1882 Penny on Ebay

[VickySilver 830]

Uhhh, yea that would be the excuse for no London 1882 in the collection. I think I have one, but have got to figure out how to picture it and see if you guys can massacre it for problems....Pretty much GVF but does not match the die combo with NO microscopic evidence of H or erasure. I gotta find it and put it up here to get crushed.

PS Bought it from a very good source as well...

[1949threepence 3,367]

Uhhh, yea that would be the excuse for no London 1882 in the collection. I think I have one, but have got to figure out how to picture it and see if you guys can massacre it for problems....Pretty much GVF but does not match the die combo with NO microscopic evidence of H or erasure. I gotta find it and put it up here to get crushed.

PS Bought it from a very good source as well...

Constructive criticism only

Be very interested to see it, VS.

[Accumulator 52]

Well it finally went for £871. I didn't bother, there comes a point where a coin is just too ugly, no matter how rare. Especially knowing that better examples do exist.

I agree. Despite the rarity it would look totally out of place in an otherwise mainly UNC collection.

Well bugger me with a rotating cactus...............I did'nt realise there was that many 1882 no Hs out there that you had to choose from.

Show me those UNCs, real interested in those, or those in worse condition, fuck, do you actually have one?

Don't hold back Dave, say what you really mean!

[azda 979]

Well it finally went for £871. I didn't bother, there comes a point where a coin is just too ugly, no matter how rare. Especially knowing that better examples do exist.

I agree. Despite the rarity it would look totally out of place in an otherwise mainly UNC collection.

Well bugger me with a rotating cactus...............I did'nt realise there was that many 1882 no Hs out there that you had to choose from.

Show me those UNCs, real interested in those, or those in worse condition, fuck, do you actually have one?

Don't hold back Dave, say what you really mean!

Lol, sorry, but i'm thinking, if we actually left coins sitting on the shelf because it looks ugly then no collections would ever be complete because some coins just don't get any better than shite grade. You'll be leaving a lot of blanks and be very frustrated eventually.

[Accumulator 52]

Well it finally went for £871. I didn't bother, there comes a point where a coin is just too ugly, no matter how rare. Especially knowing that better examples do exist.

I agree. Despite the rarity it would look totally out of place in an otherwise mainly UNC collection.

Well bugger me with a rotating cactus...............I did'nt realise there was that many 1882 no Hs out there that you had to choose from.

Show me those UNCs, real interested in those, or those in worse condition, fuck, do you actually have one?

Don't hold back Dave, say what you really mean!

Lol, sorry, but i'm thinking, if we actually left coins sitting on the shelf because it looks ugly then no collections would ever be complete because some coins just don't get any better than shite grade. You'll be leaving a lot of blanks and be very frustrated eventually.

I know what you mean and I, for one, have some fairly poor space fillers (open 3, 1908 1*+C etc.) but this was a really rough example. We know from Bernie's 1882 that there are better ones around. As I look through my collection, especially on-line, I find myself enjoying the nice EF+ lustred or toned coins but just can't find a lot of pleasure in looking at anything less than VF, no matter how rare. Perhaps this is just me. I know that others, like Scott, enjoy collecting all coins and aren't put off by grade, and that's fine for them too. Horses for courses I guess.

[argentumandcoins 70]

Well it finally went for £871. I didn't bother, there comes a point where a coin is just too ugly, no matter how rare. Especially knowing that better examples do exist.

I agree. Despite the rarity it would look totally out of place in an otherwise mainly UNC collection.

Well bugger me with a rotating cactus...............I did'nt realise there was that many 1882 no Hs out there that you had to choose from.

Show me those UNCs, real interested in those, or those in worse condition, fuck, do you actually have one?

Don't hold back Dave, say what you really mean!

Lol, sorry, but i'm thinking, if we actually left coins sitting on the shelf because it looks ugly then no collections would ever be complete because some coins just don't get any better than shite grade. You'll be leaving a lot of blanks and be very frustrated eventually.

I know what you mean and I, for one, have some fairly poor space fillers (open 3, 1908 1*+C etc.) but this was a really rough example. We know from Bernie's 1882 that there are better ones around. As I look through my collection, especially on-line, I find myself enjoying the nice EF+ lustred or toned coins but just can't find a lot of pleasure in looking at anything less than VF, no matter how rare. Perhaps this is just me. I know that others, like Scott, enjoy collecting all coins and aren't put off by grade, and that's fine for them too. Horses for courses I guess.

