass to see if there is wear on Edward's hair and beard : as you do also on his larger coins, him being one of the harder monarchs to see hair wear on. And the principle is also true that grading should be consistent across denominations; a fairer comparison in terms of picture would be one that 'blows up' that sixpence to the size of a real life halfcrown. The other factor to take into account is that detail on small fine parts of the design (e.g. lion faces) is almost non-existent on UNC examples of a small coin, where on a large coin you would use those very parts to judge the first signs of wear. So size does matter when you look at the grade of a small coin, as the die itself contains less detail than the same design on larger denominations. If the coin was sent to CGS Peck, do you believe it would come back as UNC? Personally i don't think it would, but as i've said, it's a nice coin and for coinerys comment that its "tarnished" well, i'd rather buy this coin than a big shiny one without "tarnish" at least i'd know it had'nt been cleaned This is a truly fascinating discussion, thanks to everyone for their comments so far! Dave, while slightly disappointed about the 1915 HC (as I paid UNC money for it), I posted it on here precisely because I wanted the kind of honest opinions you have given. If we can't obtain high res pictures of a coin before we buy, it's always going to be a bit of a lottery! Caveat emptor as usual. As for the 6d, I paid EF money for that one, and to me it is closer to aUNC, so I was and still am delighted with it - not because I have made a paper profit but because it is such a gorjus coin and a joy to own. Two things occur to me: Is there a resource anyone knows of where you can see high res photos of various grades to compare your prize possessions against? If for example the dies on small coins like this didn't produce anything better than my example then there wouldn't be anything better out there I guess (rim knocks and bag marks aside!) When selling I like to be completely open and honest, the last thing I want is a disgruntled buyer ... but would it really make sense to supply very high res photos that magnify tiny imperfections that would not otherwise be detected? After all, as some have observed, you wouldn't expect to examine 400mm pictures of a crown (or would you?), and if you did all sorts of things might show up! I don't think I will ever be interested in proof coins, they don't seem real to me, but the very best examples of a lightly circulated or near uncirculated proper coin, then hell yes!

..and it's repeated further down also But apparently it's a 'Farting', a very rare coin indeed ...

Quick dog walk to the offy for a bottle of red then ... takibg your farthings with you of course!

Thanks Nick, it allowed me to post more in a separate post: