[HAXall]

I have bought those two coins not long ago.is it really different variates or just defect? How valuable would they be?
(description was with the coin)

[Accumulator]

HAXall, on 25 March 2012 - 08:46 PM, said:

I have bought those two coins not long ago.is it really different variates or just defect? How valuable would they be? DSC04612 - Copy.JPG
(description was with the coin)

Hi, I've never seen the flaw to the date area before. To my knowledge it's not a known variety and would probably only prove of interest to collectors if other similar coins are found. It's certainly worth holding onto though.

The ONE' flaw is, however, a well known variety and considered collectible. Typically these sell for £40-£60.

[Peckris]

Accumulator, on 25 March 2012 - 08:52 PM, said:

HAXall, on 25 March 2012 - 08:46 PM, said:

I have bought those two coins not long ago.is it really different variates or just defect? How valuable would they be? DSC04612 - Copy.JPG
(description was with the coin)

Hi, I've never seen the flaw to the date area before. To my knowledge it's not a known variety and would probably only prove of interest to collectors if other similar coins are found. It's certainly worth holding onto though.

The ONE' flaw is, however, a well known variety and considered collectible. Typically these sell for £40-£60.

In high grade! (I'm certainly in the market for a minimum EF, but would prefer GEF - UNC). However, in the grade illustrated it would be no higher than around £10. BTW Gouby rates them one order of rarity higher than the 1926ME.

[Accumulator]

Peckris, on 25 March 2012 - 10:05 PM, said:

Accumulator, on 25 March 2012 - 08:52 PM, said:

HAXall, on 25 March 2012 - 08:46 PM, said:

I have bought those two coins not long ago.is it really different variates or just defect? How valuable would they be? DSC04612 - Copy.JPG
(description was with the coin)

Hi, I've never seen the flaw to the date area before. To my knowledge it's not a known variety and would probably only prove of interest to collectors if other similar coins are found. It's certainly worth holding onto though.

The ONE' flaw is, however, a well known variety and considered collectible. Typically these sell for £40-£60.

In high grade! (I'm certainly in the market for a minimum EF, but would prefer GEF - UNC). However, in the grade illustrated it would be no higher than around £10. BTW Gouby rates them one order of rarity higher than the 1926ME.

I actually meant £40-60 at the grade shown, based on recent eBay sale prices. I've not seen a GEF-UNC example but would expect such to achieve £200-£300!

Bronze prices are crazy. I was watching a 1918kN in GEF-UNC that sold on eBay last night for £1340. They're not that rare!

[Peckris]

Accumulator, on 26 March 2012 - 05:54 AM, said:

Peckris, on 25 March 2012 - 10:05 PM, said:

Accumulator, on 25 March 2012 - 08:52 PM, said:

HAXall, on 25 March 2012 - 08:46 PM, said:

I have bought those two coins not long ago.is it really different variates or just defect? How valuable would they be? DSC04612 - Copy.JPG
(description was with the coin)

Hi, I've never seen the flaw to the date area before. To my knowledge it's not a known variety and would probably only prove of interest to collectors if other similar coins are found. It's certainly worth holding onto though.

The ONE' flaw is, however, a well known variety and considered collectible. Typically these sell for £40-£60.

In high grade! (I'm certainly in the market for a minimum EF, but would prefer GEF - UNC). However, in the grade illustrated it would be no higher than around £10. BTW Gouby rates them one order of rarity higher than the 1926ME.

I actually meant £40-60 at the grade shown, based on recent eBay sale prices. I've not seen a GEF-UNC example but would expect such to achieve £200-£300!

Bronze prices are crazy. I was watching a 1918kN in GEF-UNC that sold on eBay last night for £1340. They're not that rare!

That's crazy! I've got about three which I got from change in the late 60s. Perhaps I can yet swap them for a high grade, with a cash adjustment (he said, murmuring his pipedreams out loud..)

Has anyone ever done a study as to how rare the 18KN is in relation to the 19KN? My own guesstimate is that it's at least 3 times commoner, maybe 4 or 5. In fact, I'd say the 18H and KN weren't so very far apart from each other. Unlike the 19H and KN which must be at least an order of ten apart, if not more.

