VickySilver

OK, what penny?

Coins as investment? Good luck! Although they may end up bringing more money that they were purchased for in some instances, overall I would not begin to count on bringing in retirement money. Funny thing I have noted about collecting is that some of the mediocre to lesser coins (in monetary value) have been some of my very favorite. No doubt when the day comes to resell they will not bring a lot. In fact, and understandably so, dealers will likely "cherrypick" the more expensive bits and dump or lot up the lesser coins. Some of the more expensive bits may or may not bring a profit - likely the lesser bits will lose out as investment. As far as the certifying game and London coins or others who take ordinary coins, slab them, and then sell them for crazy numbers, even I who am a bit equivocal about slabbing, come down firmly against this not only because I do not see the added value but because it seems squarely a ripoff. As a collector I rather resent the dealers and flippers who drive up prices and have no interest in the coins themselves...

Peckris, I think the point is that people likely have not been searching out the obscure differences that make a slender 3 a slender 3. I can quite imagine that with more searching more will turn up - doubtlessly many on this forum have more experience than I but will note I have NEVER looked for this type before, and it was only after this sale that I looked at my two specimens (oh well, not "slender 3's"). This coin has far less going for it even than, say, the US 1970 S one cent of the small date. In the end this is a minor variety and not a date or mintmark individual coin like the 1882 London mint coin. Absolutely outrageous that this slender 3 coin attracts other than minimal interest. Not even an overdate and NOT a major varietal. I will not name names but I know a collector that collects by die state and so would have multiple specimens from the same die. There is something for everybody I suppose and am thankful that collectors paying such money must not be interested in the relatively rare bits that I go after...

Yes, sorry about that as it is term for copper coins (even if of alloy) when they retain excellent luster. These would be top coins, and was trying to emphasize how ridiculous (IMO) was the price paid for the slender 3 or die marked 5 pennies. I would very much prefer the set of key pennies any day, not that they are cheap. What is difficult to fathom is that an 1882 London (NOT Heaton) penny in mint [red] would likely bring less than this overblown bit and yet is a date and mint combination likely of greater rarity and not subject to increase of finds now that the type has been identified as rare.

Well, increase in objectivity is the point, no matter what one's perspective is. Unfortunately there has been probably much more subjectivity in "traditional" grading, even using the examples you have brought forth. In another post one of the posters said he would discount a TPG coin. If so, please let me have first look at ALL of your PCGS 65 red coins prior to 1930. Back to the introductory post before the pirating: 19k for the slender 3 penny - does the purchaser realize he has paid above and beyond the cumulative value of the following for a minor variety: 1849 red unc. 1856 PT red unc. 1856 OT red unc. 1860 red unc. copper 1864 crosslet 4 red unc. 1864 "plain" 4 red unc. 1869 red unc. 1871 red unc. 1875 H red unc. 1882 London vf or so Simply incredible.

Yes, good points all. Still, do you not think Rob that in the penny series that if a coin is unique or very rare and all other variables roughly constant AND a person has one of these coins in hand that it might not help to know that this coin is MS63 by a reliable TPG AND a coin equally rare in the same series at the same grade (or higher or lower) has just sold for X pounds that it might not affect the value of the considered coin being considered? Without a [RELIABLE] TPG number and without having personal knowledge of the auctioned coin, it would be hard to tell exactly; and I say this because most certainly there is a difference between an MS63 and an MS67, for example. If all the coins are near basal state like this "slender 3" penny, then I think it does not matter as much. Although no doubt quite naive, I may know a thing or two about supply or demand, and manipulation of the later not to mention contrived examples of the former (such as CGS slabbed 1967 halfcrowns, etc.). How is one to have any clue as to the availability of established issues that may or not be as rare as we make them out to be - the 1869 penny comes to mind. If one is studying the 1904 San Francisco minted Barber half dollar, a population guide at PCGS after 23 years may be of some value in helping to determine scarcity or value at a particular grade. I would imagine that the numbers may at least give some guide as to relative scarcity after of allthose years than after two or three, which is where on the learning curve these CGS slab pops are and where to some degree even PCGS might be when it comes to UK or other foreign issues. And this is just being a devil's advocate, as I am not necessarily in favor of slabbing. I would also note that in an extensive series widely collected, such as Morgan Dollars are in the States, that there is in fact much better uniformity in grading by a company such as PCGS. I think there is a tendency to throw the baby out with the bathwater when these services are castigated, and examples are trotted out of where they were fallable in a series that is not their "mainstream". Perhaps they ought not to be grading 1905 shillings, let alone the hypervarietals in the Bun head series of pennies. I agree that there is a marketing angle by these companies, and IMO the terrible example is with recent US bullion issues where there are great fights as to whether a coin should be kept in OGP (original government packaging) or be slabbed into the inevitable near perfect MS 69 or 70; believe it or not, much money is spent in submitting or resubmitting such coins. To digress, which I apologise for doing frequently, dealer graded non-numerically graded coins such as GVF or the newer aEF are possibly even more problematic than the apparently widely hated TPG coins. I have seen some coins be of superb quality and others being absolute cra-. Coins sold as EF, let alone GEF in an old Glendinning catalogue were many times in fact mint state with NO signs of wear. I see many instances on ebay (no dealers mentioned) where coins are sold as unc. or versions of that when even in substandard photographs hairlines and cleaning are obvious. I would submit these are in fact a much greater problem and are not sufficiently addressed other than being lamented on these boards.

