All Activity

Interesting. I don't know why about the half crowns. I did just order a proof 1927 florin (only available in proof that year) and an UNC 1927 Wreath Crown from The Coin King so I'm eagerly awaiting them.

Had a look on Ebay uk listing for 1927 half crowns as suspected most of the better grade of the first shield examples were fairly expensive. What was surprising was the amount of proofs of the new design were listed with only 15k minted for the sets as against 6.8 Million minted for general issue. Again with the 1927 proof florin the Coin King had three proofs for sale while GB Classic Coins had two. Is there something about 1927 proof coins that makes them unpopular?

Ive been looking for a long time but even some very expensive MS 64 examples still showed signs of poor strike / wear.

Not much fun in Stalingrad, no. You need the A361, Barnstaple section....

Very interesting, it was a coin I was offered off a dealer and with this interesting obverse I may purchase it now !

I agree with Peckris that the loss of details is virtually all due to weak striking. Otherwise, wear would be very obvious in other areas like the garter letterings. And with these 0.50 silver points, areas of wear would show discolouration. If there is still lustre on the top of the shield area, then it's another indication that it is weak striking. You can still try to upgrade to specimens that are fully struck!

Isn't it a brockage? No. Just a die clash - see original post at top of thread. This picture immediately above is an overlay / superimposed, not what the coin actually looks like.

Isn't it a brockage?

Seems fine this morning. Thanks for your efforts @Chris Perkins

It seems to be a relatively common occurrence in the 1870's - I have 1875 and 1877 pennies with the same flaw.

Its a rotated die clash which this overlayed picture shows quite well.

Hello. I was looking on this forum and found some conversations and photos of 1922 One Penny and it's 27 reversed. I'm simply not knowledgeable enough in this to know what i've got here...I keep going back and forth. I would appreciate it if anyone could give me an opinion. TIA

Hi I was wondering if anyone could identify what has happened to the bust of Victoria on this 1870 penny. It’s a strange flaw and seems to have been done at the time of striking

Thanks for the comments I wasn't sure as wear and poor strike are hard to distinguish sometimes as i was thinking of upgrading.

It's only the F103 that are really valuable - something the article failed to mention. People with F108 are going to think that they really have something special.

Seriously? Or joking? If you really have, are you up for selling one of them?

I would say poor strike, as the lettering on the garter is perfect, and that's among the first areas to wear. Difficult to grade without seeing in hand, but I would say the second one is AUNC.

As in Sou for femail pig?

Seems ok for me now. I did block an IP range and there are about 200 guests online at the moment. As soon as you block one though, it does virtually nothing as they use a load of different IP addresses. Don't think it's malicious at the moment. Probably training an AI or who knows.

many thanks Paddy, you example clarifies the No 5 on my worn one, its one I can keep as a space filler until I come across another, Many thanks and all the very best , 👍

....turning up in your change 😂

Yes, I'm suffering too.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/money/brits-urged-check-stash-now-37172309 I've got several 1881H pennies in Unc - I must be a millionaire !

I guess we are under attack again as everything very slow...

I would say the second is definitely 1859. Here is a snip of mine for comparison. It is a common confusion - we often see either mis-labelled on Ebay and even on proper auctions.