Ebay's Worst Offerings

[Rob 3,152]

£320 for THIS lot???

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/5-guineas-pre-1920-s...#ht_1095wt_1007

Someone must have a lot more money than sense. £5.25 face value of pre-1920 silver would fetch ... what ... £100, £110, tops? As coins, rather than silver, they are just poor (well, VG+ which amounts to much the same thing for what are likely to be pretty common dates).

Spot price for silver today is about £200 for £5.25 face.

[Flash 23]

Scrap silver has been selling well above melt price for 2 weeks or so now - odd, but I'm not complaining!

[Peckris 579]

£320 for THIS lot???

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/5-guineas-pre-1920-s...#ht_1095wt_1007

Someone must have a lot more money than sense. £5.25 face value of pre-1920 silver would fetch ... what ... £100, £110, tops? As coins, rather than silver, they are just poor (well, VG+ which amounts to much the same thing for what are likely to be pretty common dates).

Spot price for silver today is about £200 for £5.25 face.

As high as that? Well, someone still paid £120 over the odds! Crazy.

[Coppers 58]

Another penny for our consideration....

One in a million?

Looks like this seller has set his sites a tad lower...

Try Try Again

Edited October 17, 2009 by Coppers

[Coppers 58]

A 33 penny which the seller indicates has been examined and found to be altered...

Link

[Gary D 76]

A 33 penny which the seller indicates has been examined and found to be altered...

Link

Looks to be a very good example, I was thinking of having a punt myself if it does go too far. It could make £100 which is not too outrageous for a very well done altered date.

[Peter 615]

Looks like a nice bit of shill bidding going on here.

[Red Riley 2]

Looks like a nice bit of shill bidding going on here.

I don't know so much. Looks like quite a good forgery and I would expect it to realise a decent price.

[Peter 615]

Looks like a nice bit of shill bidding going on here.

I don't know so much. Looks like quite a good forgery and I would expect it to realise a decent price.

Bidder 2 4 & 7 are Shilling....smell the coffee

[Coppers 58]

Looks like a nice bit of shill bidding going on here.

I don't know so much. Looks like quite a good forgery and I would expect it to realise a decent price.

Bidder 2 4 & 7 are Shilling....smell the coffee

Now at £102.00

[Gary D 76]

Looks like a nice bit of shill bidding going on here.

I don't know so much. Looks like quite a good forgery and I would expect it to realise a decent price.

Bidder 2 4 & 7 are Shilling....smell the coffee

Now at £102.00

Went for £240, a bit more than I expected but it did look a good one to Bidder 2, Still think it was shilling? I've got a load of coins on there at the moment if anyone wants to shill them up a bit

[Peckris 579]

Went for £240, a bit more than I expected but it did look a good one to Bidder 2, Still think it was shilling? I've got a load of coins on there at the moment if anyone wants to shill them up a bit

Doesn't surprise me it went for so much. It's such a good forgery it's almost like having the real thing Bargain.

[Gary D 76]

This one realy did make me laugh

A what!!!

[Coppers 58]

Now here's a coin that likely missing from most collection...

The only one online

[Rob 3,152]

Now here's a coin that likely missing from most collection...

The only one online

This quote from his sales pitch seems a bit cheeky. Although many businesses make additional profits on shipping & handling, I find it distasteful and therefore refuse to do so. For individual raw coins it will always be 60¢ to anywhere in the U.S. and $1 to anywhere outside the U.S. . The opening price of $5000 is clearly not OTT. I was going to say that it probably is the only 1670 farthing listed, but if you look hard you should be able to find another - incorrectly described as a 1672, 1673 etc. and in a suitably dire grade

Edited October 24, 2009 by Rob

[Peter 615]

This could have also gone into the slabbing debate.

What a joke.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/20p-NO-DATE-MULE-CGS...=item1c0bc23310

Edited October 27, 2009 by Peter

[Peter 615]

and another.....what a complete farce.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vie...em=120456365825

[Peckris 579]

This could have also gone into the slabbing debate.

What a joke.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/20p-NO-DATE-MULE-CGS...=item1c0bc23310

Apparently only 7 certified. No, make that 8, there's the winning bidder to add to the total...

[davidrj 194]

What do folk here think of this one 1869 penny?

the date looks very odd to me

[Flash 23]

Lol a replacement "6" and not a particularly good one!!!

Don't think much his grading either. A fine reverse and an approaching VF reverse doesn't = VF

[RLC35 288]

None of my 1869's have a date like that one. I was a little doubtful about the coin when I first saw it.

[Red Riley 2]

Lol a replacement "6" and not a particularly good one!!!

Don't think much his grading either. A fine reverse and an approaching VF reverse doesn't = VF

I'm trying to work out what has been done. 1869 dates are generally well alligned (unlike say 1860s) and the obverse is generally correct for 1860-74. The normal trick is to lower the entire exergue and the 'fuzz' around the 1 and the 8 seem to bear this out. The only logical numeral to change is the 9 but this actually looks better than the 6. I'm at a loss.

[davidrj 194]

1869 dates are generally well alligned (unlike say 1860s) and the obverse is generally correct for 1860-74. The normal trick is to lower the entire exergue and the 'fuzz' around the 1 and the 8 seem to bear this out. The only logical numeral to change is the 9 but this actually looks better than the 6. I'm at a loss.

both my 1869 have normal well aligned dates - this one jumped at me when I first saw it - a very odd coin - the 6 is strange to say the least and the 9 appeears to have lost its tail - I think both numerals have been replaced.

now at £16 with 9 days to go, too expensive for me to satisfy my curiosity

[Coppers 58]

Another penny for our consideration....

One in a million?

Same approach, but a lower price...

One in fifty thousand

Edited November 27, 2009 by Coppers

[davidrj 194]

1869 dates are generally well alligned (unlike say 1860s) and the obverse is generally correct for 1860-74. The normal trick is to lower the entire exergue and the 'fuzz' around the 1 and the 8 seem to bear this out. The only logical numeral to change is the 9 but this actually looks better than the 6. I'm at a loss.

both my 1869 have normal well aligned dates - this one jumped at me when I first saw it - a very odd coin - the 6 is strange to say the least and the 9 appeears to have lost its tail - I think both numerals have been replaced.

now at £16 with 9 days to go, too expensive for me to satisfy my curiosity

"On 24-Nov-09 at 16:42:44 GMT, seller added the following information:

I have been informed that this coin could be a fogery as the 9 is to high in the date. Any bids may be retracted if you think this is the case. see close up photo of the date"

went up tp £104 but now £77 interesting to see where it ends up