Myself and my Dads penny collection is littered with low grade examples and probably 6 or more will have cost over £1k each in poor/fair (some over £2k). Dave is quite right if shite is all that is available you'd best buy some toilet paper for your cabinet because shite will be going in there to fill the gap!

[1949threepence 3,367]

Lol, sorry, but i'm thinking, if we actually left coins sitting on the shelf because it looks ugly then no collections would ever be complete because some coins just don't get any better than shite grade. You'll be leaving a lot of blanks and be very frustrated eventually.

Yes, but everybody's different, and most people set their own personal parameters when it comes to collections. I doubt there are many who have every single example/die combination in the bunhead run. But it's their decision to what extent they go, and not up for criticism ~ any more than I would criticise you for your coin collecting/selling choices.

You came across so strong in your two posts last night, that I wondered if you had some sort of vested interest in that particular coin. Did you ?

[azda 979]

Lol, sorry, but i'm thinking, if we actually left coins sitting on the shelf because it looks ugly then no collections would ever be complete because some coins just don't get any better than shite grade. You'll be leaving a lot of blanks and be very frustrated eventually.

Yes, but everybody's different, and most people set their own personal parameters when it comes to collections. I doubt there are many who have every single example/die combination in the bunhead run. But it's their decision to what extent they go, and not up for criticism ~ any more than I would criticise you for your coin collecting/selling choices.

You came across so strong in your two posts last night, that I wondered if you had some sort of vested interest in that particular coin. Did you ?

No interest in Bunhead pennies what so ever. My little irk was, if you collect THAT series and refuse to point blank not collect a certain date because you know there's only worn examples, so you'll also know that there's going to be holes popping up all over. 1860 is the most popular of the Bunheads due to the various die OBVs and REVs, this makes that date alone a good series to collect, but if you're collecting just bunheads and onwards then you're going to come up against a few hurdles along the way if you don't pick up the shite and take it with you. Just because your tray looks pretty with EFs and above does'nt make it complete unless you COMPLETELY collect the series if its affordable to you. Just my thoughts, you have your own opinions

[DaveG38 405]

Lol, sorry, but i'm thinking, if we actually left coins sitting on the shelf because it looks ugly then no collections would ever be complete because some coins just don't get any better than shite grade. You'll be leaving a lot of blanks and be very frustrated eventually.

Yes, but everybody's different, and most people set their own personal parameters when it comes to collections. I doubt there are many who have every single example/die combination in the bunhead run. But it's their decision to what extent they go, and not up for criticism ~ any more than I would criticise you for your coin collecting/selling choices.

You came across so strong in your two posts last night, that I wondered if you had some sort of vested interest in that particular coin. Did you ?

No interest in Bunhead pennies what so ever. My little irk was, if you collect THAT series and refuse to point blank not collect a certain date because you know there's only worn examples, so you'll also know that there's going to be holes popping up all over. 1860 is the most popular of the Bunheads due to the various die OBVs and REVs, this makes that date alone a good series to collect, but if you're collecting just bunheads and onwards then you're going to come up against a few hurdles along the way if you don't pick up the shite and take it with you. Just because your tray looks pretty with EFs and above does'nt make it complete unless you COMPLETELY collect the series if its affordable to you. Just my thoughts, you have your own opinions

If you are a series/date collector, then in my view you must try and fill the gaps, even if that sometimes means that you have some poorer specimens in there. If you want to collect only uncirculated, then even with an unlimited budget, you may still find that you never get the coin to fill those one or two spaces that exist, and maybe never will. That's frustrating and does nothing for my sense of satisfaction at having a series 'completed.' For me, the answer is to fill the gaps with the best you can, and keep searching for the improvements, even if these are still not up to the quality of the rest of the collection.

In my case, I have a complete date run of Victorian sixpences, many in the higher grades, but the 1854 is fair/fine at best as is the 1893 jubilee head. I don't think I've ever seen a EF or UNC specimen of either date, so notwithstanding the high prices they would command, I've never been in a position to grab high grade specimens. That means I can live with lower grades because I can tell myself I'm still looking.

[VickySilver 830]

Yes, those last two are showstoppers in unc. I won't say I traded the farm, but kind of...

Dritanniar of 1878 in unc. almost impossible, and some other dates as well. Have to

settle on less than fantastic unc.s sometimes (well, for a while as it just gnaws at you).

Edited February 15, 2013 by VickySilver

[Colin88 54]

Azda....you sweary bloke you.....you're right, I was thinking of Bernie's son....did Bernie ever sell the 1933 currency he was punting around a few year back?..(PS had the pattern I seem to remember )..I'm a tad out of touch on the penny front I'm afraid...

