|
|
The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com |
|
|
Coinpublications.com
Predecimal.com
oldcopper
-
Content Count
611 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
15
Posts posted by oldcopper
-
-
4 hours ago, Menger said:The left (and much of the establishment) have long been “politically correct” but they only recently became “woke”.
Political correctness, woke - it means using whenever possible words like "NazI" and "far-right" to constantly vilify people who don't subscribe wholly to their creed. No grey areas are allowed. It's been infused into us for over 60 years and accelerated strongly about three years ago with the advent of George Floyd and Coronavirus. No coincidence of course and all planned. It means ignoring or downplaying Pakistani grooming gangs yet visiting people's houses who have eg misgendered someone on social media to record an Orwellian "non-crime hate incident".
I'll give you a perfect example of this propaganda from the Guardian a few years ago, the title "Most child sexual abuse gangs made up of white men"
and from the BBC's report on the grooming gang paper in question from the Home Office:
- "Research has found that group-based child sexual exploitation offenders are most commonly white."
See, what are these far-rightists going on about?
From the main three studies quoted, in one 42% were white, 35% ethnic (the largest of which was black at 17%), from another the figures were 30% whites to 28% Asian, so quite close. In another, out of 52 of these gangs recorded, half were Asian and only 11 were white. None of these figures were given in the Guardian article, but can be got from the Home Office report via the BBC article. But what a slam dunk!
But hang on, aren't most murderers in China going to be...errr...Chinese? For example.
Exactly, firstly the white population of the UK is about 6 times larger than the ethnic population, and nearly 15 times larger than the Pakistani-origin Muslim one. Not mentioned. Secondly figures aren't currently available from large towns and cities where active investigation was still occurring such as Telford, a massive Pakistani grooming centre, and thirdly, the police didn't always record the ethnicity of offenders for some unknown, perhaps politically correct, reason. These factors weren't mentioned either. And where were the whistle-blowers in these Pakistani communities? Literally thousands were involved, spanning decades. One can only assume no one saw anything wrong with it, or they all lived in fear.
So the Guardian, in order to get to its big point, deliberately misleads its readers. They're so keen on the over-representation argument when it suits them, such as the police/race dynamic in the US (very misleading if you look at the violent crime rates), but cannot mention a much greater over-representation when it doesn't suit them. And let's not forget the grooming that is overtly racist, as white girls are nearly always the victims of Pakistani-origin groomers. They don't seem to do it to their own. This wasn't mentioned either. What a surprise.
This is how much propaganda works - it's lying by omission. You are only given the part of the picture to make you think what they want you to think. The same of course goes for the Home office paper, obviously slanted as much as possible to muddy the waters and happy to assert the meaningless "most are whites" comment without context. But the figures still speak for themselves
So what the Guardian headline should have said was: "Whites and Chinese least likely to form child sexual abuse gangs." I'm guessing the Chinese aren't big offenders.
Woke also means the constant demonisation of white, Western societies as fundamentally bad and built on oppression and racism. The "far right" is always used a a bogeyman, yet in reality means people who object to mass immigration, and lately the sexualisation of very young children and the sexual mutilation of children and young people (see the latest Costa advert), and much more of what the globalists decree as our new Orwellian truth. Even Ulez protestors are "far-right extremists" according to Sadiq Khan, whom it's now known has pressurised scientists and falsified the scientific evidence for introducing it.
This woke illness has come from the top and promoted by the media with its excesses brushed under the carpet. Quota systems, identity politics - if people don't see what a danger this poses to any meritocratic society and the incentive to work hard, use your brain and be a success, then they are naive to say the least. Stupid and evil could be two other words that apply.
-
2 hours ago, Diaconis said:Peckris’ argument does seem valid when considering that “reported” truths and facts cannot be relied upon as such these days, i.e, truths and facts. Has the reporter done sufficient research? Who did he interview, was his information derived from first hand accounts, Chinese whispers or, dare I suggest, re-interpreted for purposes of eliciting certain reactions to reinforce certain existing beliefs. Does he even care about truth and honesty? Probably not.