Well, I was hoping for more enlightening discussion than the caveman variety: "slabbing sucks", etc. Value is quite subjective and liable to vary with many changes of circumstance. Part of the value to a TPG system is to try to decrease some of these variables and to attempt to give a bit more uniformity to market. Maybe this is in itself an assumption (that uniformity is a good or necessary thing). What do readers think of attempting to peg the value of one rarity to another? What about to specimens of the same date and mintmark? I think all this is past saying that a particular coin is more valuable in or out of a TPG case; that is a lesser argument that I think most would agree on - that there is no difference in value to a particular coin in or out of such a casement.

Unless one wants to pony up the 8 pounds or so for a mint set.....

It does however broach the subject once again of "objectivity". Can we compare a rarity in one series with another? How to determine relative rarity vs. conditional rarity. Rob, have to say I am not familiar as in hands-on appraisal of the Rasmussen 1933 but even if I was, how would it compare to the other available (potentially) specimen? Would you not rather have a mint version of this coin at the same price, or the corollary being what would be the price break or differential between the two? If you do not have the other coin to look at, can there be some objectivity as to how the in hand specimen compares to the other, and a numbering system may be an adjunct to determining this. Others have used comparative coins from the same or other series to help in pegging the value. All this begs the question as to just how objective these TPG graders are. This is and has been a subject of great debate on this forum and others, and an area that I certainly have reservations about as well.

Hey Rob, I think I generally agree with the fact that slabs are not that wonderful a thing. I must take exception to the statement in your next-to-the-last post where you gave rationale for a DECREASE in value for the 1933 penny in a slab versus a higher value not in slab. Not sure if the logic holds. A coin in slab can always be removed though the opposite is not true; the slab should not decrease the value of the coin as logically it either adds no value or is appreciated by slab lovers and may add value - just think this coin is hyped as GEM if it reaches the 65 or above status. Many rare US bits are slabbed, and in fact they are protected as such and generally thought to carry more value in the slab (I can think of the famous 1804 dollar or 1913 Liberty neckels as examples). Although they may not add tremendously to value, it is "standard" for these coins, valued at 1.2 mill pounds and UP!! With regards to the former an AU58 may go for the former value and an MS66 may go for 2.5 mill pounds! The coins are equally rare but are compared to one another and other such coins of similar rarity via the slabbed number. It may seem hard to grasp, but the US market is capitalized to a degree that it is orders of magnitude bigger than that for UK coins and the experience of slabs, no matter how tasteful or accurate has been key in this; it is Big Brother in action - will this be the right direction for Little Brother (UK). As far as the slabbed bits offered by London, if people love the slabs and have a collection of slabs they will fit nicely in if slabbed. What if a particular collector has slabbed halfcrowns dating all the way back to the inception of the milled coinage and so has them lined up side to side, and so is just looking for a date run? Not my taste, but that collector might like a nice 88 graded 2/6 tp complete the run.