[Coinery 1,152]

Lol, sorry, but i'm thinking, if we actually left coins sitting on the shelf because it looks ugly then no collections would ever be complete because some coins just don't get any better than shite grade. You'll be leaving a lot of blanks and be very frustrated eventually.

Yes, but everybody's different, and most people set their own personal parameters when it comes to collections. I doubt there are many who have every single example/die combination in the bunhead run. But it's their decision to what extent they go, and not up for criticism ~ any more than I would criticise you for your coin collecting/selling choices.

You came across so strong in your two posts last night, that I wondered if you had some sort of vested interest in that particular coin. Did you ?

I have to confess myself, and I feel that I can, in view of the fact I'm going to be sidestepping the forum for a while, that I can easily relate to a decision to stick to high-grades only, in view of the fact that for most people there is no need to spend large sums on washers, when there is mostly still a number of 'affordable' high-grade coins to accumulate, and I reckon most of us fall into that category!

However, when/if a time ever arrives for us humbles, where we have nothing left to spend our money on to complete a collection, then I guess the mega-expensive, low-grade, filler would be a hurdle we would all have to face, and very few of us could honestly predict their actions in that situation.

It must surely always seem like a mad concept to any collector to sit a Poor coin in a Top-Flight collection, when there are still numerous other coins to collect in the series? I can only speculate, but gap-filled high-class collections must still irk nearly as much as the original gap?

Surely most collectors must set out having psychologically prepared themselves for the fact that a 1933 penny is not going to grace their collection in ANY grade, and equivically, surely a great many others must have done something similar with the other major rarities and, fortunately, have never stressed about it?

I for one would not feel niggled at a tray of pennies that numbered 1932, 1934, I would never have attempted the series otherwise!

[Peter 615]

Apart from farthings I'm a quality collector rather than quantity but still have 1000's to shift.

[Accumulator 52]

Lol, sorry, but i'm thinking, if we actually left coins sitting on the shelf because it looks ugly then no collections would ever be complete because some coins just don't get any better than shite grade. You'll be leaving a lot of blanks and be very frustrated eventually.

Yes, but everybody's different, and most people set their own personal parameters when it comes to collections. I doubt there are many who have every single example/die combination in the bunhead run. But it's their decision to what extent they go, and not up for criticism ~ any more than I would criticise you for your coin collecting/selling choices.

You came across so strong in your two posts last night, that I wondered if you had some sort of vested interest in that particular coin. Did you ?

I have to confess myself, and I feel that I can, in view of the fact I'm going to be sidestepping the forum for a while, that I can easily relate to a decision to stick to high-grades only, in view of the fact that for most people there is no need to spend large sums on washers, when there is mostly still a number of 'affordable' high-grade coins to accumulate, and I reckon most of us fall into that category!

However, when/if a time ever arrives for us humbles, where we have nothing left to spend our money on to complete a collection, then I guess the mega-expensive, low-grade, filler would be a hurdle we would all have to face, and very few of us could honestly predict their actions in that situation.

It must surely always seem like a mad concept to any collector to sit a Poor coin in a Top-Flight collection, when there are still numerous other coins to collect in the series? I can only speculate, but gap-filled high-class collections must still irk nearly as much as the original gap?

Surely most collectors must set out having psychologically prepared themselves for the fact that a 1933 penny is not going to grace their collection in ANY grade, and equivically, surely a great many others must have done something similar with the other major rarities and, fortunately, have never stressed about it?

I for one would not feel niggled at a tray of pennies that numbered 1932, 1934, I would never have attempted the series otherwise!

This is a really interesting discussion, and there's no reason for it to be heated or emotionally charged in any way. After all it's just a hobby for most of us, and we come on here to relax

I think you've almost hit the nail on the head for me Stuart. I do have some low grade rarities in my collection but, short of the fact that I have them, they provide little visual satisfaction. If really good examples of rare coins appear I'll empty the piggy bank but otherwise I'm probably happier filling in the less-rare gaps with top grade examples than shelling out on washers. The 1882 in question was worn but it was the nasty pock-marks that did it for me. It just didn't excite, no matter how rare.

[Peckris 579]

Lol, sorry, but i'm thinking, if we actually left coins sitting on the shelf because it looks ugly then no collections would ever be complete because some coins just don't get any better than shite grade. You'll be leaving a lot of blanks and be very frustrated eventually.

Yes, but everybody's different, and most people set their own personal parameters when it comes to collections. I doubt there are many who have every single example/die combination in the bunhead run. But it's their decision to what extent they go, and not up for criticism ~ any more than I would criticise you for your coin collecting/selling choices.