However, to discount one source of information in favour of another believing the latter to be more trustworthy than the former when equally uncertain of the source of that information may be fallacious.
As for the word woke, don’t get me started, it is the past tense of wake, nothing else.
I refuse to use the word “woke” in its current context and to acknowledge it in conversation; there’re already too many sub-standard, useless, dumbed-down Americanisms in the English language as it stands, without entertaining new ones. It grieves me just to hear it used.
Such language seems to be created by those who lack sufficient vocabulary to express themselves adequately in the first place and therefore resort to creating such rubbish out of ignorance. Some may argue that it is a progression and development of a language. I see it as a regression.
Well said.
The news is that 77 NHS trusts have signed up to the "Rainbow Badge Scheme" where they get points for degenderising the workplace ie when talking to patients etc. This has apparently originated from an internal unit in NHS England and has no mandate from any of the staff - it has basically been forced on them like much else of this nonsense. Just why "breast feeding" should be re-named "chest-feeding" for instance is a mystery to possibly everyone. And mother as "birther", Peckris might think that's progress, but it's just dehumanising people.
Well said. I think providing specific information, as Paddy did, makes things much more credible. And if there's no blow-back from the NHS, then the story is of course true. Perhaps there will be, I very much doubt it though as this is an easily checkable story which the journalist will have done already. This information is also available from other sources, such as an interview by Julia Hartley-Brewer on Talk Radio, available on YouTube.
Peckris has given no facts about anything, nothing specific, as usual it's just platitudes, slogans and in this case, asserting a certain woke isn't "extreme" is his opinion. Was that his big argument? So how can he say he's stating facts or whatever. Where are they? Have I missed something?
I'll give the Mail this - though they sadly toe the line on Climate Change and other such stuff, they do now and again publicise things the rest of the media shy away from, such as Biden's corruption and the sinister absurdness of this wokery being forced on us.
There is a very good article on this in, yes, The Daily Mail, which also contains a piece by Professor Angus Dalgleish, Professor of Oncology, whom I have seen give a public talk before, about the corrosive effect of all these Diversity, Equity and Inclusion courses all NHS staff now have to their waste time on, rather than actually doing their job.
-
6 hours ago, Paddy said:I think it is best we just agree to differ. Neither of us is likely to change our viewpoint substantially, so there is no point wasting blood pressure on the debate.
The trouble is there's no debate because when you put the Daily Mail clipping to Peckris, he pulls out the cliched lazy get-out clause so beloved of the Left:
"The Daily Mail, you can't believe a word they say etc etc etc!"
Which is very convenient, because a person with even less self-awareness than Peckris can see that cancelling the words mother and woman is not a good look. So isn't that lucky he doesn't have to discuss it with you.
And the Cabinet Minister and the other MPs who are complaining about it, and who are probably referred to on page 6 - that's all completely made up by the Mail as well?
Let's analyse this. If the Mail either made up the story or got it completely wrong, let's consider what would happen? Firstly, they'd get a complaint in writing from one or more of the involved parties and would then have to issue a subsequent apology and retraction at the very least. If this were not enough, or it was not forthcoming, they would then be referred to the press regulator.and perhaps be taken to court.
Thus any newspaper is going to have to be pretty sure that what they print about any organisation or powerful people like politicians is based on facts, unless it's obviously opinion. They cannot afford it not to be. So presumably Peckris has examples of hundreds of cases of the Mail being sued for printing false stories about powerful people or organisations? Because they do it all the time, right?
No of course he doesn't. There may have been a few over the decades but that's true of every paper. It's his way of avoiding the subject.
And Peckris airily assures us that NHS "users" are referred to as "clients". But this story is specifying maternity clinics, not just general "users" of health services, who will usually have non-sexually specific conditions. So he changes the story to fit his narrative. And when was the last time he hung out in a Maternity Ward?