Darn, I must be getting old and missed that bit. Oh well, suppose it is too late to bid....Intrinsically the same value as the "slender 3" so MUST be a bargain.

Wow, that does not even look to be good silver. I guess somebody accepted it in the past; still it should be sold as such and glad to see you buying it as such.

Ignore their store values. The auctions are a better place to hunt (usually except for this slender 3)....

Peckris, I agree the second better but might capitalize the N (from nVF to NVF - would that be a slightly lower grade?).

Wow, Coppers, good recall. Also an outrageous sum. Glad this (or these) collectors interests don't sync up with mine!

Absolutely incredible! I would look for this coin in a resale (if it were to occur) to drop considerably. I can see a date varietal that is a mint mark or a major device alteration such as with the 1926ME being worth much more, but honestly a 600x premium for not even an overdate, I just can not get over. Even the famous penny of 1864 gets only a slight premium for the crosslet. I also think I would be most wary that the population of such open 3 pennies might be highly subject to increases. I have two 1863s in GEF or better and have NOT looked at them, and I collect pennies if only by date. I have simply gone with a date collection of pennies and only made a few exceptions, and I guess am in the minority or out of the loop. I would like see you Mat or any other readers to elucidate the reasons for such a price and if it is sustainable or even advisable to buy such a coin. Don't have the reference at the moment but I recall within the week seeing a higher grade halfpenny with die Letter going for much lower than previously - and I recall when THEY were all the rage....

Mat, can you link that one? That seems absolutely phenomenal & wonder if real how such a coin would be worth 6-8x a mint state 1849 or 15x a mint 1856 and 6+x a mint 1864 crosslet 4 or 12x a mint 1875H, etc. I also completely fail to understand how 1882 London mint pennies in VF or above are not valued far in excess of a date VARIETAL! IMO (in my opinion) this is lunacy, but more power to the buyer if they can toss cash about like that.

Top coin will go perhaps 50 pounds. It takes some exotica to go more. I have a uniface 1971 10 P full weight that went for about 60 and a 1981 New Pence struck over a 1953 6d in gem that I bought some while ago for about 175, if memory serves but that coin is a bit more "out there".

I think it will go more than 7k, and there are a few more to add if you get the Heaton coins (40). Also, try finding a mint 1882 London - that is a crushing proposition. If you just pick the most common for each year, then you could get away with the 1882 Heaton; also, mint 1867 through 1871 will bust that price average. Still, fun things to collect & rewarding if you take your time.

Yes, I think that the 1915 and '16 pennies may be a bit tougher well struck and with good lustre than are given credit . The 1917 - 1921 well struck and with good luster are good coins as well, even London Mint. I have had pretty good luck (well maybe a bit of persistence as well) in the penny series so have learned them very well by date and can answer some questions. I DO NOT collect the hypervarietals and let the big fights be fought by others over these bits; a big fight over an "open 3" in VF I just can not see, but more power to those collectors.

Yes, this thread got railroaded just a bit. It did not look like there were universal great prices but it seemed to me at least that a few prices were remarkable: 1956 proof farthing at 1550 plus comission,,,,,what about 1750 or so afterwards seems a pretty big number. 1839 silver proof farthing at 3100 plus fees...about 3600 or so. The later rare but sadly looked to be a bit mishandled. Well, what do others think and/or did they have any wins?

Well responders including me will beg off and say they need to see the coin in hand, but I think that the curiosities of toning include phenomena related to the metal alloy itself (which at least to me appear to be "woodgraining" which is thought to be incomplete mixing of the metals) and the environment in which the coin was in. If the coin initially oxidized in one environment and then was moved and suffered surface friction it could appear as such. Many people think that pennies are copper and therefore red but the alloy is a mix and referred to as bronze by many which may have variably yellow colour in appearance as well.

Russ, I would not get too excited by a bit of metal as planchet and striking flaws of this nature are not special and so would not have added value IMO (in my opinion).

What do readers think of the bidding STARTING at low estimate? It is therefore de facto reserve at that price - I might even prefer an unannounced reserve and see where the bidding takes the prices.

Is this the famous ebay debate coin? I love this date and looks nice!