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

   Rotographic    

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.

Sign in to follow this  
1949threepence

What percentage of pre decimal currency was reclaimed by the RM post 15.2.1971?

Recommended Posts

Worth checking some old Coins News from the time - I'm sure the Australian Coin Review had Royal Mint report summaries in the late 1960s early 1970s.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Mr T said:

Worth checking some old Coins News from the time - I'm sure the Australian Coin Review had Royal Mint report summaries in the late 1960s early 1970s.

I could be wrong but I had the feeling Coin News was first published in the 80s?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/16/2020 at 7:15 AM, Mr T said:

Worth checking some old Coins News from the time - I'm sure the Australian Coin Review had Royal Mint report summaries in the late 1960s early 1970s.

Tried the Coin Monthly mags from that period. Have read them all up to the end of 1976, and found nothing on reclamation rates, save for what Court referred to in his first article. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/18/2020 at 2:16 PM, 1949threepence said:

Tried the Coin Monthly mags from that period. Have read them all up to the end of 1976, and found nothing on reclamation rates, save for what Court referred to in his first article. 

Seems possible that after the bottom fell out of the modern market post-D Day, few really cared?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Peckris 2 said:

Seems possible that after the bottom fell out of the modern market post-D Day, few really cared?

Quite possibly. I imagine the period post D Day and beyond must have been quite a flat and depressing time as far as the modern market was concerned. All the prior enthusiasm was largely based on collecting from change in circulation, and that option was abruptly removed. 

With that said, there is another very interesting article from the October 1972 edition, on the subject of coin "wastage rates". This is something touched upon by Jerry @jelida earlier, and his opinion is vindicated by the research in this article. It starts on page 83, and is headed "A further analysis of coin surveys", by T.J.Cole B.A., B.Phil. Essentially, Cole concludes that there is a 2% per annum wastage rate on coins which have mintages exceeding 9 million, but this rises steeply for mintages below 9 million. So for example, if a coin had a mintage of say 20 million in 1945, by 1970, one would have expected the number of that cohort still extant, to be 12,069,286.    

I'm not sure I quite get the logic of why wastage rates due to pure loss (carelessness) should be any higher for mintages of below the arbitrary figure of 9 million. Cole seems to have established stats to support this contention, but I can't see why rates of loss should be any greater in absolute percentage terms if the mintage is lower. 

    

  

 

 

Edited by 1949threepence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

I'm not sure I quite get the logic of why wastage rates due to pure loss (carelessness) should be any higher for mintages of below the arbitrary figure of 9 million. Cole seems to have established stats to support this contention, but I can't see why rates of loss should be any greater in absolute percentage terms if the mintage is lower.

He can't possibly determine whether the wastage was due to carelessness or collectors. I'd guess that once a low mintage was known about, many collectors/investors would put examples aside in the hope of higher values in times to come? Add that to the 2% normal wastage and there's your higher %.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/20/2020 at 4:36 PM, Peckris 2 said:

He can't possibly determine whether the wastage was due to carelessness or collectors. I'd guess that once a low mintage was known about, many collectors/investors would put examples aside in the hope of higher values in times to come? Add that to the 2% normal wastage and there's your higher %.

Indeed so.

Cole added a chart of "expected" and "actual" numbers of a brass threepence sample collected. Although I'm not sure any 1946 or 1949 should be expected as they weren't ever issued for circulation here in the UK. 

Expected 1 = Scotland

Expected 2 = Midlands

Expected 3 = Southern England

It would appear from previous surveys taken into account by Cole, that there was far less evidence of hoarding in Scotland.

 

 

 

 

cole 5.jpg

Edited by 1949threepence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/22/2020 at 2:58 PM, 1949threepence said:

Indeed so.

Cole added a chart of "expected" and "actual" numbers of a brass threepence sample collected. Although I'm not sure any 1946 or 1949 should be expected as they weren't ever issued for circulation here in the UK. 

Expected 1 = Scotland

Expected 2 = Midlands

Expected 3 = Southern England

It would appear from previous surveys taken into account by Cole, that there was far less evidence of hoarding in Scotland.

Interesting that. I remember at school I switched from pennies to 3d's on a particular day ... and in the first bag I looked through there was a 1949! Never found a 46 but did get a fair sprinkling of 50 and 51.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/23/2020 at 11:31 PM, Peckris 2 said:

Interesting that. I remember at school I switched from pennies to 3d's on a particular day ... and in the first bag I looked through there was a 1949! Never found a 46 but did get a fair sprinkling of 50 and 51.

Sounds as though you got lucky. Have you still got it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

Sounds as though you got lucky. Have you still got it?

Definitely! Though I got a much better one - NEF - from Cookie in the 90s. A GEF would now suit me...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True that may well be that the RM called in as much as possible, but I still hae £90 in £SD from fairlings to crowns

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the large amount of .925 silver pre 1920 George V coins that are still around which are in around VF condition suggests that a significant number were hoarded at an earlier time. Obtaining the 1920s issues in the higher grades is far more difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ozjohn said:

Given the large amount of .925 silver pre 1920 George V coins that are still around which are in around VF condition suggests that a significant number were hoarded at an earlier time. Obtaining the 1920s issues in the higher grades is far more difficult.

Yes - they were hoarded in bulk in the early years following the debasement of .925 silver to 50% in 1920. Many people, not just collectors, wanted the higher silver content. That's also why you see so much high grade silver from 1942-1946 after the removal of silver in 1947.