And where does this one come from? - "NHS Trusts who (voluntarily) listen to Stonewall or other such organisations wouldn't get very far with their patients"
I'm so glad that the first question that Mrs Spriggs and her haemorrhoids will have is to ask the receptionist is how involved that NHS trust is with Stonewall, because if it is, she's going to march out of the door and find another hospital to have her operation (in 6 months time).
We can safely say that Peckris talks nothing but complete nonsense.
-
2
-
-
50 minutes ago, Coinery said:Woah, this all seems a little out of character. Really bothers me when people are being unkind to each other!
That's alright, Michael can't dispute any of my points so he has to fall back on name-calling. Par for the course.
-
On 8/19/2023 at 7:25 PM, Michael-Roo said:Not funny.
Never mind the Spanish Inquisition, here come the Puritan woke! Closely followed by the grammar police.....
A harmless and wryly amusing joke in my opinion, playing on our stereotyping, but in your eyes not as funny as picturing Trump and Hitler greeting each other, truly sophisticated humour that, or thinking about it, berating someone for having the temerity to design their own book cover not up to your expert standards.
-
2
-
-
5 hours ago, 1949threepence said:Yes, it does seem random, as many of the coins aren't slabbed. Some were slabbed years ago and have already gone past the 10 year expiry date, and some have only just been done and have an expiry date of June 2033.I would think done at Noonan's behest after seeking Richardson's permission.
Interesting that the now slabbed 1806/1805, is "top pop" - no doubt because it's the only example there.
Might be worth making an enquiry about the KT3 in the sense of why no further expansion beyond the fact that it was slabbed by NGC. Is it now?
Yes, I expect I'll go and have a look at them at some stage.
-
20 hours ago, 1949threepence said:It astounds me that many dealers and sellers alike, have still not learned the adverse lessson of using plastic packaging for coins.....
....and that's just plastic envelopes. What you describe above sounds horrendously damaging.
Anyway, thanks for the info.
Though DNW say on the web that it's been graded by NCG without specifying a grade, now I've received the hard catalogue (£25 - ouch!) that isn't in it.
Some of the collection has been only recently slabbed (as they weren't bought as slabbed), but some of it is not slabbed, including some big items like the silver P.1086. And some coins have been removed from slabs. It seems quite random, and not dependant on date of purchase. It would be interesting to know why.
-
9 hours ago, 1949threepence said:Some fantastic coins in that collection, including 2 of that rather strange 1806/1805 mule.
One of them went for £2,200 in the Spink Sept 2015 auction, that provenance mentioned in the catalogue, as part of a collection (Andy Scott?). Nice coin in that case, a bit mottled on the reverse, but unfortunately quite a few other coins in that collection were artificially toned. And even worse was in one that I bought, the colour was more like painted on rather than baked in (however they do it!), as even a light dab of a cotton glove to remove a bit of debris resulted in a light brown area of under-copper suddenly appearing amongst all that colour!
Unsurprisingly I was not happy, but rubbing that side on a carpet did make it look better if a little weird, and I sold it soon after. Then it reappeared in another dealer's tray at the LCF a few months later looking vastly "improved"! Poor coin.
The KT3 gilt is interesting - fantastic looking coin. I saw it at St James auction 2014 preview, and this is the only time I had ever seen this, but the coin had been shrink-wrapped, or perhaps "vacuum packed" in a cellophane or clingfilm type plastic skin. I asked Mr Fenton about this and he airily said it was for protection. It only occurred to me afterwards to wonder how you would take it off.
I presume it's not been slabbed still in its plastic skin, though I notice DNW haven't mentioned the slabbing grade in their catalogue. "Unc details - clingfilmed" perhaps!?
-
11 minutes ago, secret santa said:Yes, Noonans are claiming their lot 527 is the same one you refer to (Gregory lot 258) in terms of the provenance.
I should have asked at the time - it wasn't a bad coin apart from the defects.
-
15 hours ago, DaveG38 said:Ah, sorry, I didn't see the title of the thread.
