Old design 50p coins to be re-minted

[hertfordian 0]

Interesting link on the London Gazette site authorising the RM to re-issue all of the previously used designs on 50p coins in precious metals and cupro-nickel. The Mint is obviously looking for more ways to squeeze money out of us poor collectors! ;-))

http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/591...-07-25;all=coin

[Peckris 579]

The Mint is obviously looking for more ways to squeeze money out of us poor collectors! ;-))

They didn't have enough ways already ?

27.3 mm - that's the new smaller dimension, right? Which means there are some older types, e.g. the 1973 EEC reverse, which will be effectively new designs.

[hertfordian 0]

The Mint is obviously looking for more ways to squeeze money out of us poor collectors! ;-))

They didn't have enough ways already ?

27.3 mm - that's the new smaller dimension, right? Which means there are some older types, e.g. the 1973 EEC reverse, which will be effectively new designs.

...and as these will all be dated 2009 (as far as I can see), they'll be new designs anyway - especially with the obverse portrait not being the Machin version...

[scott 129]

why do the mint want our money... they make the stuff O.O

[1949threepence 3,366]

The Mint is obviously looking for more ways to squeeze money out of us poor collectors! ;-))

They didn't have enough ways already ?

27.3 mm - that's the new smaller dimension, right? Which means there are some older types, e.g. the 1973 EEC reverse, which will be effectively new designs.

...and as these will all be dated 2009 (as far as I can see), they'll be new designs anyway - especially with the obverse portrait not being the Machin version...

Did you notice though that the gold piedfort coin had two obverse options, as follows:-

For the obverse impression either:

(a) Our effigy with the inscription “ELIZABETH · II · D · G REG · F · D ·†and the date “2009â€; or

( Our effigy with the inscription “ELIZABETH · II D · G · REG · F · D†and the denomination “FIFTY PENCEâ€,

All the others had just option (a) for the obverse design.

Thanks for the link, by the way. Very Interesting.

[Peckris 579]

Did you notice though that the gold piedfort coin had two obverse options, as follows:-

For the obverse impression either:

(a) Our effigy with the inscription “ELIZABETH · II · D · G REG · F · D ·†and the date “2009â€; or

( Our effigy with the inscription “ELIZABETH · II D · G · REG · F · D†and the denomination “FIFTY PENCEâ€

If they go with option ( I guess we will see "RARE UNDATED" gold piedfort 50 pences turning up on eBay?

[VickySilver 775]

This proliferation of issues and reissues is quite over the top in my opinion. I remeber rather liking the gold Britannias as they got started and even got a one and a half ounce (which I wear on a chain to this day). But then they kept dumping unc. and proof bullion pieces in all the fractionals each and every year for twenty years, and I have just left them alone. Ditto the silver Britannias. Now each of the denominations is issued and reissued in all different metal compositions and feature increasingly inane commemorations, and I get the feeling that the Royal Mint is emulating the private mints with their "coins" struck for Liberia, Fanning Island, etc.

They seem to be killing the goose that laid the golden egg, and - I really don't care if there are arteficial rarities being created, and god bless the buyers of such.

[Peckris 579]

This proliferation of issues and reissues is quite over the top in my opinion. I remeber rather liking the gold Britannias as they got started and even got a one and a half ounce (which I wear on a chain to this day). But then they kept dumping unc. and proof bullion pieces in all the fractionals each and every year for twenty years, and I have just left them alone. Ditto the silver Britannias. Now each of the denominations is issued and reissued in all different metal compositions and feature increasingly inane commemorations, and I get the feeling that the Royal Mint is emulating the private mints with their "coins" struck for Liberia, Fanning Island, etc.

They seem to be killing the goose that laid the golden egg, and - I really don't care if there are arteficial rarities being created, and god bless the buyers of such.

Indeed - the secondary market for these items shows just how poor an "investment" they are. There's a glut of commems and the like (or there was, a few years back - I'm sure things haven't changed much?) - and the values in Spink are stagnant.

And to make matters worse, the Elizabeth II pages in the Standard Catalogue have become quite ridiculous. I think they should confine them to currency issues only, including proof sets and BU sets, and move everything else out into a separate "Mint Issues & Commemoratives" booklet. Anything not issued for currency could go in there - from the 1972 Silver Wedding "Crown" onwards, i.e. all piedforts, all crown-sized pieces, all gold and silver Britannias, anything issued as a specimen in a folder, Baby Sets, you name it. And also it could then take in all those lovely fantasy pieces too, which don't get featured anywhere, such as the gorgeous pattern 1798 penny, with the Kuchler obverse and reworked Boulton reverse pattern.

[1949threepence 3,366]

This proliferation of issues and reissues is quite over the top in my opinion. I remeber rather liking the gold Britannias as they got started and even got a one and a half ounce (which I wear on a chain to this day). But then they kept dumping unc. and proof bullion pieces in all the fractionals each and every year for twenty years, and I have just left them alone. Ditto the silver Britannias. Now each of the denominations is issued and reissued in all different metal compositions and feature increasingly inane commemorations, and I get the feeling that the Royal Mint is emulating the private mints with their "coins" struck for Liberia, Fanning Island, etc.