[Accumulator]

Peckris, on 26 March 2012 - 08:24 PM, said:

Accumulator, on 26 March 2012 - 05:54 AM, said:

Peckris, on 25 March 2012 - 10:05 PM, said:

Accumulator, on 25 March 2012 - 08:52 PM, said:

HAXall, on 25 March 2012 - 08:46 PM, said:

I have bought those two coins not long ago.is it really different variates or just defect? How valuable would they be? DSC04612 - Copy.JPG
(description was with the coin)

Hi, I've never seen the flaw to the date area before. To my knowledge it's not a known variety and would probably only prove of interest to collectors if other similar coins are found. It's certainly worth holding onto though.

The ONE' flaw is, however, a well known variety and considered collectible. Typically these sell for £40-£60.

In high grade! (I'm certainly in the market for a minimum EF, but would prefer GEF - UNC). However, in the grade illustrated it would be no higher than around £10. BTW Gouby rates them one order of rarity higher than the 1926ME.

I actually meant £40-60 at the grade shown, based on recent eBay sale prices. I've not seen a GEF-UNC example but would expect such to achieve £200-£300!

Bronze prices are crazy. I was watching a 1918kN in GEF-UNC that sold on eBay last night for £1340. They're not that rare!

That's crazy! I've got about three which I got from change in the late 60s. Perhaps I can yet swap them for a high grade, with a cash adjustment (he said, murmuring his pipedreams out loud..)

Has anyone ever done a study as to how rare the 18KN is in relation to the 19KN? My own guesstimate is that it's at least 3 times commoner, maybe 4 or 5. In fact, I'd say the 18H and KN weren't so very far apart from each other. Unlike the 19H and KN which must be at least an order of ten apart, if not more.

If you put one on eBay and get less than £40 I'd honestly be amazed. Equally if you can show me an UNC example I will give you £300 tomorrow.

V R Court did a study on this and came up with the following:

1918H 2,465,658
1918KN 1,195,142

1919H 4,787,556
1919KN 422,044

If these figures are correct, the 1919KN is 2.8 times as rare as the 1918KN.

You're right about the ratio of 1919 H to KN being around 10 (actually more than 11).

[VickySilver]

Hmmm, I daresay the ratio would be greatly changed in favor of the "H's" if it was well struck full lustre coins that were included!

BTW, if anyone has a 1919H of that description, do let me know as I would be a buyer most likely as mine are just too mushy on
the obverse.

[argentumandcoins]

VickySilver, on 26 March 2012 - 11:46 PM, said:

Hmmm, I daresay the ratio would be greatly changed in favor of the "H's" if it was well struck full lustre coins that were included!

BTW, if anyone has a 1919H of that description, do let me know as I would be a buyer most likely as mine are just too mushy on
the obverse.

Fully struck is probably one of the hardest of all to locate. The obverses (for reasons well documented already) are always very weak. My own is VF to the eye whilst the reverse is a well struck UNC.

[VickySilver]

Yes, I have two mushy obv. 19H's but had a bit of luck with Spink (in the old days, that is) with the 18H.

I think you can still call a coin uncirculated if has not been circulated and just plagued with the weak obverse,
but this makes it "run of the mill" as has been said.

[Peckris]

argentumandcoins, on 27 March 2012 - 08:50 AM, said:

VickySilver, on 26 March 2012 - 11:46 PM, said:

Hmmm, I daresay the ratio would be greatly changed in favor of the "H's" if it was well struck full lustre coins that were included!

BTW, if anyone has a 1919H of that description, do let me know as I would be a buyer most likely as mine are just too mushy on
the obverse.

Fully struck is probably one of the hardest of all to locate. The obverses (for reasons well documented already) are always very weak. My own is VF to the eye whilst the reverse is a well struck UNC.

Mine is also a fully struck reverse with virtually no detectable wear. The obverse legend has absolutely no flattening whatever, but the hair is almost completely lacking. How you'd grade it? Nightmare!

[Accumulator]

Peckris, on 27 March 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

argentumandcoins, on 27 March 2012 - 08:50 AM, said:

VickySilver, on 26 March 2012 - 11:46 PM, said:

Hmmm, I daresay the ratio would be greatly changed in favor of the "H's" if it was well struck full lustre coins that were included!

BTW, if anyone has a 1919H of that description, do let me know as I would be a buyer most likely as mine are just too mushy on
the obverse.

Fully struck is probably one of the hardest of all to locate. The obverses (for reasons well documented already) are always very weak. My own is VF to the eye whilst the reverse is a well struck UNC.