I don't think gold and early proof sets really count for many collectors - they're now mainly collected by investors from what I can see. Which of us is going to fork out the best part of 100k (or the best part of half a million upwards for a good 1839!) for one of the old proof sets? Especially as you could pick up a nice one for 10-25K 20 years ago.
Anyone seen the Philip Richardson mainly Soho collection now listed on DNW? There's 200 lots on there. Some nice coins....
I notice one anomaly, to do with the gilt 1797 inscribed edge KP5 penny. DNW refer to the coin as a one off, and the inscription was referred to in Peck as a later adulteration in a footnote. Now, whether it is or not I don't know, but In Baldwins 47 (Gregory II) one of these was the front cover coin, in beautiful and brilliant mint state no less. A stunner. However, a more ropey one turned up in their auction a few years later, scratched and edge knocked, but it was given exactly the same provenance as their supposedly unique earlier mint state one. This is the one in DNW.
So either someone bought it in Baldwins 47 (£2,800 hammer), kept it in their pocket for several years, then resold it (£460 hammer!), or more likely there are at least two of these coins in existence, both identically and incusely inscribed. In which case it is more likely that the edge is a contemporary and official addition.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Rob said:The evidence suggests the florins weren't issued as a set for the reasons I have outlined previously. You can't exclude that partial sets were possibly given to a few people, but all 28 varieties - no. These were clearly made to test the waters on the best obverse/reverse die and legend combinations.
Separate from the proofs of course, but I wonder how they were stored or given to people as quite a few of each variety were made. Or perhaps the Mint just stuck them in a cupboard for a long time, but they must have sold them/given them away at some stage.
-
21 hours ago, 1949threepence said:You may well be right.
I can't speak for denominations other than the penny, but it appears there is only one confirmed 1853 bronzed copper with an inverted reverse penny.
What I do wonder about is the number of en medaille 1853 copper proof pennies. There were only 40 proof sets minted, but there has to be more than 40 extant proof pennies even now. Possibly as many as 40 again. So what is the reason for them? Were they ordered separately by members of the public after the original sets had been issued, for those who couldn't afford a full set?
I susoect we will never know the answers to thse questions unless, possibly, some obscure newspaper article turns up, or some official mint briefing is found.
What surprises me is that, as there obviously seem to be more of some of these proofs than were issued in the sets, why haven't any survived with an original case, Royal Mint envelope or whatever packaging they would originally have been put in? There are no contemporary official boxes around for any individual proofs of the Wyon proof set years as far as I know. Same with the pattern florins of the late 1840's for instance. About 25 years ago in SNC there was a fantastic set of all three main Gothic crown varieties (2 x1847, 1853) plus several of the different florin patterns in a plush velvet case, but that my have been a later case.
-
43 minutes ago, Michael-Roo said:'Minor'? Ridiculous.
How many confirmed examples do we now have, seven, eight? They've included the 1694 MVRIA halfpenny for many years even though, until a recent fourth came to light, only three were known.
And if we're talking about minor varieties I'd suggest they reconsider their inclusion of a 1675 farthing, no stop after CAROLVS. Again, been in there for years, and given a value, yet has anyone here ever seen one? I haven't, nor am I aware of anyone who has.
I've never seen a clear William III BRIVANNIA halfpenny, although this is still listed in some catalogues. More likely a damaged T in the cases I've seen, with no telltale middle gap.
Spink are inconsistent, they don't list copper patterns, although some of these (the Medusa and the DEI GRATIA eg) were seemingly just released as currency. Yet for instance 1826 George IV/Wm IV crowns, and all the 5 and 2 guineas/5 and 2 pounds (except 1823 £2) from George III to Una and the Lion, though patterns, are listed and priced. If I remember rightly (haven't bought a Spink catalogue for some years) several edge/border varieties of the Una and the Lion are listed and priced. The staff are probably too busy to re-write it to any extent.
-
"the rims although equal in height to the currency coin are more raised from the fields".
A nonsense comment from LC. If the field was lower in relation to the rims which are the same thickness as normal currency, then the coin would have been struck on a thinner flan and thus be lighter.