They seem to be killing the goose that laid the golden egg, and - I really don't care if there are arteficial rarities being created, and god bless the buyers of such.

Indeed - the secondary market for these items shows just how poor an "investment" they are. There's a glut of commems and the like (or there was, a few years back - I'm sure things haven't changed much?) - and the values in Spink are stagnant.

And to make matters worse, the Elizabeth II pages in the Standard Catalogue have become quite ridiculous. I think they should confine them to currency issues only, including proof sets and BU sets, and move everything else out into a separate "Mint Issues & Commemoratives" booklet. Anything not issued for currency could go in there - from the 1972 Silver Wedding "Crown" onwards, i.e. all piedforts, all crown-sized pieces, all gold and silver Britannias, anything issued as a specimen in a folder, Baby Sets, you name it. And also it could then take in all those lovely fantasy pieces too, which don't get featured anywhere, such as the gorgeous pattern 1798 penny, with the Kuchler obverse and reworked Boulton reverse pattern.

Totally agree. They really are pandering to the collector market in a way which is making the whole thing annoyingly artificial.

One of the reasons I'm just not interested in post 1971 currency at all.

[Chris Perkins 223]

Me too, it's a complete load of tosh without exception! I think I've aired that opinion often enough.

Essentially they are not coins, they have become medals. 'Coins' made off-metal on purpose with no intention of them ever being circulated as money. Stupid designs commemorating stupid things that are not worthy of being commemorated.....and that no one really cares about (especially on the 50p - I repeat: 'what a load of tosh'). And they are specially packed in little box with a numbered certificate that might as well say 'Well done on buying this novelty medal, it'll never be worth anything like what you paid for it'.

To summarise: More Tosh than a 1990s episode of The Bill!

[Sylvester 15]

Now you guys know why I refuse to collect proofs!

I've said it many times, over many years, I generally dislike commemoratives, the rate we're going they be commemorating the fact that the sky is blue.

This is why as a general rule I avoid modern coins.

[DaveG38 385]

Just to put the other side of the coin, so to speak, there are a number of modern commemoratives that I do find rather attractive. For instance the 2008 Elizabeth I proof crown was a very nicely executed piece of work and with the frosted relief looks good. I also quite like he useless commemorative 50 pences, if only to relieve the monotony of the britannia reverse.

After a few years I think we'll all be thoroughly cheesed off with the latest business strike offerings, which are a novelty at first but for me are already beginning to become monotonous, and will be much more interested in seeing some variation.

[Sylvester 15]

I expect the Victorian collectors felt the same way in 1886, 49 years of the same designs.

Of course the problem is the Queen has had a very long reign and long reigns tend to bring monotony (sure the coins get redesigned every now and again but not often). In the early 20th century there were several monarchs who had short reigns and every time the monarch changed generally the designs changed (except for the 1d, 3d and the gold which kept their designs). The modern monotony problem has been kind of amplified by decimalisation where all the previous designs (except the 6d, 1/- and 2/-) were removed from circulation, since the 6d, 1/- and 2/- vanished in the 80s and 90s, we've had nothing but decimal designs for forty years. The 2008 redesign was very welcome (at least for me), but eventually it'll get boring. Ten or twenty years from now when QEII kicks the golden bucket hopefully they'll redesign the reverses as well as the obverses!

Just a thought.

Edited to add; If you think we're hard done by, just take pity on the Americans, up until the 'clipart' State Quarter program started in 1999, they'd had the following;

Cent - Same obverse since 1909, same reverse since 1959 (to 2009)

Nickel - Same design since 1938 (to 2006?)

Dime - Same design since 1946 (and this hasn't changed as far as i'm aware)

Quarter - Same design since 1932 (to 1998)

Half - Same design since 1964 (to present)

Now that is dull.

[VickySilver 775]

I agree with the bit about having fresh designs, but the logic of reissues being fresh eludes me. Also, probably not too many of these collector specials will be reaching the man in the street (or woman either!).

[Sylvester 15]

I agree with the bit about having fresh designs, but the logic of reissues being fresh eludes me. Also, probably not too many of these collector specials will be reaching the man in the street (or woman either!).

That's very true. I does seem to me as if the annual minting of circulating coinage is now more of a sideline for the mint rather than it's main job. Maybe i'm cynical?

[Peckris 579]

That's very true. I does seem to me as if the annual minting of circulating coinage is now more of a sideline for the mint rather than it's main job. Maybe i'm cynical?

Well it's not so far-fetched - when you consider that the total value of coins in circulation represent, year-on-year, an ever-shrinking portion of the money supply, then it really is a matter of decreasing priority. Today's £10 note probably equates to a 1930s halfcrown in real terms.

As for commemoratives, I recently bought (via eBay) a 'fantasy' proof penny of 1798, which featured the Kuchler George III obverse, and a Britannia reverse closely based on the pattern pieces of the Boulton era, minted on a heavy dark bronze flan. I don't usually go for those fantasy pieces, but I fell in love with this as soon as I saw it. They can do some things right, it seems.

