Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook


The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.

Mr T

Sterling Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Mr T

  1. On 5/16/2020 at 7:31 AM, Zo Arms said:


    Welcome back.

    This is a thought only, open to discussion or ridicule, viewed from a carpenters point of view.

    Here goes.

    Reverse B. Quite happily churning out pennies. It's getting on a bit and a small die crack appears.

    You need to prolong its life for a while because the new reverse C die isn't quite ready.

    To prevent the crack traveling further, you drill a small hole just in front of it. This will stall the cracks line of travel. Not prevent it. Just stall it.

    A perfectly round hole. Or dot. 

    Fill the crack in as an added form of strength, clean it off and away you go again. A dot penny.

    Hole fills with grease and gunk and becomes the shadow of the dot. You can see it on some 97's in the right light. Can't feel it as raised, but you can make out where it is.

    After a while the die crack continues its travel. The dot hole deforms as a result and you're left with Jerry's penny.

    But you've achieved your aim. You've prolonged the life of the die. The new reverse C is now ready and production resumes as before.

    I'm sure that this theory is full of faults and assumptions but it's food for thought.


    I vaguely recall reading a similar theory before so you may be onto something - might have been in one of Michael Gouby's books? I really can't remember now.

  2. On 7/28/2020 at 10:20 PM, VickySilver said:

    I see it listed at 200 sets. Are they like the RM, where often we see reported maximums as oppose to actual number sold - modern mints have an issue with this? The OP set 2002 Jamaica is listed as are all the other Jamaica sets from 1988-2001 at 500. These must be maximums because some are much scarcer than others.

    I suspect an original set limit is the first number, the number released another, the net number out to actual collectors (net after returns, losses, etc.) possibly entirely another.

    I believe the Royal Australian Mint do the right thing - pretty sure all the advertised mintages is what ends up getting produced, and some things are advertised as unlimited mintage (so whatever they can sell within whatever window they give themselves I guess).

    Also, I had some luck getting images of early 20th century patterns from the Royal Mint Museum recently - it may be worth your while emailing them to see if they have an image of the 2002 Jamaica coins (and if they don't they would hopefully be able to confirm if they have any in their collection).

  3. On 7/26/2020 at 12:08 AM, VickySilver said:

    Ha, Tom. Good looking out! Have you found others since, and was that a set as released by a mint (which?).   I am so glad to see others in similar hunts to myself and the search is quite entertaining, if sometimes without fruit for periods of time.

    I think I stopped looking after that - the rest of the Cook Islands stuff is keeping me busy though. It was produced by the Royal Australian Mint - I'm sure I could find out how many were produced but I haven't gotten around to it yet. Their record keeping should be pretty good though - just accessing the records is the hard part.

  4. 8 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

    In fact, let us narrow it down to pennies in particular. If we assume that Court's estimated mintage figures are correct, and we also accept a generous reclamation rate of 90%, that theoretically leaves the following current figures of extant pennies for the following varieties:-

    1903 open date - estimated mintage 37,300 - potentially still in existence      3,730 (extremely unlikely to be anywhere near as high)

    1905 F 160 - estimated mintage  3,231, 359  - potentially still in existence  323,136 (plausible, but unlikely to be that high)

    1908 F164  - estimated mintage  1,166,550   - potentially still in existence  116,655 (plausible, but unlikely to be that high)

    1908 F164A  estimated mintage      55, 550   - potentially still in existence      5,555 (extremely unlikely to be anywhere near as high)

    1909 F169  - estimated mintage       23,200   - potentially still in existence     2,320 (almost certainly more would have come to light of this extremely rare and sought after variety)

    1911 Gouby X - estimated mintage 188,000 -  potentially still in existence      18,800 (extremely unlikely to be anywhere near as high)

    1913 F175 -  estimated mintage 1,733,500   - potentially still in existence    173,350 (extremely unlikely to be anywhere near as high)

    1913 F176 -  estimated mintage    948,750   - potentially still in existence       94,875 (extremely unlikely to be anywhere near as high)

    So that leaves three possibilities: 1) The reclamation rate was much higher than 90%:  2) Court's figures are incorrect: 3) There are many thousands sitting out there somewhere, still waiting to be discovered.

    I find it difficult to accept that Court's figures are that much out, as he was working from a substantial pre melt population, which should be representative of the whole population then still in existence. I also think it highly improbable that there are so many thousands of the rare varieties still sitting out there, given that nearly 50 years have elapsed, several generations have passed, and surely most jam jar/kitchen drawer/garage collections would have been looked at by now, and profits turned, wherever possible. 

    That just leaves one possibility - that the RM withdrawal rate of pennies was in fact, ultimately much higher than 90%. Maybe as high as over 99% in many cases, especially on varieties not at that point well known. Moreover, given what I've alluded to previously on this forum, that a fair percentage of F175 & 176, for example, are high grade, it would suggest that they had previously been collected and put away by default, purely as date types. Their much rarer significance having not been known about by the collector at the time.

    Very interesting topic and no easy answers.

    I somehow doubt a reclamation rate of 90% too - from memory the British West African withdrawal rate was around 90% for two shillings coins (the highest rate for any denomination).

    I suppose some of the survivors would be too worn to identify (probably not a whole lot though - 60 years of circulation has left plenty of half-decent coins) and I suppose a fair few would have been sent overseas. I'm sure plenty of British pennies ended up in Australia and New Zealand at least and I think the average collector here in Australia isn't too bothered with Freeman numbers.

    • Like 1

  5. On 2/5/2020 at 3:00 AM, VickySilver said:

    OK, don't get excited as it is only and primarily an edge variety with bevelled edges although there are some other differences.

    What are the other differences?

    On 2/6/2020 at 3:17 PM, VickySilver said:

    As an addendum, I am unaware of any publishing of the contents of the Pretoria Mint before it was deaquisitioned - does anybody know of source material?

    Agreed! It is often mentioned as the source of those 1924 proof sets with the 1922 penny but I can't find a source to back that up. https://coins.ha.com/itm/great-britain/great-britain-george-v-satin-finish-specimen-set-1924-and-1922-not-listed-in-the-spink-guide-but-well-known-these-are/a/340-15206.s mentions an old collection from South Africa but that's a little vague.