Mine is also a fully struck reverse with virtually no detectable wear. The obverse legend has absolutely no flattening whatever, but the hair is almost completely lacking. How you'd grade it? Nightmare!

My 1919H is in a grotty slab, from which I really must free it! It's fairly well struck and has much more lustre than the photos takenthrough the plastic suggest.

[Red Riley]

Accumulator, on 26 March 2012 - 08:35 PM, said:

V R Court did a study on this and came up with the following:

1918H 2,465,658
1918KN 1,195,142

1919H 4,787,556
1919KN 422,044

If these figures are correct, the 1919KN is 2.8 times as rare as the 1918KN.

You're right about the ratio of 1919 H to KN being around 10 (actually more than 11).

I would take these figures with a pinch of salt. If they were arrived at after a survey of coins in circulation, the accuracy would depend on the date at which the survey was done. The reason? Our fathers and grandfathers removing them from circulation as they 'may be valuable one day'. You only have to look at e-bay to see how many are still out there waiting for collectors to buy them - hundreds of thousands maybe. I was inspecting every penny I could get my hands on from 1969 to 1971 and didn't see any, not one! Clearly a survey conducted in 1920 would be more accurate than one in done in 1970, so if this was performed closer to the latter date than the former, you will need a great deal of help from your condiment set.

[azda]

My REV 19KN, OBV is the same mushy shite

[Peckris]

Red Riley, on 28 March 2012 - 01:07 PM, said:

Accumulator, on 26 March 2012 - 08:35 PM, said:

V R Court did a study on this and came up with the following:

1918H 2,465,658
1918KN 1,195,142

1919H 4,787,556
1919KN 422,044

If these figures are correct, the 1919KN is 2.8 times as rare as the 1918KN.

You're right about the ratio of 1919 H to KN being around 10 (actually more than 11).

I would take these figures with a pinch of salt. If they were arrived at after a survey of coins in circulation, the accuracy would depend on the date at which the survey was done. The reason? Our fathers and grandfathers removing them from circulation as they 'may be valuable one day'. You only have to look at e-bay to see how many are still out there waiting for collectors to buy them - hundreds of thousands maybe. I was inspecting every penny I could get my hands on from 1969 to 1971 and didn't see any, not one! Clearly a survey conducted in 1920 would be more accurate than one in done in 1970, so if this was performed closer to the latter date than the former, you will need a great deal of help from your condiment set.

Interesting! I was checking assiduously from 1968 to 1970 and I found :
0 x 1919KN
2 x 1918KN (rubbish condition)
0 x 1918H
several 1919H but most were sub-Fair, perhaps two were somewhere between Fair and Fine

[Accumulator]

Red Riley, on 28 March 2012 - 01:07 PM, said:

Accumulator, on 26 March 2012 - 08:35 PM, said:

V R Court did a study on this and came up with the following:

1918H 2,465,658
1918KN 1,195,142

1919H 4,787,556
1919KN 422,044

If these figures are correct, the 1919KN is 2.8 times as rare as the 1918KN.

You're right about the ratio of 1919 H to KN being around 10 (actually more than 11).

I would take these figures with a pinch of salt. If they were arrived at after a survey of coins in circulation, the accuracy would depend on the date at which the survey was done. The reason? Our fathers and grandfathers removing them from circulation as they 'may be valuable one day'. You only have to look at e-bay to see how many are still out there waiting for collectors to buy them - hundreds of thousands maybe. I was inspecting every penny I could get my hands on from 1969 to 1971 and didn't see any, not one! Clearly a survey conducted in 1920 would be more accurate than one in done in 1970, so if this was performed closer to the latter date than the former, you will need a great deal of help from your condiment set.

I think we can reasonably put the condiment set to one side, as Court understood the potential pitfall you are describing. I quote what he says about arriving at the relative mintage figures:

In the case of the 1918 and 1919 H and KN varieties, a slightly different formula has been adopted to arrive at the respective estimated mintages. For each of these years, an official mintage figure is available for the H and KN types together, and although the incidence of these coins in the sample must have been considerably affected by collectors, their frequency relative to each other would probably have been comparatively unaffected, so that the total official mintages for these coins have been divided in the proportions in which they were found, and without reference to the numbers of coins of 1918 and 1919 without mint marks.