1954 penny

[Menger 92]

4 hours ago, VickySilver said:

The bigger issue is the domination of the modern market for rare coins by those blessed with generous resources and the squeezing out of those with more modest means.

Isn’t that the same (to a degree) for all markets though - from coins to houses to art to (dare I say) women. So perhaps more important than market domination is to ensure that we share pictures on the internet of what we have got (within reason) and for everyone else to enjoy. 😊 

 

Edited Tuesday at 04:28 PM by Menger

[jelida 1,348]

30 minutes ago, Menger said:

 from coins to houses to art to (dare I say) women. 

It does seem that generous resources seem to attract women…..or am I just watching the wrong sort of videos…..? 😮

Jerry

[Circulation penny collecto 15]

Thank you Master Jmd - the "latest" acquisitions are actually the 1849 and the 1847 Medusa (upgraded) which i am thrilled with.

As for Mr Jelida though, he seems rather bitter ( he rather reminds me of Norris Cole on Coronation Street). He needs to take a deep breath and try to understand that it is MY website and is for MY record-keeping and i will do it how it pleases me. It is not content for an erudite textbook to be published, nor am i trying to sell him anything. I simply put up the link to share the content if anyone was interested. And if some of the numbers are slightly dated from hundreds of coins then i will  live with it............

[jelida 1,348]

2 hours ago, Circulation penny collecto said:

As for Mr Jelida though, he seems rather bitter ( he rather reminds me of Norris Cole on Coronation Street). He needs to take a deep breath and try to understand that it is MY website and is for MY record-keeping and i will do it how it pleases me. It is not content for an erudite textbook to be published, nor am i trying to sell him anything. I simply put up the link to share the content if anyone was interested. And if some of the numbers are slightly dated from hundreds of coins then i will  live with it............

You really shouldn’t be so sensitive to criticism, I have already stated that it is your prerogative to act as you wish. As they say, you can take a horse to water etc. 

Jerry

Edited Tuesday at 11:11 PM by jelida

[blakeyboy 1,757]

2 hours ago, Circulation penny collecto said:

 

As for Mr Jelida though, he seems rather bitter ( he rather reminds me of Norris Cole on Coronation Street). He needs to take a deep breath and try to understand that it is MY website and is for MY record-keeping and i will do it how it pleases me. It is not content for an erudite textbook to be published, nor am i trying to sell him anything. I simply put up the link to share the content if anyone was interested. And if some of the numbers are slightly dated from hundreds of coins then i will  live with it............

Hmmm...you state the the 1954 penny will hopefully not be sold or seen again....have a good long think about that statement and how it sounds....

[Menger 92]

5 hours ago, blakeyboy said:

you state the the 1954 penny will hopefully not be sold or seen again....

I bet he has a peep at it once in a while … who could resist? 
 

Anyhows - I see it as a great service that he shares the photos, even if he hopes not to sell.  With the advances in technology we are seeing, I think the more we all share quality images of private collections the better.  Let’s go!! 👍👍

[VickySilver 857]

14 hours ago, Menger said:

Isn’t that the same (to a degree) for all markets though - from coins to houses to art to (dare I say) women. So perhaps more important than market domination is to ensure that we share pictures on the internet of what we have got (within reason) and for everyone else to enjoy. 😊 

 

True, but interestingly skill, luck and stamina do reward the financially less buoyant. Seeming to get harder with the passing of the years though. I remember once thinking Norweb was perhaps the best collector of more recent Brit issues and esp. of 19th and 20th Century coins. One could occasionally find better specimens of some coins that she had but not overall. Still it was enjoyable to occasionally pip those with pecuniary advantage.

I suppose what annoys some is the braggadocio bit, though that does not diminish the achievement.

Edited Wednesday at 06:12 AM by VickySilver
clarity

[blakeyboy 1,757]

The 'braggadocio bit' isn't, for me, the problem.

(Would anyone claim not to have a swagger when owning such a fine collection?)

I  don't think the ability to spend cash and tell everyone about it gives anyone, except Michael Freeman, and Michael Gouby,  the right to assign Freeman numbers or rarity symbols.

Only immense academic effort is rewarded by the assignment of such rights and privileges,not spending cash....

[Menger 92]

33 minutes ago, blakeyboy said:

Only immense academic effort is rewarded by the assignment of such rights and privileges,not spending cash....

Surely we have a right attribute whatever rarity or symbol we want to our own collection and on our own websites and wot not. Then it is up to anyone else to attribute such credibility to our determinations as they choose.  

