PWA 1967

Thanks Peck i didnt know that 🙂 Although a good sign of a coin being retoned quickly after being messed about with is the fields will be a lot darker (black ) and patches will be that similar kind of (pinkish ) colour on bronze.The more a coin has been rubbed / polished the harder it is for the oil to stick to the surface and this is more often on the highest points. IMO though from the photo its had some kind of lubricant on and been re toned..........Unless its the photo and in hand does not look anything like the picture at all ....................................... Just having a look on the LCA website for the last twenty minutes at cleaned penny (pennies ) there are numerous examples that are the pinkish colour which they describe as cleaned and re toned or starting to re tone. These have been cleaned as if LCA were not sure they would maybe of not mentioned anything and if the seller did not agree maybe would not of been put in the auction.

IMO its had a rub with some kind of olive oil / lubricant. All the high points are much lighter and the colour not naturally dark , with the pinkish colour on the OBV that remains meaning it may of been done to re tone it.

Might be some use to someone who wants to re sell them on ebay / Faceache or something 🙂. 1983 ,1985,1986 x 2 , 1987 x2 ,1988 & 1994 So 8 sets for........Whatever your happy to pay without me going to the post office for nothing . PM me please. Pete.

Why the wife is going to the post office tomorrow someone may want this book as i have one already. The Bronze coinage of great brittain Its the Michael Freeman 1970 1st edition with dust wrapper. Please dont ask me for it FOC and then put on ebay the day after as one forum member did , as dont mind wrapping it up and sending it for nothing but not if someone is going to take the piss Better to let someone have it who really wants one rather than just having because its free 😟 Pete.

Why these are still here and probably not suitable for the forum a forum member has kindly offered to put them on ebay for me 🙂 Thanks again. Pete.

Thats the one that Loose bought and then sold , i mention it as he found that in a mixed Lot at a major auction house 🙂

The other thing to remember is people often spend a couple of hours looking and find nothing of any value ,its much easier when the sale price has brought it to peoples attention

Some people are looking at them all day Jon and you cant bid with as much confidence only seeing one side in a picture or missing out on something that is hidden. Hat off to the buyers especially if they took the time to go and have a good look and are happy , its the same as looking at something and knowing its crap on the side that is hidden and not going to high.They may well of bought others we cant see in the picture 🙂 There was obviously something or some in the 1860 Lot selling for over £3K with commision.

Scarce ones at DNW not attibuted today in mixed lots 🙂 I thought i may of been in with a chance especially when one lot i was interested in opened at £20 All good fun. Pete.

Is now online for anyone interested.

Brilliant and thank you so much for your reply ,i should of again looked in the book and not spent as much time on the 1874. Quick easy exp[anation ...Hat off and dont get to sunburnt today 😎

Maybe you can help me please Terry are Paddys two coins the same reverse or different ? I am confusing myself now and probably wrong as usual but would just like to be sure 🙂

Trying to learn as i have looked at a few of this reverse ( 1874 ) on the two pictures Paddy put up the second one is as i thought Ja. The first picture of Paddys though i am still not sure and maybe i am getting it wrong and still think its J The single plume on Ja is straight / thinner and falls downwards but on Paddys first picture it is slightly curved ? I had also looked at both helmets and the hair and thought the first one was J ,only because the first picture the helmet looks off set rather than more upright and straight.

I dont think you are getting confused Cliff and think your right to say they are two different reverse with the second one Ja. Although that may mean we are both wrong

Yes Terry you may well be right about the first one although it still looks messed about with and they are just the ones newly listed ,there are plenty others and didnt want to put them all on . One of the reasons i mentioned of not buying this particular type from a photo and better looking for an UNC one . Pete.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1946-King-George-V1-One-Penny-Coin/333139589766 https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1946-One-Penny-1d-Coin-King-George-VI-Great-Britain/254218876981 https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1946-KP-King-George-VI-Penny-Lighthouse-High-Tide/133011747161 https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1946-King-George-VI-Penny-Lighthouse-High-Tide-KP/133042119208 https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/King-George-VI-Penny-1946/293076506981 A few new listings on ebay that are quite fascinating . I think maybe these are cleaned although i may be just guessing.

The problem is Gary ,when i typed in Slavish the words they used to explain the meaning i didnt know what they meant either

Slavish seems to be the IN word at the moment ,i will have to try and find out what it means. Slavish ..........

The F177 is the most common of the 1913 Ian and IMO often well struck ,should not be to hard to find a really nice one. Pete.

I thought it better to use another fact as you may be interested to know. The graders at cgs have been looking for years ,well before cgs started and have obviously looked at the coins in hand. Although you may not agree with there opinion it is know doubt better than mine. On there data base they have six 1944 pennies submitted as NOT MT and only one 1946. The part you may find fascinating is that out of six submitted two of them were rejected. I will let you guess why. Pete.

Take it easy and i am really sorry about the language if i offended you , my problem is that i stuggle to write things down and am what may be called thick and of low intelligence. I wasnt at school from being thirteen and did not have much education before ,so my posts may appear childish or daft as i find it hard to put words into writing and obviously cant spell. I dont know what slavish means that you described me as being but if its bad then you were probably right . I dont and cant make excuses for my stupid posts but feel maybe you would see a different Pete should you ever meet me or speak to me on the phone ,.if you could understand me 😊 I wont start going on again and have said or atleast tried to say what i thought at the time. Keep smiling. Pete.

I only wish i had kept the cleaned ones now However i bought a 1948 off an ebay picture that myself and another forum member were undecided about ,as to weather it was MT ,i cant find the ebay picture anymore but still have the cleaned coin and am happy to post FOC to anyone who may be interested. Pete.

Thought i would check the 1946 to see if i had been missing something as logic does say that 1944 would be scarcer of the three to find. The private message i sent you was wrong looking at the list ,only two were described as NOT MT 1944 & 1945......NO 1946 . Dave Craddock has not had a 1946 on a list for two years but had the others ,i dont have the lists going back any further. There wasnt one in the Crocker sale and cgs have only graded one although more for other years. . Not much else to go off ,but as i said to find one in a couple of days you did really well.I have been looking for a lot longer and only ever found one one for sale ,which is the cgs one. Also with regards looking at pictures. Terry says he wasnt sure and was it cleaned untill it arrived 🙂 Groom says in his book "Care in identifying light specimens is needed once they become worn " ...rubbing is sometimes from a picture similar to wear and the reason i said its better to look for an UNC one. Also its not only pictures and even in hand that people edge on the side of caution. The Crocker sale............Possibly a bright finish ? The workman sale.........Appears to be a bright finish. Neither of these two give me a lot of confidence and looking at the pictures i again cant be sure. . You say "Its all guess work on your part isnt it " i probably can have a quite an educated guess after looking for a couple of years ,two of which i have sold 1944 & 1945 on the forum about eighteen months ago.The picture i put up was with another to compare as i knew its hard to tell from a picture even back then. I stand by what i say ,hard to tell from a photo ,some that look NOT MT have been cleaned and 1946 is the hardest to find. i will always admit to being wrong as i am often ,although i feel on this occasion i might actually be right for a change. Have a good day and why your finding them STAY lucky 😊 Pete.

The Large picture ,you were not sure about and from the picture neither was i but thought it looked cleaned , i am often wrong and its how i learn. The ones you have in hand you have the benefit of being able to see properley and more so than in a photo. I am being honest about throwing some away and wish i had kept them now as would of sent them you 😊 As i mentioned earlier i was just giving my opinion for maybe others to double check the picture. I cant say anymore without repeating myself ,so will let you have your own opinion on them. Enjoy the rest of the weekend. Pete.