Relative values of a few rarer pennies

[Accumulator 52]

Based on another topic about pennies recently sold on eBay, I thought it might be interesting to look at relative prices being paid for a few of the rarer examples.

As a basis for discussion I produced a small table showing 4 varieties, their frequency in VR Court's survey (i.e. the predicted number of coins of that date you would have to search to find a single example of the rarity) and the predicted market price (for an example in around Fine condition). This market price is based on the regular eBay trades of 1903 Open 3's, averaging say £90. I have chosen the 1903 as they seem to appear more regularly than any of the other coins.

The results are below:

Who'll have a go at explaining the sale of a 1909 F169 at London Coins in March for £1600?

The only explanation seems to be that many collectors (me included!) just get too lazy and aren't prepared to do the necessary legwork to find these coins!

Edited May 12, 2013 by Accumulator

[davidrj 194]

Who'll have a go at explaining the sale of a 1909 F169 at London Coins in March for £1600?

The only explanation seems to be that many collectors (me included!) just get too lazy and aren't prepared to do the necessary legwork to find these coins!

1) 1909 is a relatively scarce date to begin with

2) the 1909 F169 is far better known - being in most price guides

3) Also the 1909 F169 is much harder to spot because the reverse border teeth disappear quickly on worn specimens - so probably a higher grade is needed to identify one compared to the others.

I'm certainly still looking

Also my perennial complaint re circulated 20th century issues on Ebay - generic photos and only showing one side of the coin

still need 1908 F164a too!

Edited May 12, 2013 by davidrj

[Peckris 579]

When was Court's survey done? Obviously pre-decimal, but how long before? I suspect that the frequency of known rarities have changed dramatically since 1971, and it would seem that all those 4 varieties must have been known about pre-1971, or a survey of them could not have been taken. I don't know how, but it's time for a new survey - perhaps a regular sample of eBay once a month for a year.

[davidrj 194]

When was Court's survey done? Obviously pre-decimal, but how long before? I suspect that the frequency of known rarities have changed dramatically since 1971, and it would seem that all those 4 varieties must have been known about pre-1971, or a survey of them could not have been taken.

In his (1972) article he states "the project started 4 years ago" but they knocked off for 6 months to do halfpennies - never seen any results from that survey though

Pity he didn't include the veil head Vicky pennies either - there were still shedloads of them in circulation at the time

I don't know how, but it's time for a new survey - perhaps a regular sample of eBay once a month for a year.

Can't be done - decent stuff sells, but the crap gets continually recycled via "free listing" weekends

[Rob 3,152]

When was Court's survey done? Obviously pre-decimal, but how long before? I suspect that the frequency of known rarities have changed dramatically since 1971, and it would seem that all those 4 varieties must have been known about pre-1971, or a survey of them could not have been taken.

In his (1972) article he states "the project started 4 years ago" but they knocked off for 6 months to do halfpennies - never seen any results from that survey though

Pity he didn't include the veil head Vicky pennies either - there were still shedloads of them in circulation at the time

I don't know how, but it's time for a new survey - perhaps a regular sample of eBay once a month for a year.

Can't be done - decent stuff sells, but the crap gets continually recycled via "free listing" weekends

For many items that is the only realistic way to sell. Very few items are desirable enough to ensure that they sell first time round for what would be fair market value elsewhere, and for the rest that would invariably mean starting at 99p and selling at any price. If people don't use a free listing weekend they incur fees. What are they - 10%? Whatever it isn't zero, so you would be an idiot not to list when the cost is zero and it negates the failure to sell. It means you can load the costs incurred onto the postage. You have to ship using a signed for method for anything collectable, though I think that winners of practical items are less likely to abuse non-delivery claims. That's a minimum of £2 these days, and for anything over a kg £5. People moan a lot about the postage costs on ebay, but it is only fair for sellers to protect themselves and for buyers to acknowledge this right.

[Peter 615]

Bidders have an option.I have bought a few variety beauties at what I am happy with.Ebay tends to give you a nice selection and may it last.

[davidrj 194]

I don't know how, but it's time for a new survey - perhaps a regular sample of eBay once a month for a year.

Can't be done - decent stuff sells, but the crap gets continually recycled via "free listing" weekends

Rob, Peter - you both miss my point, I'm not complaining about the relisting BUT recycled listings make any attempt at statistics impossible. Court's suevey is valid because his samples were on the way to the melting pot - ie no coin was counted twice

[Paulus 1,975]

I don't know how, but it's time for a new survey - perhaps a regular sample of eBay once a month for a year.

Can't be done - decent stuff sells, but the crap gets continually recycled via "free listing" weekends

Rob, Peter - you both miss my point, I'm not complaining about the relisting BUT recycled listings make any attempt at statistics impossible. Court's suevey is valid because his samples were on the way to the melting pot - ie no coin was counted twice

Totally get you David, can you think of a statistically more valid survey?

[Rob 3,152]

I don't know how, but it's time for a new survey - perhaps a regular sample of eBay once a month for a year.

Can't be done - decent stuff sells, but the crap gets continually recycled via "free listing" weekends

Rob, Peter - you both miss my point, I'm not complaining about the relisting BUT recycled listings make any attempt at statistics impossible. Court's suevey is valid because his samples were on the way to the melting pot - ie no coin was counted twice

Well, maybe there is an outside chance to do a survey by trying to replicate the experiment. You can certainly collect as many piles of low grade pennies as possible and ensure they get melted and hence not double counted. That would be good for everyone as the supply of crap far outweighs the number of collectors and their demand. What you cannot overcome is the 40 years of cherry-picking to remove the rarities from the accumulated piles. You are comparing two different populations - the first was for circulating coinage, the second non-circulating collected accumulations by people with a probable interest in coins. That will inevitably skew the results.

[Accumulator 52]

Totally agree. I can't see any way a Court type survey could ever be undertaken now. As far as I can tell, most if the accumulations sold on eBay have already been sifted for many of the rarities.

Of course it would be possible to do a similar survey on circulating decimal coins, if anyone felt so inclined. I won't be ordering a copy though!

[Peckris 579]

I don't know how, but it's time for a new survey - perhaps a regular sample of eBay once a month for a year.

Can't be done - decent stuff sells, but the crap gets continually recycled via "free listing" weekends

Rob, Peter - you both miss my point, I'm not complaining about the relisting BUT recycled listings make any attempt at statistics impossible. Court's suevey is valid because his samples were on the way to the melting pot - ie no coin was counted twice

Well, maybe there is an outside chance to do a survey by trying to replicate the experiment. You can certainly collect as many piles of low grade pennies as possible and ensure they get melted and hence not double counted. That would be good for everyone as the supply of crap far outweighs the number of collectors and their demand. What you cannot overcome is the 40 years of cherry-picking to remove the rarities from the accumulated piles. You are comparing two different populations - the first was for circulating coinage, the second non-circulating collected accumulations by people with a probable interest in coins. That will inevitably skew the results.

Exactly Rob. Though there's an interesting future scenario - if copper prices continue to rise, and dross continues to be sold for scrap, can't you envisage a situation where the known rarities become progressively commoner in relation to their peers?