Red Riley

These really are difficult to get hold of, it was the last one missing in my run too. I eventually bought one, NF condition in 2008 for £226. Sadly not currently for sale though.

I actually found a similar coin in my mother's effects when she died 4 years ago. This then of course begs the question of where on Earth did she get it from? The thing was clearly not silver but what I had interpreted as a flaw in the blank could actually be read as a lower case 'r' (for 'replica'). I have it in the back of my mind that there was a stately home somewhere that was selling these things as souveneirs to tourists but which one this was I just can't say, but presumably this is where she got it from.

Yes, I appreciate that forgeries are a real issue for all of us, but speaking personally I think that if third party grading services remove some of the risk, they nonetheless effectively sterilise the hobby. Coins are very tactile things, after all that's what they were designed for and I would much rather run the risk of picking a duff'un or putting a fingerprint across a BU 1926 ME than be reduced to the custodian of a number of anodine chunks of plastic containing things that were once genuine coins. Has the much greater problem of forged artwork persuaded the likes of Christies to encapsulate genuine Monets or Modiglianis in polyethylene or whatever to prevent forgery? Of course we must do all we can to root out these malicious fakes, but it must not be at the expense of turning our great hobby into a branch of the financial establishment with prices quoted in the Financial Times. I for one don't want to hear Robert Peston saying things like, 'Prices of coins slumped today on Wall Street as a report by Standard and Poore's slated the market as being overvalued...'. There are enough boring things out there that people call 'investments' without adding to the whole tedious list. My coin collection is there for my own personal pleasure and for that of anybody else of a like mind. It is not an investment, it exists to satisfy my craving for something which is at one time relatively complete and of genuine historic value. I dare say that there is the odd coin in my collection which isn't all it might seem but hey, c'est la vie. If third party grading services are the answer, then perhaps we asked the wrong question.

Declan, that's exactly the potty, bizarre sort of thing that I would do. You're not an only child as well are you?

Of course I meant 'come out' not 'come out' if you see what I mean...

Er... can we come out yet?

Contemporary forgeries have some historical significance and although not hugely valuable, should never be binned.

Although they do present pitfalls for the inexperienced, in my view contemporary forgeries just add to the fun of collecting and can be an interesting area of collection in their own right. The coins issued in 1816-20 were particularly prone to less than convincing forgery. Every serious numismatist should have at least one in their collection! There is a distinct difference between the two types of forgery. Contemporary forgeries were designed by the counterfeiters to defraud the faceless government of the day whereas the latest glut are much more pernicious in that their intention is to swindle the likes of you and me out of our individually hard-earned cash. It's Brinks Mat v. a Post Office heist.

The obverse is a lot worse than the reverse which shows the slightly odd pattern of wear on the side of the face but very little on the fingers which is usually the touchstone. I go GVF/NEF Arguably the obverse condition is largely irrelevant on a coin where you are only interested in a small portion of the reverse but I think that given the current state of the market, the price may not be that optimistic sadly.

What gets me is that it isn't even a particularly interesting variety. The '3' is a couple of microns thinner than normal. Well great. I've said before that such minor varieties don't float my boat. Apologies if I step on anyone's toes but to me this is 'geek collecting'. Clearly though there are at least two of them out there with infinitely deep pockets. With this in mind, how much do you reckon a really interesting penny such as 1933, 1952 or 1954 would go for? First seven figure penny anyone?

Hi Snowball, welcome to the forum. I will say right now that I have no idea re the £1 note but it does look fairly creased so suspect not much. The rest of what I have to say probably won't make your day either; first of all, the 1948 2/6d and 1940 1/2d have no value at all and given the fact that the others are quite worn and very common, you would probably be looking at maybe £2-3 each. If you want to sell them, probably the best way is to put them on e-bay with a starting price of 99p and see what happens.

I'm afraid I agree with you, some of the prices for rarities these days are astounding, but no way would I deal with that seller. He states a strict 'no returns' policy and then concocts some cock and bull story to justify his policy. If the coins are not exactly as described then I think it highly likely that his policy contravenes Canadian law, as it would in the UK but if it push came to shove, trying to resolve any issues across international boundaries would be a nightmare.