Rarity seems such a subjective thing - a finger in the air based on personal experience much of the time.  

In my area of thruppences several the ESC rarity ratings seem a bit wonky - so I ignore them. 

Edited Wednesday at 09:16 AM by Menger

[Rob 3,160]

2 minutes ago, Menger said:

In my area of thruppences several the ESC rarity ratings seem a bit wonky - so I ignore them. 

Unless the rating in ESC is demonstrably accurate, they should all be taken with a pinch of salt. Obviously things that are clearly common (C-C3) isn't the problem, but at the R7 end of the scale there are numerous discrepancies, e.g. Roman I 1825 shillings (R7, I think not), or 1723 C/SS shillings which are given R5 both of which are clearly complete bs.

[Denarius 9]

20 minutes ago, Menger said:

Surely we have a right attribute whatever rarity or symbol we want to our own collection and on our own websites and wot not.

Rarity is a somewhat flexible attribute as further examples of rare coins are found. It would be better to quote rarity as an opinion rather than fact.

Freeman numbers, however, refer back to a respected and universal source of documented information and are clearly not open to change or invention.

[Menger 92]

18 minutes ago, Denarius said:

Freeman numbers, however, refer back to a respected and universal source of documented information and are clearly not open to change or invention.

Then how can the system hope to improve? 
 

[Denarius 9]

7 minutes ago, Menger said:

Then how can the system hope to improve? 

Not by allowing all and sundry to invent arbitrary changes/inventions in a number of scattered and unrelated sources.

Ideally, there should be a central recognised "official" source of this sort of information. Penny collectors are lucky in that they have Michael Gouby who is still prepared to acknowledge and document additional varieties but, when he retires, there will be an enormous gap.

[Menger 92]

14 minutes ago, Denarius said:

Not by allowing all and sundry to invent arbitrary changes/inventions in a number of scattered and unrelated sources.

That is how many bottom up systems work (common law, language, customs) so it may help fill the gap.  What works sticks and what does not falls by the wayside … 

[blakeyboy 1,757]

52 minutes ago, Rob said:

Unless the rating in ESC is demonstrably accurate, they should all be taken with a pinch of salt. Obviously things that are clearly common (C-C3) isn't the problem, but at the R7 end of the scale there are numerous discrepancies, e.g. Roman I 1825 shillings (R7, I think not), or 1723 C/SS shillings which are given R5 both of which are clearly complete bs.

Absolutely.

So this rather means that someone who realises this through experience wouldn't ascribe a rarity number at all......!!

[jelida 1,348]

2 hours ago, Menger said:

Rarity seems such a subjective thing - a finger in the air based on personal experience much of the time.  

Except in the case of Freeman of course, who actually studied a massive random sample from circulation ; while not perfect, his estimations of comparative rarity are as accurate as will ever be achieved for the bronze coinage. In terms of actual numbers of exceptionally rare coin varieties that were barely or not represented in Freeman’s sample, there will always be an element of flux as demonstrated by RS’s excellent ‘Rarest Pennies’ register. A ‘unique’  ‘slender 3’ 1863 penny becomes three known for instance, and more will be found. And in the end, it is market availability and demand that determine the price.

In general I can see where you are coming from. One has to hope that those declaring, and particularly publishing, rarity values make every effort to ensure reasonable accuracy. You will not find a ‘rarity’ value on any of my coin tickets, for good reason.

Jerry

[terrysoldpennies 778]

1 hour ago, jelida said:

Except in the case of Freeman of course, who actually studied a massive random sample from circulation ; while not perfect, his estimations of comparative rarity are as accurate as will ever be achieved for the bronze coinage. In terms of actual numbers of exceptionally rare coin varieties that were barely or not represented in Freeman’s sample, there will always be an element of flux as demonstrated by RS’s excellent ‘Rarest Pennies’ register. A ‘unique’  ‘slender 3’ 1863 penny becomes three known for instance, and more will be found. And in the end, it is market availability and demand that determine the price.

In general I can see where you are coming from. One has to hope that those declaring, and particularly publishing, rarity values make every effort to ensure reasonable accuracy. You will not find a ‘rarity’ value on any of my coin tickets, for good reason.

