LCA December

[PWA 1967 1,835]

Now online for anyone interested or maybe just want a break from playing the piano.😊

[jelida 1,196]

Thanks Pete. 

I cant say I’m that impressed with the supposed obverse 10 E over P from the photos; has anyone actually seen it in the flesh? Looks like a die crack in the images.

Lovely 1863 die number 2, way out of my league.

Will try and view them at the Midland.

Jerry

[PWA 1967 1,835]

18 minutes ago, jelida said:

Thanks Pete. 

I cant say I’m that impressed with the supposed obverse 10 E over P from the photos; has anyone actually seen it in the flesh? Looks like a die crack in the images.

Lovely 1863 die number 2, way out of my league.

Will try and view them at the Midland.

Jerry

Yes i looked at that and thought the same so went onto the next one 😊

I also havent seen it though so i suppose its unfair to comment by going just off the picture.

[secret santa 2,013]

Doesn't look right to me.

[1949threepence 3,366]

Like Jerry, the 1863 die No 2 under date is unfortunately out of my league, and the die No 4 is little more than a washer (albeit a very rare washer). 

I want a F38, but not a counterstamped one.

Nothing much else there of massive interest, although I've made a note of one or two of mid interest in case they don't go at main auction.  

[Nick 325]

Lot 472 is one of the infamous 1864 dn 64 fakes.

[blakeyboy 1,601]

I can't get Safari or Firefox to work on LCA site tonight... do they go down a lot?

[1949threepence 3,366]

2 hours ago, blakeyboy said:

I can't get Safari or Firefox to work on LCA site tonight... do they go down a lot?

Working OK on Chrome, Kev.

Also no probs on android tablet.

[DaveG38 385]

Firefox works OK for me.

[PWA 1967 1,835]

1 hour ago, 1949threepence said:

Working OK on Chrome, Kev.

Also no probs on android tablet.

His name is Blake , Gary not Kev😂

Edited November 9, 2018 by PWA 1967

[blakeyboy 1,601]

And there's me just about to open a new account!!

I've recently upgraded Sierra, and all that's changed is that Safari and Firefox both won't go to London Coins.

All other things I go to work fine.....bamboozling.....

What is it about there site that these two search engines don't like?

The customer service?

[1949threepence 3,366]

7 hours ago, PWA 1967 said:

His name is Blake , Gary not Kev😂

My mistake. Apologies.

Mike

 

[blakeyboy 1,601]

On 11/7/2018 at 11:10 PM, Nick said:

Lot 472 is one of the infamous 1864 dn 64 fakes.

How can you tell?

 

LCA site running for me now, so I had a look, and it's a good fake, if it's fake....

[Nick 325]

9 hours ago, blakeyboy said:

How can you tell?

There were a number of them that appeared about 5 years ago.  They all have the same bag marks and a cud on the n of tenth.

If you search here for 1864 and florin you'll find all the previous discussion.

[Peckris 2 2,042]

On 9 November 2018 at 10:10 AM, blakeyboy said:

How can you tell?

 

LCA site running for me now, so I had a look, and it's a good fake, if it's fake....

Exact Chinese copy, taken from a good coin which is why the fakes are all absolutely identical. The same problem occurs with some Northumberland shillings - the only way to tell a fake was side by side with another, but by now we should know what to look out for.

[1949threepence 3,366]

4 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

Exact Chinese copy, taken from a good coin which is why the fakes are all absolutely identical. The same problem occurs with some Northumberland shillings - the only way to tell a fake was side by side with another, but by now we should know what to look out for.

Some of those fakes are getting frighteningly good.   

[Peckris 2 2,042]

28 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

Some of those fakes are getting frighteningly good.   

It's why Format Coins in Birmingham stopped dealing British coins - they got fed up telling people their coins were fakes.

[Sword 1,330]

On 11/9/2018 at 8:06 PM, Nick said:

There were a number of them that appeared about 5 years ago.  They all have the same bag marks and a cud on the n of tenth.

If you search here for 1864 and florin you'll find all the previous discussion.

What would happen if they start copying a proof coin without such imperfections? 

[Paddy 1,539]

51 minutes ago, Sword said:

What would happen if they start copying a proof coin without such imperfections? 

I am sure they do already. The only reason we are not discussing it is because they are impossible to detect by all normal means.

About the only way would be isotope analysis of the metal content to identify if the composition is consistent with the metals used at the time.

 

[DaveG38 385]

How do we know that the 1864 florin isn't the one used as the master for copying?

[Nick 325]

1 hour ago, DaveG38 said:

How do we know that the 1864 florin isn't the one used as the master for copying?

Because I believe that I've seen the original, which had all the same bag marks, but not the cud on the n of tenth.

Here's the link.

Edited November 11, 2018 by Nick

[Peckris 2 2,042]

2 hours ago, DaveG38 said:

How do we know that the 1864 florin isn't the one used as the master for copying?

That's a good point, but I have an instinct that the masters are still in China. (Just a hunch).

[Sword 1,330]

50 minutes ago, Peckris 2 said:

That's a good point, but I have an instinct that the masters are still in China. (Just a hunch).

I imagine the fakers might want to get rid of the "evidence" once the deed is done. Selling the original asap is quite sensible just in case someone might think it is a fake later on?

[jelida 1,196]

Had a close look at some of the pennies today, it is my opinion that the F10 E over P is just a complex die flaw. The R over B in REG is probably OK and the die number 2 is nice. Nothing for me to spend my increasingly stretched resources on this time though.

Jerry

[secret santa 2,013]

Interestingly, Gouby records R over B on an obverse F (Freeman 4) + rev g, but LCA describes their example as 5 + D.