As there's no mention of a light weight, presumably it is of normal weight and hence normal flan thickness. So any suggested lower field observation is just an optical illusion.
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, 1949threepence said:In fact I'm not sure the detached clover is a reliable indicator as there are a number of other varieties and dates which also have it, including my 1860/59, several 1858's and going back, even my 1853 proof penny has a detached clover.
My 1856 OT does seem to have a misaligned colon.
For me, the die flaw between the rim and C of VICTORIA seem totally unique to the 1858/6.
Missing/incomplete stems in the floral exergue is presumably caused by die blockage. You'd expect fine line engraving to be the most vulnerable to blocking, see Charles II halfpenny date numerals. In proofs I've seen it on some 1831 pennies but not on others. Same with the George IV 1825 copper proofs. So this factor most likely develops on the die during use ie some will show it and some won't.
In this case it's a reused die overstamped, so it will be diagnostic if the blocked stem was already there when the overdating was done, which it probably was (unless anyone finds an example with full stems).
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, 1949threepence said:And....a broad sail veiled head 1894 pattern went for ~10K dollars (from memory) a few years ago at Stacks and Bowers, part of a fantastic bronze penny collection. London Coins had previously sold a nice one for £1600 hammer back in 2006.
Which all means that if anyone wants to form a veiled head penny pattern collection (2 coins), they've missed the boat by about 15 years.
If anyone on here bought that 1894 pattern from LC, well done!
-
1
-
-
38 minutes ago, secret santa said:I was going to bid for the 1895 pattern (F777) at Noonan's today. A similar specimen sold for £3500 on Baldwin's list in 2011 but today it went for £10,880 !!!!!!!!!
Needless to say, I didn't buy it.
£12,880 you mean!
-
13 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:I doubt we will face a winter crisis, at least not compared to the miners' strike that brought down the Heath government in '73, with a 3-day week, no TV after 10:30 pm - which was at a time when we were nearly fully dependant on coal. Now, 50 years later, the wind will keep blowing, and the turbines will turn.
The unions can be very stroppy when it comes to jobs. If they can't see the winds of change (pun intended), then more fool them. Anyway, Labour isn't as reliant on the unions as they once were, a legacy of Blair and New Labour.
I can see quoted posts of course, but quoting your post doesn't include the post you quoted! However, as far as emitters like India and China are concerned, I wouldn't say "free pass"; when it came to trying to get agreement, the West had three choices:
1. Get everyone to agree to a minimum level of reduction (which would not happen)
2. Abandon the whole business through lack of agreement by certain countries
3. Reluctantly accept a certain level of compromise as being 'better than nothing', which is what we had to settle for in the end.
We don't know what China is up to, they are an industrialised authoritarian Communist economy who keep their cards close to their chest. Maybe they will come to see the danger posed by climate change. Let's hope so. What's more important is that America under a Democrat president and Congress are making great progress and reduction of CO2 - that really does make a difference. As far as Britain is concerned, we do still have some influence in the world. If - I should say 'when' - we achieve carbon neutrality there are nations that will take notice even if our contribution amounts to the proverbial teaspoon (actually it is more that that, though not a huge difference on its own).
As being defined as "industrialising" nations, yes China and India for example have got a free pass, this is enshrined in previous treaties - they can use as much fossil fuel, mainly coal, as they want. So China using a further 300 million tons last year to bring its annual consumption of coal to over 3 billion tons. And remember, coal is the worst CO2 emitter per energy produced, of any fossil fuel. I presume that's giving you sleepless nights - if not, why not? CO2 levels are at record highs mainly due to massive coal burning, but not in the West.
And if Biden is doing so great on the renewables front, how come he's just given permission to open up the huge Willow Field, set in pristine wilderness in Alaska. Any thoughts on that, and does it mean that unlike Starmer, the US still has some grasp of reality?
So are they going to transport Willow's fossil fuel to the remainder of the US by tanker, or use an existing pipeline or build one? They cancelled one pipeline a couple of years ago.