You came across so strong in your two posts last night, that I wondered if you had some sort of vested interest in that particular coin. Did you ?

I have to confess myself, and I feel that I can, in view of the fact I'm going to be sidestepping the forum for a while, that I can easily relate to a decision to stick to high-grades only, in view of the fact that for most people there is no need to spend large sums on washers, when there is mostly still a number of 'affordable' high-grade coins to accumulate, and I reckon most of us fall into that category!

However, when/if a time ever arrives for us humbles, where we have nothing left to spend our money on to complete a collection, then I guess the mega-expensive, low-grade, filler would be a hurdle we would all have to face, and very few of us could honestly predict their actions in that situation.

It must surely always seem like a mad concept to any collector to sit a Poor coin in a Top-Flight collection, when there are still numerous other coins to collect in the series? I can only speculate, but gap-filled high-class collections must still irk nearly as much as the original gap?

Surely most collectors must set out having psychologically prepared themselves for the fact that a 1933 penny is not going to grace their collection in ANY grade, and equivically, surely a great many others must have done something similar with the other major rarities and, fortunately, have never stressed about it?

I for one would not feel niggled at a tray of pennies that numbered 1932, 1934, I would never have attempted the series otherwise!

This is a really interesting discussion, and there's no reason for it to be heated or emotionally charged in any way. After all it's just a hobby for most of us, and we come on here to relax

I think you've almost hit the nail on the head for me Stuart. I do have some low grade rarities in my collection but, short of the fact that I have them, they provide little visual satisfaction. If really good examples of rare coins appear I'll empty the piggy bank but otherwise I'm probably happier filling in the less-rare gaps with top grade examples than shelling out on washers. The 1882 in question was worn but it was the nasty pock-marks that did it for me. It just didn't excite, no matter how rare.

And that's the issue in a nutshell. When you've got a low-grade ultra rarity, the ONLY pleasure comes from saying to yourself "it's very very rare!" - there can be none from looking at it. After all, an 1882 washer with no H looks no different from any other bun penny washer, even an 1882 where the H has worn away. What you'd see is a washer, and you'd just have to keep telling yourself "It's rare!"

[Rob 3,152]

If it's the only one available, or not listed elsewhere, I'll take it irrespective of grade as long as the salient features are clear.

[1949threepence 3,367]

Lol, sorry, but i'm thinking, if we actually left coins sitting on the shelf because it looks ugly then no collections would ever be complete because some coins just don't get any better than shite grade. You'll be leaving a lot of blanks and be very frustrated eventually.

Yes, but everybody's different, and most people set their own personal parameters when it comes to collections. I doubt there are many who have every single example/die combination in the bunhead run. But it's their decision to what extent they go, and not up for criticism ~ any more than I would criticise you for your coin collecting/selling choices.

You came across so strong in your two posts last night, that I wondered if you had some sort of vested interest in that particular coin. Did you ?

I have to confess myself, and I feel that I can, in view of the fact I'm going to be sidestepping the forum for a while, that I can easily relate to a decision to stick to high-grades only, in view of the fact that for most people there is no need to spend large sums on washers, when there is mostly still a number of 'affordable' high-grade coins to accumulate, and I reckon most of us fall into that category!

However, when/if a time ever arrives for us humbles, where we have nothing left to spend our money on to complete a collection, then I guess the mega-expensive, low-grade, filler would be a hurdle we would all have to face, and very few of us could honestly predict their actions in that situation.

It must surely always seem like a mad concept to any collector to sit a Poor coin in a Top-Flight collection, when there are still numerous other coins to collect in the series? I can only speculate, but gap-filled high-class collections must still irk nearly as much as the original gap?

Surely most collectors must set out having psychologically prepared themselves for the fact that a 1933 penny is not going to grace their collection in ANY grade, and equivically, surely a great many others must have done something similar with the other major rarities and, fortunately, have never stressed about it?

I for one would not feel niggled at a tray of pennies that numbered 1932, 1934, I would never have attempted the series otherwise!

This is a really interesting discussion, and there's no reason for it to be heated or emotionally charged in any way. After all it's just a hobby for most of us, and we come on here to relax

I think you've almost hit the nail on the head for me Stuart. I do have some low grade rarities in my collection but, short of the fact that I have them, they provide little visual satisfaction. If really good examples of rare coins appear I'll empty the piggy bank but otherwise I'm probably happier filling in the less-rare gaps with top grade examples than shelling out on washers. The 1882 in question was worn but it was the nasty pock-marks that did it for me. It just didn't excite, no matter how rare.