Not sure, but you don't want to 'peon' a live rail. I'll get my coat...

It's actually a William and Mary farthing (Gulielmus et Maria - the Maria bit being the only part that hasn't worn away). No great value but as Rob inferred, if you want to sell it, the best thing you can do is put it on e-bay with a 99p start and see what gives.

Unfortunately, not buying from China is not the end of it. There is a lot of money to be made buying this stuff and then selling it on secondhand as it were. If a guy in London buys say, a Gothic crown from China (fake obviously) at a hefty discount to the value of the real thing, keeps it for a while, and then re-lists it from his home address, there is no evidence remaining that it ever came from China and the chances of the end purchaser being able to pick it as a duffer are quite low. Very worrying.

Reasonably well struck but a few bag/later abrasions on the obverse. I would say not far off the going rate but if it were me, the abrasions would probably begin to grate after a while. Generally speaking I think Colin Cookes know their business and you are unlikely to get much of a bargain but on the other hand you're not likely to get seriously stung either. From the blancmange.

I must be getting forgetful in my old age, but was that really me?

er... halfpenny

This sort of thing tends to get done to coins from time to time. It was probably just somebody with a bit of time to kill, some kind of tool and an old penny...

I think that due to their relative size and thinness, if that's a word, pennies were always among the most difficult coins to produce and it required a great deal of skill to get a heavy obverse design onto the planchet without damaging the reverse. Plus of course, they were made in far greater numbers than any other coin. I just wonder if, for the reason that future supplies of steel were uncertain, the mint stockpiled worn out but uncracked dies in case they were needed in future and in the case of pennies they were! Don't forget that the reverse in this period could also be pretty shocking. So my hypothesis on why pennies are so appalling in this period is: 1) They were the most difficult coin to produce and were thus most easily affected by skill shortages; and 2) As they were produced in greater numbers than anything else, if there was a complete embargo on the mint acquiring steel, as it was needed for tanks, warships etc. penny dies would have to be used to produce more coins, ergo they were more worn out than those used for halfpennies, farthings etc. I think different denominations revealed the lack of skill which went into their production in different ways, again entirely unscientific, but I have a 1916 2/6d in GEF with a very 'soft' strike and a completely flattened rim on the obverse - once more probably due to a worn die, but in this design the effigy is rather recessed meaning it isn't the highest point and therefore the die wears first elsewhere. Anyway, an interesting subject for somebody else to research!

Yeah, not sure where they've gone. I'm sure they were still there last time I looked (in February). He seems to be opening a new shop and setting up a new website. Not certain why this has stopped him listing on Online Coins though.

It is strange though that despite using the original portrait, the years 1911-13 (but not the 1912H) and 1921-6 rarely show symptoms of ghosting (although 1926 MEs do have other problems). However, between those dates pennies more often than not have the tell-tale halo round Britannia. I would slightly take issue with £400 (puts on crash helmet and hides under table!) in that it did seem to get solved - I have seldom seen anything from 1921 to 1926 with much in the way of ghosting. Most designs seem to suffer from it to some extent and in some examples, but I would suggest that by that stage pennies were no worse than any other contemporary design. The worst years were probably 1915-19 which, allowing for a slight time lag coincided with the First World War and its attendant shortages of materials and skilled manpower. In fact, the pennies produced during this period were amongst the worst-made coins of the modern era. An interesting topic Mr Russ, which us old stagers will be quite familiar with but collectors of more tender years will probably know little about.

Credit where it's due, although I think I've bought very little from Cambridge Coins, I have generally thought their grading stood up to scrutiny. Run by a guy called Dave Allen who, as far as I know, is absolutely no relation!

They look like genuine scratches, so for me no the photo shows no evidence of cleaning. To be honest not far off EF, although these late Young Head 2/6ds are often poorly struck so once again would need seeing in the hand.

Have to say I was thinking GVF, although the second lot of photos look better than the first, but grading is meaningless if you paid the right money.