-
12 hours ago, 1949threepence said:Not necessarily - if we get a severe Winter with a persistent Scandinavian anticyclone, we could experience a flat calm over many weeks just in the areas where most turbines are placed.
As far as what you say about China is concerned, I'm way more cynical than you on this issue. I certainly would regard it as moronic beyond all belief if we continued to tighten towards net zero before are ready - and we are very far from ready yet. The "setting an example" you hint it is just arrogance. Especially as no-one will take a blind bit of notice, until such time as we truly are at net zero. Then they might.
Any rate, I notice that Starmer was back peddling slightly today when he admitted it would be a very long time before we could do completely without fossil fuels. Actually the idea of a "GB Energy" isn't a bad one.
I'll let @oldcopper reply if he wishes to do so, and quote to you what he says. Although I must admit, I find it quite extraordinary from a technical point of view, that one member's posts really are invisible to you.
I expect he sees the ones he wants to see! He can probably see all of them - it's just a convenient excuse for getting out of answering any of my questions after he comes out with his usual nonsense.
It's the same old story - there is no real perspective or realism in Peckris's blithe platitudes. It's all taken at face value from the media or politicians. He hasn't thought about it. He "hopes" China will come round - Xi has said that China will only change over to renewable energy when "others have shown it to be a success". If China can gain vast economic power from being the only country in the world that can do energy-intensive manufacturing, Xi isn't going to kill his golden goose - virtually limitless cheap energy, and the unfortunate result of net zero will be the complete economic ascendancy of China. So we're basically enabling a slave state to become the economic powerhouse of the world because they can, and do, burn as much coal as they want. To make all our renewables like solar panels for instance!
Xi is safe enough in his stance - no one will ever make a success of it of course, as the renewables shebang has two huge flaws: its energy is not storable on any scale thus has to be used when made, and the supply is variable and uncontrollable. It's weather dependant, and cannot be magicked up when needed. You can't have bigger elephants in the room than that.
"The wind will keep on blowing" - as you say, not if we have an anti-cyclone above us which happened for a prolonged period this Winter. And in Winter solar is basically useless with long nights and weak light, not forgetting it produces nothing for 50% of the year, ie night. So solar is only really significant on high Summer days when we least need the energy.
So on not very windy days in Winter, how many nuclear power stations, small modular or otherwise, would we need to effectively produce 100% backup for ALL our energy needs? That would entail charging all vehicles, warming all buildings, hot water, all industry and all current electrical stuff?
And how is our nuclear building programme going at the moment?
We're tricked on every level - we're told renewables produce up to 50% of our electricity, often craftily called "energy" instead as if it's our total energy requirement. And yes it does produce up to 50%, but only now and again. But it also produces less than 5% of our electricity at other times. They don't tell us that, but just employ the phrase "up to". They don't mention that much of the rest of the electricity is generated by gas. And that's to order, unlike renewables. But electricity is only currently about 20% of our total energy consumption, the remainder being mainly fossil fuels with a bit of nuclear, that means our billions of pounds investment in renewables provides 20% of between 5% and 50% - so less than 1% to maximum 10% of our total energy requirement, produced randomly of course.
Where does one start on this? - there are so many holes in it. Like some elderly acquaintances of ours who have just bought a mid-range EV, so as to tell everyone they're "saving the planet"!
Help, help, help.....!!!
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, 1949threepence said:There was an uprising in East Germany in June 1953, which was quelled by Soviet troops. Although it wasn't an invasion as such. They were already stationed there.
ETA: the map is incorrect anyway, as it extends across all of Germany, despite the fact that West Germany was unaffected.
Thanks, that's probably what they mean though they aren't really right.
-
53 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:Got to laugh. Keir Starmer has upset the unions (GMB & Unite) with his messianic zeal over not granting any more oil and gas exploration licences if Labour get in next year.
They are unhappy about the effects on their member's jobs and financial security.
As I've said before, yes, a transition to net zero would be a fantastic long term aspiration. 2030 is absolutely impossible to achieve, 2045 maybe. In the meantime we also need oil and gas both to ensure our own security and as a possible export to Europe.
