Martinminerva

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...

Yes, great example of another J2 with fattening numerals to show mrbadexample...

Deffo J2. Thinness or otherwise of date numerals is misleading except on near-unc coins: as the coin wears, the numbers and letters naturally broaden as the high points flatten.

And herein lies the whole problem, both with today's general populace and with any AI or algorithm. 😀

The seller says in his listing: I am not a coin expert so please any information would be useful. So, I hope a good many of us will give him the useful information that he is trying to pass off a fake!

'Post of the Month' , mate. Cheers! I am sure I am not the only one who laments the rise of TPGs.... God help us if there's a rise in "Coin AI" or similar. Maybe Bitcoin and the like will be collected in the future instead of all these pointless bits of copper, silver and gold? 😏

Yes. It was. I meant my post! Or do I ?? Error 404 resource not found bang crash spark... Highly illogical, captain...

Please not! I prefer to rely on RI (real intelligence) and my human nuance - if I like the look of a coin and want to buy it, I will buy it. If not, I won't. I do not need to be "told" what grade a British coin is by a (frequently) American TPG, and even less so by some future computer algorithm. Or was this post created by ChatGPT? 😏

No indeed. Picture please!

A genuine sovereign weighs 7.98 grams, so I am even more suspicious. Wonder if it is correct diameter, and, more significantly, thickness? Suspect strongly a lead-based core (the silvery stuff showing through) and then gilded. The fact it was with another pewter forgery also makes me very dubious. The only way to be certain is to take it to a reputable jeweller for proper appraisal including chemical testing.

It's a 7+G. The third group of leaves down contains 4 leaves, with the fourth just poking out at the bottom, proving obverse 7. It's a nice overall coin.

Exactly my point! How can sniping, either manually or automatically be relied upon now? Please enlighten us, Jerry!

Just as a matter of interest, how can you do that now if the listing doesn't tell you at what seconds it finishes?! As shown above, it is very rare that a listing ends at 00 seconds, so how do you know when 3 seconds before the end actually is?! Or is it automatic? But then, how does the software know at what seconds it finishes?! I am a bit bamboozled!!

Things are a more than a bit different, I agree, and there is a distinct difference between selling and buying. If you list for, say, 10 days, your item is 10 days to the second from when you submit the listing, unless you schedule a listing to start later when it does default to 00 seconds. As a seller, you are told hours, minutes and seconds when your item will finish. I have been selling on ebay for 20 years and this has always been the case. Indeed, I always make a note of when my items finish to the second so I can follow the last few moments by refreshing the screen (as live updates have not appeared for years when viewing one of your own items). What HAS changed I agree is that they do not now publish the "seconds" finish on a still live listing to prospective buyers - only when a listing has ended do they appear as in the screenshot above. This is a big nuisance, I absolutely agree! Maybe they have done that to try to control sniping?? Or maybe it is just sloppy coding - eminently possible given how ebay has gone over the last few years. If you do get any reply or joy from ebay to your questions, do let us know here as things have certainly gone weird of late!

Not so, Mike. The "bids" list doesn't show the seconds that an item finishes at. For that you have to see the listing itself (screenshot pasted in by using the item number) and you'll see it was 20.16 and 42 seconds, thus the various "snipes". Listings rarely end exactly at 00 seconds unless a seller schedules a listing to go live later rather than in real time. The clock weirdness you describe though I have noticed too in that they are not always in sync. Suspect latency in our broadband connections, and not sure if there is a solution to that. Hope that helps at least a bit...

Just a normal 4+D. As stated above, the remains of the LCW is visible below the shield to prove reverse D, and similarly the remains of LC Wyon seems visible entirely below the bust, albeit either with wear or die fill, which would be obverse 4. (Freeman notation)

And the second one also looks like a replica or copy: there appears to be some silvery metal showing through the "gold" where the coin is damaged above the queen's head. Copies of sovereigns are incredibly prevalent, sadly. If so, it would have basically no value at all. Sorry.