1863 penny sold for £19000!

[scott 144]

odd term for full unc copper.

even though its bronze and is sometimes yellow

[Peckris 579]

odd term for full unc copper.

even though its bronze and is sometimes yellow

Does it mean "BU"? "Red" seems an odd way to define a BU coin which, as you point out, is usually yellow or orange or coppery gold, but rarely red. I've never heard that term before and I've been collecting for 40 years.

[Chris Perkins 228]

I've heard it before and seen it on slabs and the like, so ner!

I suppose it doesn't literally mean the coin is red, but it does basically indicate a high level of original lustre. They use the term 'brown' too for EF or even US AU coins that don't have lustre.

[VickySilver 830]

Yes, sorry about that as it is term for copper coins (even if of alloy) when they retain excellent luster. These would be top coins, and was trying to emphasize how ridiculous (IMO) was the price paid for the slender 3 or die marked 5 pennies. I would very much prefer the set of key pennies any day, not that they are cheap.

What is difficult to fathom is that an 1882 London (NOT Heaton) penny in mint [red] would likely bring less than this overblown bit and yet is a date and mint combination likely of greater rarity and not subject to increase of finds now that the type has been identified as rare.

[Coppers 58]

Yes, sorry about that as it is term for copper coins (even if of alloy) when they retain excellent luster. These would be top coins, and was trying to emphasize how ridiculous (IMO) was the price paid for the slender 3 or die marked 5 pennies. I would very much prefer the set of key pennies any day, not that they are cheap.

What is difficult to fathom is that an 1882 London (NOT Heaton) penny in mint [red] would likely bring less than this overblown bit and yet is a date and mint combination likely of greater rarity and not subject to increase of finds now that the type has been identified as rare.

Whether the prices these two pennies realized were due to hype, auction fever or a temporary case of madness, the buyers will be in for a very rude awakening should they ever try to sell these pennies.

[Peckris 579]

Yes, sorry about that as it is term for copper coins (even if of alloy) when they retain excellent luster. These would be top coins, and was trying to emphasize how ridiculous (IMO) was the price paid for the slender 3 or die marked 5 pennies. I would very much prefer the set of key pennies any day, not that they are cheap.

What is difficult to fathom is that an 1882 London (NOT Heaton) penny in mint [red] would likely bring less than this overblown bit and yet is a date and mint combination likely of greater rarity and not subject to increase of finds now that the type has been identified as rare.

Thanks for the enlightenment. But the rarity of the narrow 3 penny cannot be less rare than the 1882. Satin only knew of one, and this is presumably the second known specimen. Which makes it rarer than the 1933! (Though I do know that bun varieties never come near to matching 1933s I'm price, however rare...)

[VickySilver 830]

Peckris, I think the point is that people likely have not been searching out the obscure differences that make a slender 3 a slender 3. I can quite imagine that with more searching more will turn up - doubtlessly many on this forum have more experience than I but will note I have NEVER looked for this type before, and it was only after this sale that I looked at my two specimens (oh well, not "slender 3's"). This coin has far less going for it even than, say, the US 1970 S one cent of the small date.

In the end this is a minor variety and not a date or mintmark individual coin like the 1882 London mint coin. Absolutely outrageous that this slender 3 coin attracts other than minimal interest. Not even an overdate and NOT a major varietal. I will not name names but I know a collector that collects by die state and so would have multiple specimens from the same die. There is something for everybody I suppose and am thankful that collectors paying such money must not be interested in the relatively rare bits that I go after...

[Coppers 58]

In the end this is a minor variety and not a date or mintmark individual coin

Exactly so.

[Peckris 579]

Edited October 21, 2009 by Peckris

[Peckris 579]

I know a collector that collects by die state and so would have multiple specimens from the same die.

OMG, really? Now that's what I call obsessive. It does beg the question though, where there are two common dies that are exactly the same, how does he know the difference between them? (That surely is the train-spotting aspect of our hobby...)

[Peter 615]

I have a Peck and a Freeman's book (also Montague) but I have never really studied my 1d's.

A lot of my 1d's came out of circulation and I have added to over the years so my 20C collection is probably EF minimum except for KN's ME etc.

I have several obviously different die coins for the Bun pennies.

My main passion is farthings so I need to check my 1d's for open 3 1903's slender 3 in 1863 etc.

I do have a few 1895 2mm which Freeman rates as rare.....these I have picked up over time as they have always been noted as a rarity.

My wife caught me reading Freemans book this evening and when I mentioned varieties and told her about 6 obverses and 5 obverses for the same date she gave me that look.

However its what floats your boat............I was estatic when I got my 2 prong 1840 1/4d which isn't wildley published.....but I won't be looking for die varieties of this date....although I have another example where the prong is fading....sad isn't it.

Just enjoy the hobby.

[scott 144]

yea i dont get why 2 pronged trident is listed... its just a worn die my 1840 has 2 1/2 trident prongs lol

have bought a couple of interesting farthings (see the 1845 one in the Coin aquisition of the week thread

but yea, if there is one example known then sure, if its listed as a specific variety and there is one other known its definatly worth taking...... just not at £19k if i had 19k i would probably make sure i have EVERY penny from 1860-67 in EF+ lol (except 1882 london obviously)

[Peter 615]

yea i dont get why 2 pronged trident is listed... its just a worn die my 1840 has 2 1/2 trident prongs lol

have bought a couple of interesting farthings (see the 1845 one in the Coin aquisition of the week thread

but yea, if there is one example known then sure, if its listed as a specific variety and there is one other known its definatly worth taking...... just not at £19k if i had 19k i would probably make sure i have EVERY penny from 1860-67 in EF+ lol (except 1882 london obviously)

Scot

The 2 pronged 1840 is a clear variety.....notice the ghosting on the reverse.....very rare and seldom offered even by Cooke

It took me 20 years of searching.

http://www.omnicoin.com/coin_view_enlarge.aspx?id=947669

[scott 144]

o i can see that.. that ghosting is cool too

mine has a bit more trident prong

[Peckris 579]

yea i dont get why 2 pronged trident is listed... its just a worn die my 1840 has 2 1/2 trident prongs lol

have bought a couple of interesting farthings (see the 1845 one in the Coin aquisition of the week thread

but yea, if there is one example known then sure, if its listed as a specific variety and there is one other known its definatly worth taking...... just not at £19k if i had 19k i would probably make sure i have EVERY penny from 1860-67 in EF+ lol (except 1882 london obviously)

Scot

The 2 pronged 1840 is a clear variety.....notice the ghosting on the reverse.....very rare and seldom offered even by Cooke

It took me 20 years of searching.

http://www.omnicoin.com/coin_view_enlarge.aspx?id=947669

When is a variety not a variety? I personally believe that the 1888 and 1889 double florin 'inverted 1' types should be downgraded as they are just a worn die, not an error or clear variety (there are intermediate stages where the effect is less pronounced). The same could apply to the 'two prong farthing' I suppose.