Politics today:
One side: we'll do something insane.
The other side: we'll do something even insaner. Vote for us!
I would like the climate alarmists (eg Peckris, I know he can read my comments) to explain why the West signed up to these climate treaties that gave "industrialising" nations such as China and India a free pass to emit as much CO2 as they wanted. They are primarily responsible for the world now emitting more man-made CO2 than at any time before. I like the analogy of us trying to empty a bath with a teaspoon while China fills it up with a bucket. That sums this lunacy up, whether or not you believe in the man-made CO2 driving climate change theory.
-
On 12/29/2022 at 12:06 AM, Rob said:Not much has changed in the past
10 monthsthousand years. They still have total contempt for anything not from Moscow/St. Petersburg and who doesn't believe in the complete superiority of that genetically inbred clique. Svitlana (our guest) had a message a couple days before Christmas from her sister bemoaning the Russians were hitting Kherson with phosporus (probably thermite), had closed down power and water, and that shelling had increased approx. 10-fold in the run-up to Christmas. From her brother - he had been rotated out of the grinder just in time for Christmas, but still the Russians throw live meat into the mix. Maybe a 1/4 million deaths in an attempt to satisfy the paranoid ego of a demented dwarf. It's incredibly sad.On several occasions it has been said by Russians that the whole world is against them. This map suggests the world is more informative than the Russian Ministry of Disinformation.
Don't know why it says Germany was invaded in 1953. Am I missing something? East Germany was established in 1949 but had been in Russian hands since 1945.
-
17 hours ago, Kipster said:Thanks for posting these. I'm confident they are wrong at NGC.
I'll see what happens. I'm actually taking it into the London office for them to sort out with the States, so hopefully there'll be no issue. I also have a similar issue with another farthing I have which seems to have some crumb like debris on Victoria's chest. I've told them I wanted it removed and the London office have said they will deal with it, but time will tell. I have said that I don't want it coming back as a details grade, so don't mess about with it if it will.
Who knows what they'll do.
All three of Peck's 1826 copper proofs were in the Verene collection, all ex the June 2012 Spink auction and before ex Glendinings in a 60's auction (I think as one lot then?). They are beautiful multi-coloured coins.
-
1 hour ago, Kipster said:I see. Thank you. This is the coin in question from the NGC registry:
https://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/6673730-006/64/
I'd say it was the same brown colouration as the 1831 of mine, with perhaps just a bit more warmth to it.
Yes, that's definitely bronzed, and easier for the pre-1853 Wyon proofs as there aren't many copper ones around.
Russians
in Nothing whatsoever to do with coins area!
Posted
Encapsulated by Labour's take on the Alison Rose saga. Because the bank had wrapped itself in this hard-left ideology, much of it pushed through by Rose, she was "one of them". So Labour had no comment on her 5.2 million pound salary, and subsequent 2.4 million pound payoff. Rather they weirdly defended her in an identity politics victimhood scenario with Rachel Reeve saying she thought Alison Rose had been "bullied". No evidence was provided for this as none is ever needed of course for the woke oppression narrative.
Some victim, broke the rules and gets an x million pound payoff! An interesting theory suggests this corporate wokery all really got going around 2010 as "Occupy Wall Street" were pressurising the financial sector, compounded by the bad publicity about greedy bankers as a result of their reputation for being massively overpaid and incompetent since the 2008 crash.
How to neutralise this? - pretend you're on their side, talk the language of the adolescent woke left, have it enforced by ESG, perhaps another protective mechanism from the world's most powerful financial organisations, and finally frame the narrative carefully through the corporate-owned media. Then the financial sector will be free to carry on making their zillions without anyone even raising a murmur. Well it has certainly worked.
The left are so gullible that 15 years go they were outraged at bankers' hugh bonuses, as was everyone else, but now they're complete kittens to corporate greed, because these corporations fly rainbow flags, swear allegiance to BLM and have DIE courses.