As for the 1920s issues, yes fewer people hoarded them as they were debased, but it's also partly due to the shallower portrait from 1920 which meant the larger silver wore much more quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/25/2020 at 10:46 PM, ozjohn said:

Given the large amount of .925 silver pre 1920 George V coins that are still around which are in around VF condition suggests that a significant number were hoarded at an earlier time. Obtaining the 1920s issues in the higher grades is far more difficult.

Hmmm, not sure about that to be honest. When I collected 20th century shillings about 10 or 11 years ago, I didn't notice a great deal of difference in difficulty obtaining high grades of George V both pre and post 1920. 

The really difficult ones were Edward VII, apart from 1902 and 1910. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Hmmm, not sure about that to be honest. When I collected 20th century shillings about 10 or 11 years ago, I didn't notice a great deal of difference in difficulty obtaining high grades of George V both pre and post 1920. 

The really difficult ones were Edward VII, apart from 1902 and 1910. 

That's not usual - the 50% 1920-1926 issues are generally much harder in UNC, as the shallow portrait wore very much faster. However it's probably true to say it is more noticeable on florins and halfcrowns. If any 'shallow portrait' denomination was going to be put aside, the shilling was more likely.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's only really 1920-22 which are the erratic issues. Once you get to 23 they seem to have the metal mix and striking parameters under control and for some reason there seems to be a good number of well struck up 1925 shillings in particular, i.e. no flattening of the nose.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

That's not usual - the 50% 1920-1926 issues are generally much harder in UNC, as the shallow portrait wore very much faster. However it's probably true to say it is more noticeable on florins and halfcrowns. If any 'shallow portrait' denomination was going to be put aside, the shilling was more likely.

The only post 1920 I had the slightest difficulty obtaining in UNC, was the 1924. All the rest, no problem. Although every 1920 I saw, including the one I have, seemed to have a greyish tinge to it. So I do wonder if that story about used shell casings from WW1 being used as part of the mix, is apocryphal or whether actually true. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1949threepence said:

The only post 1920 I had the slightest difficulty obtaining in UNC, was the 1924. All the rest, no problem. Although every 1920 I saw, including the one I have, seemed to have a greyish tinge to it. So I do wonder if that story about used shell casings from WW1 being used as part of the mix, is apocryphal or whether actually true. 

I think the shell casings applied more to bronze? You do see some 1920 and 1921 pennies (huge mintages) with brass coloured flecks in them, even on worn coins. I personally think the grey tinge was more to do with them not quite getting the alloy right - you also see very yellow examples between 1920 and 1922.

Did you find it as easy to get UNC examples of halfcrowns and florins between 1920 and 1926?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Davies gives some details on the alloys. From 1920 - 1922, the "dull alloy" was used which has copper with either 10% nickel (from old shell casings) or 5% manganese. Both readily tone to a darkish grey. The "bright alloy" (just 50% copper) was used from 1922 onward and was also heavily blanched. 

I am not certain I can agree that the shallow portrait makes it harder to have coins in UNC. Any wear will make the coin lose lustre at high points and hence its UNC status, whether it is the shallow or deep-cut portrait. It's just less obvious with the sterling coins which are often less well struck to begin with. 

I think the 1923 is the easiest to find in UNC. It is surprisingly difficult to find a 1911-1919 in true UNC grade if one is very strict. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

I think the shell casings applied more to bronze? You do see some 1920 and 1921 pennies (huge mintages) with brass coloured flecks in them, even on worn coins. I personally think the grey tinge was more to do with them not quite getting the alloy right - you also see very yellow examples between 1920 and 1922.

Did you find it as easy to get UNC examples of halfcrowns and florins between 1920 and 1926?

That's odd. I thought I answered this post an hour or so ago, yet it seems to have vanished.

Actually said that I never collected halfcrowns and florins. 

Yes, you're right about the 1920 and 1921 pennies. Many of them have very streaky lustre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Sword said:

I am not certain I can agree that the shallow portrait makes it harder to have coins in UNC. Any wear will make the coin lose lustre at high points and hence its UNC status, whether it is the shallow or deep-cut portrait. It's just less obvious with the sterling coins which are often less well struck to begin with. 

I think the 1923 is the easiest to find in UNC. It is surprisingly difficult to find a 1911-1919 in true UNC grade if one is very strict. 

The way it shows most is coins where the wear is more obvious. Pre-1920 large silver rarely has more than half a grade difference between obverse and reverse. The shallow portraits - most obvious on halfcrowns - are often encountered with more than a grade difference. For example, the obverse not even F but with a reverse hovering around the VF mark. 

Yes, between 1914 and 1918 it can be difficult to find fully struck up examples due to the huge increase in mintages during WW1, but it's not hard to find examples in EF especially as many were hoarded. However, I'd amend my original comment to say "harder to find the shallow portrait in high grades" rather than strictly UNC - you only have to look at that portrait and it begins to wear.

4 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Yes, you're right about the 1920 and 1921 pennies. Many of them have very streaky lustre.

Agreed - and all the way to 1926, maybe even 1927 too. But the ones I meant are a small number of pennies where there are flecks of yellow (brass?) long after the lustre has gone. These metal flecks are actually embedded in the metal of the flan and give the coin a very odd appearance.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×