Peckris 2

Not really. Disability allows me just about to wield an iPad, and my Lumix camera in automatic 'snapshot' mode, but that's about it.

I'm afraid this is a typical example of a scan obliterating all that's good about a coin's tone. However, it's the best I could do back then, but it doesn't show the penny's glossy dark blue/green patina.

I have an 1862 penny with a wide rim, glossy almost reflective fields, and a sharp strike. I've always written it off as "not a proof" but I'd be open to it being a specimen.

To get started, you could usefully invest in two inexpensive books (banner ad above): 1. Collectors Coins (predecimal edition) which lists prices from the 18thC onwards but also has a wealth of useful information 2. Grading British Coins which shows pictorial grades from AUnc to Fair for all major types from 1797. otherwise, Welcome!

I don't have a problem with his grade on that, but the price is ridiculous. I'm not sure how you could find "far better condition"?

You're not allowed to use numerical grading? I never heard that before.

Click the Report item button, and select from a list: "Restricted and Prohibited items" > "Stamps, currency, coins" > "Replica coins, [etc]"

Blimey, yes! I went through a hell of a lot of 5/- bags of pennies, but probably still short of £100 worth. One flaw in that argument - the plastic sets were rated much more highly then than now. They were selling for at least a fiver in the late 60s (look at your Coin Monthlies..) which must be near £50 in today's money, but you can pick one up now for less than a tenner. Mind you, for a kid with little pocket money perhaps it was a different story. That's interesting. That makes the 19KN less than half as scarce as the 18KN, and I've always thought it much more scarce when you look at the numbers available for sale, and the numbers found. Mind you, the catalogues never had a 19KN so much more valuable, except perhaps in UNC.

Yes - one 1953, in VF. I didn't find a single 50 or 51, but I have the feeling they were special cases, being imported back from the West Indies. I also found two 1926ME's, but I put that down to two things: 1) the first was change from a bus conductor in early 68 before the craze had hit full swing 2) they were harder to spot (especially for novices!) compared to the other 1926, where the 19KN was easy peasy. I agree that finding a 53 would be difficult, as any in circulation would have had to be 'liberated' from the plastic set, which was the only form they were issued in. None were struck for currency.

I have a few including a replacement blue fiver, but I'd like to keep them.

Well, no I don't. Other repros - like Ed VII, 1933 pennies, and different Vicky coins - are made recognisably different and only a fool or a novice would be taken in. If it's so lifelike, then it's no longer a repro, it's a deliberate fake and designed to deceive.

Yes. I've always thought the 18H and KN weren't much different in terms of rarity. Which makes the 19H very much more common given the comparative rarity of the 19KN and greater mintage overall. That's backed up by my own experience from the late 60s.

Is that the one owned by Tommy Steele?

Why on earth produce repros that are so like the original?

I was the winning bidder there.

Anyone spot a familiar name against "Readers' Comments" for January 1970? I wonder...

That's certainly the most likely, I'd say. However, don't rule out the possibility that sales of the Year Book were comparatively healthy compared to the magazine, and that a new company was hastily formed just to publish that, but failing also a few years later. Don't forget that Philip Mussell published their Year Book from 1994 with the word NEWS in the title, which wasn't removed until 1997. If my hunch is right, then the original Coin Yearbook failed possibly due to that competition.

Here's their first, from 1994 https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/The-Coin-News-Yearbook-1994-James-Mackay-and-John-Mussell-Editors-Used-Good/382814188686?hash=item592180f48e:g:u90AAOSwC8ZceC9z The first without NEWS was 1997, as they said https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/The-Coin-Yearbook-1997-Mackay-James-A-Used-Good-Book/383115087065?epid=87422213&hash=item5933704cd9:g:fFAAAOSw8sZdXZvd Here's a Coin Monthly yearbook, 1991 (nothing for 1990, 92, or 93, which just means "not on eBay") https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Coins-Year-Book-1991-A-priced-listing-of-all-British-Coins/392429841317?hash=item5b5ea42ba5:g:x2MAAOSwrHJdYrnq 1989 https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_odkw=coin+yearbook+1997&_ftrt=901&_sop=12&_sadis=15&_dmd=1&_osacat=0&_stpos=EX2+5TQ&_ipg=50&_ftrv=1&_from=R40&_trksid=m570.l1313&_nkw=coin+yearbook+1989&_sacat=0 Before that, there's 1987 but nothing else until as far back as 1983. I think it possible (though no evidence as yet) that Coin Monthly's yearbook may have continued after the magazine folded if they saw profit in it - after all, Seaby/Spink, Coincraft, Collectors Coins, and C&MV all published annuals without a magazine to underwrite them.

Doesn't surprise me - most publications wouldn't give out that kind of information for several possible reasons. However I'm a bit doubtful about it being the last issue? Philip Mussell of Coin News did say "we started the COIN NEWS YEARBOOK in 1994 and dropped the word NEWS and adopted the blue pages in 1997 – after the demise of COIN MONTHLY and the other YEARBOOK" which seems to imply that Coin Monthly's yearbook continued for a few years after 1992?

I'd have had to think several times before paying even that, though it's definitely a variety I'd want.

What did it go for?

What a waste of good petrol.

When I went through bank bags in the late 60s (ok, not a scientific survey! but nevertheless...) I found : 1912H - too many to list 1919H - probably around 10 1918KN - 2 1919KN, 1918H - none Draw your own conclusions.

With Fair coins you should be able to read the whole legend, even if the letters are almost flat. That isn't Fair, not with VICT and TIA completely missing.