Martinminerva

Would suggest either a contemporary counterfeit or significant movement within the die as it was struck - signs of double strike round the GEO especially. Does the reverse look odd at all? Picture of that might help...

I must say that I too when it comes to things technological very much subscribe to the "if (now!) things are working, leave it alone!" school of thought. 😀

Brilliant! It all works again - secure and the page links work. Thanks for sorting out so swiftly! Cheers!

@Chris Perkins In my address bar, the prefix is already https and that leads to the warning of not fully secure and the page selection issues. I can manually change to just http but then the whole site is not at all secure, says the warning. Your predecimal shopfront is fine and secure. Is there a problem with the forum's security certificate?? But I am not at all knowledgeable about these things. All I know is that it stopped working properly a couple of weeks ago, and the issue affects all users in terms of security but only Chrome users in terms of page selection. Anything that can be done? In this day and age of hacking etc, I am very reluctant to use an insecure site! Thanks if you can resolve!

Exactly as Rob and Zo Arms report above, the issue is also affecting me, rendering the site pretty much unusable. It is a site security issue which Chrome is picking up (it gives a warning about the site not being fully secure and so one should not enter any sensitive information like passwords etc - bit hard to log on, then!) - and blocking any attempt to go to different pages. Other browsers do allow page access, but the security issue is still present. Please can someone fix things?! @TomGoodheart or @Chris Perkins perhaps?

Not quite correct. Date spacings vary on both reverses and are not positive identifiers (see screenshot of Richard's site below) and I have actually seen three spacings - narrowish and properly wide as per Richard's pictures and even narrower as per your comparison one! (Your new find is the same as Richard's first pic - narrowish with 0 just to right of bead) The true identifier is the lack of the extra line in the shield for A# (also in Richard's screenshot) as well as the flag pole thing. But yes, yours is indeed a no-knot 1* plus A# - well found! It is known on circulation specimens as well as proofs, but don't yet know how rare it is, but suspect quite rare indeed!

And this... (same seller): https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1826-King-Geo-IV-penny-coin-high-grade-/325742601973?nma=true&si=i8aQZwnOvkcF3efgsg06PXTkhUE%3D&orig_cvip=true&nordt=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557 Not good. Caveat emptor only goes so far... But the buyer has left positive feedback, so there's one (or several, with the underbidders) born every minute!

Despite the awful photography of example 20, I'm convinced they're the same coin... Too many of the dings and scratches would seem to match up rather well - angle of lighting might account for why the deep dings on 21 seem much less deep and indistinct on 20. Plus of course the poor resolution and focus! Fairly moot point anyway, whether there are 20 or 21 recorded specimens (I'm sure there'll be a good few others out there as yet un-spotted), but the fact they appeared on Richard's site sequentially just alerted me to the potential of them being one and the same!

I think it was! Specimen 20 and 21 appear to be the same coin... Look especially at the vertical scratch and dings above Britannia's helmet and head. But the photography of spec 20 is not the best!

Apparently it was found in circulation in 1967, so assuming it was actually released in 1952 that would be about 15 years of circulation. Certainly no better than A.V.F. for me. Wonder how many hundreds or thousands of people handled it in those 15 years not knowing what was passing through their fingers! Similar would appear to be true of the 1954 penny, also found in circulation I believe in the late 60's !! Oh to have been a change checker then!! (But child of the 70's unfortunately so no predecimal for me as a kid - though I did find a 1920 shilling in my change as a 5p as late as 1983 !!)

Sure looks like it to me. Jolly good find!!

Whoops! My bad! I was also looking at equally poor 1937 copies of all denominations that are now all over ebay... Clearly produced by the same "artist" and so similarly rubbish you can understand my error!

Thanks very much. The key differences I can see immediately is that this genuine one has a wide rim and the L of HALF is to a bead. The copy on the previous page has thin rim and L to gap. But the quality of the copy is pretty damn good (worryingly). Fortunately the obverse and particularly the portrait of Eddy VIII on the copies are crap!!

