zookeeperz

I thought the point of contention with open 3 was the downstroke was curved . That has a curve and from the ones i have seen they either point directly at the middle of the six or between the middle and the bottom?

Don't know if this floats your boats guys Noble Numismatics auction 21-27 november 2017. Some real nice coins on offer hammered right the way through milled inc 1905 unc shilling est $1500. tad skinny i feel http://www.noble.com.au/auctions/search/?ar=1&c=39&g=Any%20grade&q=&e=Any%20estimate&p=1

Yes /no?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. I was waiting for that lmao. Bloody snipers

Looks like S2097 roses by bust Edward IV Groat But your guy looks a lot friendlier than the picture in the book lol. But I am far from qualified to give a definite answer that was the closest to what you have and all the markings seem to match to a fashion. I am sure the hammered guru's will put you right

Kudos to him fair play. Really that is all anyone wants especially when they don't realise what they have. Better than the standard GFY you normally face

Actually by all accounts the RM stated that the Pemember coin was not an error the right leg downstroke of the R was masked by the reeding . Strange though that only this coin was chosen to be published. If you look at all the early silver Charles II most of the coins are of that type either standard B with the bottom or the top missing.Yet none of those were chosen for publication as an error type designated as RR for BR or inverted RR for BR? Unless I missed anything thumbing through. But I understand the premise with F. being a broken E but yeas it does look like an F. Unbarred A or inverted V's look as the description I just feel that this particular error because of the way R,s are made doesn't really hold as much validity . It is the pretender to the throne error

That was only an example . I could of used the £100 one but that was early up in the order and by the time I saw the tenth rrit error that guys was just to link the sales pitch. The thing is But is there a genuine RRIT error or is that the classification for the 1817 Shilling because if I look for the RRIT I would look straight past those?

Too many of these listing with ridiculous claims. "Hey matey Look at the feet one curls in one curls out that should be enough to tell you the both cannot be an R. Try broken B it's the honest claim" https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1817-George-III-Silver-Shilling-RRITT-Error/172924742263

Difference between Guaranteed Genuine and R "old collectors mark" what is one of those when it's @ home R for Replica I am surprised it never crossed his mind? But at least he pulled it @Ukstu Good job sir

Lucky sod lol. They still going for ridiculous money even the proofs which are not even in the same category as scarceness . They are just 50 p proofs no different or any rarer than any other 50p in fact there are more proofs and piedfort proof 50 pence coins that are much rarer than kew. I dare say if I was to fork out for a set @ £108 I could still earn a few quid on it

What about this 1862 CNE PENNY?

one of those you'd love to have in your hands to look at. Couldn't part with that cash on a whim that could be nothing

Seriously? between the teeth dead center of queens bust you don't see a small y?

yes her coins are well over priced She bought a few from me actually. a Single Ex 1940 and a recessed 1916 both were EF+ think I sold her both for £60 madness lol

Why do they do that. the europeans seem to put silver cleaner or beeswax furniture polish on everything?

Its not my coin Its on the bay probably clearer not blown up and if anyone was going to miss a difference it is shelly https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1861-Queen-Victoria-Penny-Freeman33-6-G-Rarity-R5-A-LOVELY-HIGH-Grade-EF-N-UNC/302496151715

Well It looks very much like a G and there looks like a P under the T the gap on her bust dead center there is a small Y

I won't influence what you may or may not see and sorry these were the pics I had to deal with actually it is probably clearer not blown up. Yes I am at it again. I have noticed a few things which may or maybe something or nothing. Can you see anything worth investigating.

What you guys think. I am not sure of this one bit. Looks like a cast job? https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1900-Queen-Victoria-Silver-Crown-LXIV/112628995834

Well there goes the neighbourhood. Just goes to show you even clear pictures tell bloody lies. Was looking forward to a cheap Single ex 1940 and it turns out to be the double. I should of gone with my original gut instinct that the line was too thin

Close up of the lions

Toning but gorgeous Condition Lustred to death and a really nice strike especially the reverse they don't come much nicer

I missed that bit but they might be selling someone else's goods I had a premonition lol

Strange the guy that is selling the other fakes the coin on the right doesn't show an obverse on his sale. Yeah I think I know for what reason . I reported the first guy for fraudulent listing practices. Although the correct terminology for what you want to report isn't in the sub menu's. I wonder why? Ebay know there are fakes why isn't this in the report boxes.?Like "Do you believe an item to be suspicious or a fake". Not the one I had to choose "Seller is selling somebody else's goods" . No option to choose anything else. Incidentally this has really annoyed me this guy has sold 751 fake kews @ £119.Read what he guarantees about his coins it is laughable . Never a front picture of the queen and all stock pics are lifted from other websites https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Various-Rare-Commemorative-Coin-Hunt-50p-2-Kew-Gardens-WWF-Olympics-Beatrix/222532435246