Jerry

The rarity ratings attributed by Freeman are as accurate as could have been made at that time , but new types discovered since then would have suffered from the mass meltdown in the 1970s , where as the numbers of scarce and rare types known by Freeman and other collectors would have been enhanced , due to searching for and including into their collections , and hording , a good example would be the 1951 penny

[jelida 1,348]

3 hours ago, terrysoldpennies said:

The rarity ratings attributed by Freeman are as accurate as could have been made at that time , but new types discovered since then would have suffered from the mass meltdown in the 1970s , where as the numbers of scarce and rare types known by Freeman and other collectors would have been enhanced , due to searching for and including into their collections , and hoarding , a good example would be the 1951 penny

Absolutely true, a study based solely on the pennies surviving now would be quite different in its balance between common and rare. Use of rarity values is at its best unreliable, and we must all understand that.

Jerry

[Peckris 2 2,147]

12 hours ago, Menger said:

Then how can the system hope to improve? 
 

To give just one example : Satin numbers (John Jerraims?) which are assigned by one expert to his post-Freeman observations of new varieties. However, we then have to have Peck, Freeman, Gouby, Satin, numbers. It does make life confusing but what other way is there?

[Peckris 2 2,147]

5 hours ago, jelida said:

Absolutely true, a study based solely on the pennies surviving now would be quite different in its balance between common and rare.

That's long overdue, but how could it be done?

[Rob 3,160]

I think a study based on current survivors is a non-starter due to the lack of ability to accumulate from circulation. For a start, once I get over 20 kgs together, I scrap them. Obviously I look for easy to identify rarities and anything that looks sellable is set aside, but with the best will in the world, I'm not going to trawl through piles of washers trying to identify them individually. Therefore, most low grade Victorian and the vast majority of 20th century pennies for which there is little or no market in less than unc, get melted. I'm not alone in doing this.

Every 10kgs scrapped is a thousand coins. I see hundreds of kgs going for scrap every year. FWIW I did 60 myself last year.

[Menger 92]

1 hour ago, Peckris 2 said:

To give just one example : Satin numbers (John Jerraims?) which are assigned by one expert to his post-Freeman observations of new varieties. However, we then have to have Peck, Freeman, Gouby, Satin, numbers. It does make life confusing but what other way is there?

One way is we encourage people to tinker around the edges by posting their own observations / assigned numbers for examples in their own collections on their own websites.  What works sticks and what does not is discarded - by the collecting community as a whole.  Again, this is how all bottom up systems work - from language to common law to customs to “best practice”. In parallel there can also be attempts at top down / expert authority - to the extent it is useful it will be respected (Gouby, Freeman, Satin …) and to the extent it is not it will be ignored. 

[blakeyboy 1,757]

On 2/4/2025 at 8:42 PM, Circulation penny collecto said:

 

As for Mr Jelida though, he seems rather bitter ( he rather reminds me of Norris Cole on Coronation Street). 

Well, as to the elephant in the room, I think 48 hours is long enough to have seen an apology for this undeserved slur.

[Martinminerva 341]

11 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

To give just one example : Satin numbers (John Jerraims?) which are assigned by one expert to his post-Freeman observations of new varieties. However, we then have to have Peck, Freeman, Gouby, Satin, numbers. It does make life confusing but what other way is there?

There was talk on here a few years back about an official re-write of Freeman (maybe either by Michael himself, or under his auspices?), incorporating all the new findings, whether the appendices in the reprint of that book, Satin's work, Gouby and also those discoveries now published on this forum by various members. And with the advent of digital photography, much better images. A monumental undertaking, but it would assemble everything into one place. But I have heard no more about it. Maybe just too big a job...?

[jelida 1,348]

1 hour ago, Martinminerva said:

There was talk on here a few years back about an official re-write of Freeman (maybe either by Michael himself, or under his auspices?), incorporating all the new findings, whether the appendices in the reprint of that book, Satin's work, Gouby and also those discoveries now published on this forum by various members. And with the advent of digital photography, much better images. A monumental undertaking, but it would assemble everything into one place. But I have heard no more about it. Maybe just too big a job...?

The comprehensive appendices that Richard added to the last Freeman (authorised) reprint did incorporate the significant varieties-new dies, overstrikes etc - recorded until then, but did not deal with variations in date width, slapdash but otherwise correct letter repairs etc that Gouby does address. It was well produced and at a very reasonable price and quickly sold out. Gouby did of course update his text also comparatively recently and still offers occasional update pages eg for the (F15) R over A in Victoria, Medusa 1847 numbers .

Really only Richards online ‘Pennies heads n tails’ is really up to date, including the new 1887 to 92 obverse. Any printed publication will age - though a ‘print to order’ version of Richards site would be wonderful!

Jerry

Edited Thursday at 11:39 AM by jelida
Typo