Can someone post pictures of both in this thread, please? Especially the 1952 so one can see the clear difference from it and the numerous prooflike copies out there...

Haven't been able to source a picture of the VIP proof... Can anyone oblige?

Link to the Colin Cooke page if anyone's interested: https://www.colincooke.com/coin_images/halfcrowns/1952.html

So am I !!

The only dickhead will be the person that buys this coin... 😉 https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/225642012856?hash=item34894fe0b8:g:nnAAAOSw-6lirbLM&amdata=enc%3AAQAIAAAA0G0GbrAeZkaTvFXPtHre8lp8tNFjmSuPRB1UtX1Y2VuCywpsz2z83Rsznu39fZL3B1nMAg1ajgAvbbeaPPRNMu6Ak9KCPqwWai%2FR4CNY6l5Za7fSR0Y2T2jUmLv5dVdOzxntSUQIw7uQZ%2FygI%2FQx%2F29GmytLd9fsHLSmR3CDcJLzWxWizsnjdp0CWXHA5EJucg4EZoDYRo52oi6b733LQo5x76v0hnVEnaWtemsVrSAFC63D9ygKyxPW4JC6%2B9Ep7gTp3I4VDYMtASVnRxjkOak%3D|tkp%3ABFBMytrg559i

I have just listed on ebay an 1874 9+K, along with a few other rare date halfpennies. They can be found at: https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?item=285309790751&_ssn=1970kit&_sop=10 Maybe of interest to some forum members?

Fairly sure it's 15. But what date is it? That would help narrow it down...

As far as I understand it, they use an original coin to cast a mould from, and then use the mould to pressure cast dies, from which the fakes are then struck. I don't know if digital scanning is yet employed, but certainly quite feasible. But either way, any imperfections on the original host coin are indeed replicated on every fake, along with any moulding flaws (such as the dodgy QVI on 1905 halfcrowns, dings and dents on eg. 1818 halfcrowns and wreath crowns) and alterations made (such as changing the digits to mimic an 1850 shilling as hinted above), which is how an astute viewer can identify them as copies.

And this is increasingly the problem... Whilst somewhere there will no doubt be a few genuine high grade die number 64's, as has been said above the VAST MAJORITY of these are modern, high quality white metal pressure cast fakes originating in the Far East. The cud on the N of tenth is a good pointer to these as well as the attendant fine circumferential die crack that connects many of the letters of the reverse legend - maybe a fault in the original pressure mould or on the original host coin, but now replicated manifold. Unless you can do a metal test or a conductivity test (such as with one of today's sophisticated metal detectors), I would be VERY wary of purchasing a die 64 1864 florin! Beware also of course "nice" 1905 halfcrowns, wreath crowns, 1850 shillings and so on. All have their diagnostic flaws some easier to spot than others - eg. wrong font 5 and 0 (too large and bulbous) on the shillings, dodgy QVI in the garter of the halfcrowns etc. Other fakes that aren't taken from a host coin, such as the quarter farthings mentioned above and the plethora of replica 1933 pennies, but which are made with modern CAD created dies are easier to spot as they just aren't accurate enough, but still fool many collectors, both novice and more experienced. Beware!

Apparently, the perpetrators have been put under a rest and will be thoroughly slated. Some say they will even have their balls put in the rack... 😉

No - they are a pig to tell apart. Your website already does by miles the best job I have seen. I wonder if Iain Dracott himself can provide gospel and/or pictures... is he a member of this forum, or is anyone here in touch with him?

.....until someone ignores the book and finds one with a different pairing.... Indeed! Dracott in his November 2021 update now records 11 plus J# (or J1 as he now calls it). From his research and my own records, I have details of the following die pairs for 1875 (not including 1875H): 11 + J#, 11 + J2, 12 + J#, 12 + J2, 12 + L (rare) and 13 + J2 (very rare). As far as I know these last two are not yet recorded with any other "mule" pairing of 11 or 12, but again one day someone might find one! Plus there is also Mal Lewenden's 13# + L of which two are now known. But these have to be pretty much unc. to be sure as shown above...