[1949threepence 3,366]

That's very true. I does seem to me as if the annual minting of circulating coinage is now more of a sideline for the mint rather than it's main job. Maybe i'm cynical?

Well it's not so far-fetched - when you consider that the total value of coins in circulation represent, year-on-year, an ever-shrinking portion of the money supply, then it really is a matter of decreasing priority. Today's £10 note probably equates to a 1930s halfcrown in real terms.

As for commemoratives, I recently bought (via eBay) a 'fantasy' proof penny of 1798, which featured the Kuchler George III obverse, and a Britannia reverse closely based on the pattern pieces of the Boulton era, minted on a heavy dark bronze flan. I don't usually go for those fantasy pieces, but I fell in love with this as soon as I saw it. They can do some things right, it seems.

Just checked on a historic inflation calculator. In 1930, 2/6d, equated to £5.83 today.

So a halfcrown then was worth considerably more than twice a £2.00 coin is today.

How long before the first £5.00 coin ? You certainly can't seem to get a new £5.00 note for love nor money these days (no pun intended)

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

Just checked on a historic inflation calculator. In 1930, 2/6d, equated to £5.83 today.

So a halfcrown then was worth considerably more than twice a £2.00 coin is today.

How long before the first £5.00 coin ? You certainly can't seem to get a new £5.00 note for love nor money these days (no pun intended)

[Colin G. 147]

£5 coins are supposed to be legal tender, anyone ever spent one or received one in change ?

Yes I have spent a few over the years when encountered in bulk purchases, because they are not worth selling. You usually end up having to spend them at a post office or large store, but they generally get accepted, and no doubt go straight into someones pocket. My contribution to encouraging future coin collectors

[Sylvester 15]

Regarding 5 pound coins, well I've tried spending them and I've been refused. I've even been turned away from an HSBC, a and a Natwest bank with the words "try the post office." In fact the very Post office I bought the thing from for a fiver, didn't exactly like the idea of me turning up months later sending something in the post and trying to pay with it.

So I refuse to have anything to do with them now.

Same problem with pre-1997 2 pound coins, although they can be spent, due with the public familiarity with two pound coins most likely, but you've got to try hard,

With reference to crisp 5 pound notes, I knew of a cash machine in Huddersfield that gave them out by the bundle. I once withdrew 200 quid and got the whole lot in crisp fivers. Surprised a few coin dealers in York with them.

[hertfordian 0]

Regarding 5 pound coins, well I've tried spending them and I've been refused. I've even been turned away from an HSBC, a and a Natwest bank with the words "try the post office." In fact the very Post office I bought the thing from for a fiver, didn't exactly like the idea of me turning up months later sending something in the post and trying to pay with it.

So I refuse to have anything to do with them now.

Same problem with pre-1997 2 pound coins, although they can be spent, due with the public familiarity with two pound coins most likely, but you've got to try hard,

With reference to crisp 5 pound notes, I knew of a cash machine in Huddersfield that gave them out by the bundle. I once withdrew 200 quid and got the whole lot in crisp fivers. Surprised a few coin dealers in York with them.

I do remember some years ago (must have been around 1995/96) getting given a couple of £2 coins in change from the post office despite these being the old single colour versions which were only really intended for commemorative purposes. Haven't ever seen anyone try spending a fiver coin though.

BTW - Got a generic "to all households in the UK" mail-out from the Royal Mint today offering an Olympic Countdown for a fiver. Shame that they've then whacked £1.95 postage charge on top of that so it's not quite the "fiver for a fiver" that they're claiming in the literature. Also, they must have money to burn if these mail-outs really have gone to *every* household in the UK!

Hertfordian

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

In response to a google search, is the £5 coin legal tender:

Yes, the five pound coin (crown) is legal tender in the United Kingdom in values up to any amount.

Despite being fully legal tender the five pound coin (crown) will often be refused in shops simply because it is not commonly seen in circulation. The reason for this is that though coin is of a standard size and weight it has no standard face designs, the coins are always of a commemorative nature and so are often kept away in private collections.

There is no way to force an individual to accept any form of payment, including legal tender. Transactions in the UK are always a mutual agreement between two parties.

The Post Office have stated that they are happy to receive the coin as payment for goods and services. A bank should also be able to exchange the coin for change or a banknote, or you can deposit it into an account.

Right, deep breath, and off to the bank....

[bilnic 0]

Within the last few weeks I received a 1996 £2 'Football' (monometal type) in my change at a local supermarket. It looks as though it's almost the first time that it has changed hands. I accepted it, said "Thanks" as though it was an everyday event and now it's in my collection.

Bill.

[scott 129]

post offices usualy take anything....

[hertfordian 0]

And here they are

http://www.royalmint.com/store/BritishSilv...mp;origin=email

Now how on earth do the RM justify trying to charge just short of £200 for a proof set in CUPRO-NICKEL?!?! If that was for sterling silver, maybe - but base metal?! I know they've got to make money these days but they are having a laugh - particularly if one compares how much similar products seem to cost from the US Mint....

I think that this is one set that I'll *definitely* be able to live without!