Totally agree with Stuart & Steve.

I don't, for example, anticipate getting an 1862 with halfpenny numerals, nor an 1863 open 3, nor an 1863 with die date (and there's more than one die No available), nor an 1877 narrow date, nor all of the bronze proofs. It's never going to happen, and that doesn't bother me in the slightest. Consequently, those rare and extremely rare items, mostly, apart from the proofs, only available as smooth surfaced washers, are not even on the radar for me. I'm content with high grade versions of the regular pennies for those years. The pleasure of coin collecting is all about looking at beautiful items. I get nothing from looking at some crap worn out piece of junk with a century plus wear on it, no matter how vanishingly rare. I wouldn't want such an eyesore sitting in my tray amongst the good stuff, of which there's more than enough. I'll save for good quality versions of the attainable rare coins I haven't yet got, such as the 1864 crosslet 4, the 1879 narrow date, the 1882 over 1, or the 1869.

If high grade specimens from the numerous 1860 or 1874 die pairings, which I haven't got, become available, and I like the look of them, then I'll consider a punt or buy.

But that's me. Like Peck, I don't like looking at washers. However, I would never criticise anybody who did go for such items. That would be their choice, and something they personally got something from. As I said earlier, we're all different. It doesn't mean that any of us individually should incur disrespect or astonishment for those differences, as they pertain to the perceptions of others.

[Red Riley 2]

This is a really interesting discussion, and there's no reason for it to be heated or emotionally charged in any way. After all it's just a hobby for most of us, and we come on here to relax

I think you've almost hit the nail on the head for me Stuart. I do have some low grade rarities in my collection but, short of the fact that I have them, they provide little visual satisfaction. If really good examples of rare coins appear I'll empty the piggy bank but otherwise I'm probably happier filling in the less-rare gaps with top grade examples than shelling out on washers. The 1882 in question was worn but it was the nasty pock-marks that did it for me. It just didn't excite, no matter how rare.

My thoughts entirely. I know where the line is, but until I see the coin I don't know which side of it a particular coin falls. In this case, it falls the wrong side.

[Gary D 76]

This is a really interesting discussion, and there's no reason for it to be heated or emotionally charged in any way. After all it's just a hobby for most of us, and we come on here to relax

I think you've almost hit the nail on the head for me Stuart. I do have some low grade rarities in my collection but, short of the fact that I have them, they provide little visual satisfaction. If really good examples of rare coins appear I'll empty the piggy bank but otherwise I'm probably happier filling in the less-rare gaps with top grade examples than shelling out on washers. The 1882 in question was worn but it was the nasty pock-marks that did it for me. It just didn't excite, no matter how rare.

My thoughts entirely. I know where the line is, but until I see the coin I don't know which side of it a particular coin falls. In this case, it falls the wrong side.

I'm a date collector and filling the gap is the first priority, I'll then update to get the best grade as they become available. 1903s 1909 1922s pennies etc if available in UNC would be beyond my means. I'm happy to make do with 1920, 1933, 1954 etc altered dates, but will not stoop to copies.

[TomGoodheart 400]

I think you've almost hit the nail on the head for me Stuart. I do have some low grade rarities in my collection but, short of the fact that I have them, they provide little visual satisfaction. If really good examples of rare coins appear I'll empty the piggy bank but otherwise I'm probably happier filling in the less-rare gaps with top grade examples than shelling out on washers. The 1882 in question was worn but it was the nasty pock-marks that did it for me. It just didn't excite, no matter how rare.

Same here really. Of course, my collecting aims have changed with time. When I first started out I was keen to pick up all the rarities both to fill gaps and those that nobody else seemed to know about. But with time I've come to realise that that mysterious 'eye appeal' that's often mentioned here is key for me. I just don't any longer get the pleasure from this sort of thing:

Rare? Yes, I only know of two other examples. But satisfying to have such a coin in my collection? Not so much!

So I too am now on a journey to track down the better examples of what, to most people, are just 'ordinary' coins, since poor examples can be found without any difficulty at all.

Now in some cases the coin I want belongs to someone else. I guess I'll just have to wait until I find something they want more or they decide to sell! In others I'm still looking for an example that 'does it' for me.

Is that a satisfying way to collect? Not entirely! But for me I can live with it far better than in the early days when I was all in a rush to fill any gap at any cost. Discernment and patience are still things I'm learning. But the fact that I am learning them makes my collecting focus different these days and I just have to accept that gaps (temporary or permanent) in the collection is one price I have to pay for feeling happier when I look at my treasures!