All Activity

ohhhh! and I did spot a flaw its only a lump between the teeth and the 2nd letter I in Victoria.....👍

just tacking on to this topic in regards to found in good condition,...... and theses six pence's dated 1911 George V and a young head Victoria 1887 fall into this category, I had these dates already paged however theses are in so much better condition, so need to show and switch them out... 👍

It is a very nice design 😊. Consider being a type collector and then you won't need to have more than one example. (Obviously, gifts from family are supernumerary.)

I had the good fortune to pick up a couple of these coins, recently, for a bargain £145 the pair. But when pawing over them, marvelling at how new they looked, in what appeared to be nearly full lustre, I noticed they were from the same pair of dies, and looking suspiciously similar. Further investigations revealed that all the other class VIs I could find out there were also looking lustred and from the same dies…beginning to feel suspicious at this point. UNTIL, that is, I discovered the 1969 Colchester Hoard was linked to a couple of the recent sales, leading me to explore that further. The hoard story is fascinating in that it was added to in at least two distinct lots, spanning at least 12 years, and is also thought to be linked to the 1902 hoard, found in the same street. The Edward I class VI coins, numbering nearly 2000, were ‘fresh from the Bury mint, and from the same pair of dies.’ There was previously only ONE known example of that type, so I can say with confidence that my own two coins will have made up a part of that hoard, explaining their fresh surfaces. The BNS article is well worth a read, as is a google search for the history and speculation surrounding the hoard itself. It has strong links with a Jewish family who were occupying the hoard location during that period. https://www.britnumsoc.org/publications/Digital BNJ/pdfs/1974_BNJ_44_5.pdf

well its a start

My son isn't helping - he bought me a 2021 today 🤣

Now you only need 27 other dates and about 35 different privy marks/ varieties

Ow yes the thrill of the chase . !!!!!!

Never thought of that. Goodness, it's a complicated business.

The true conundrum is whether or not it is the coin/variety that you are expecting. If you've been unsuccessful in your bidding, then it might have been or might not have been. If successful, then you won't know until you open the packet with the coin. If you don't open the packet then it might or might not be what is expected. What to do????? Final advice: "What, me worry."

On this coin there seems to be a circular mark on the bottom of the obverse that may be a die crack and could account for the double striking of the date.

Not only the pennies were good. It was an all-round interesting sale given things like the unique 1847 6d and the Henry VI (restored) farthing. I picked up a couple things, so in a good mood today.

I don't want to know if I lost it!

Some lovely rare pennies sold at Sovereign Rarities this morning. Most of them have been on the market before with some increasing in price and some decreasing. The wonderful 1882 F112 BU sold for £12,250 which was cheaper than it realised in the Spink Gerald Jackson sale (June 2014 for £15,150)

I think the 1927 florin (and also threepence?) are a target as these dates are not available in circulation coinage. For the date-run collectors they are appealing once the usual dates have been acquired. The 1927 proof Half crown would be far less appealing as the date can be ticked off with a circulation issue, even though the design is totally different.

I still think it's odd - there are many low mintage proofs in the 20th Century. Repros are usually of extremely rare coins, or are obvious bad copies of particular types (though not often of 20th Century coins unless extremely rare such as 1933 or 1954 pennies).

You don't want to know if you won the penny?

It suddenly occurred to me the other day I had put a bid in for a nice looking penny on eBay. I had to put the bid in early as I had a long drive when it was due to mature. By the time I got home the auction was over. Now here is my conundrum. I could check with the web site to see if I had been successful or not. But if I did I might have failed in my bid and had lost the coin. However, if I don’t check it out I could still hold the winning bid, but I won’t know until I looked at the listing. Therefor, I might have won that coin, or not, until I find out one way or the other. I( I have lost the bid then I would be disappointed, so am I in a better position by not looking? Unless I have won it.

I am inclined to agree with you, Paddy, now I see all 3 together. But, keep looking for a 1915 recessed without the broken tooth as they do exist. I have one!

Not at all... Genuine 1927 florins are proof only, barely 15,000 struck and typically change hands for £120 - £150 and are sought after. A Chinese poor quality copy (which this is just one of many, many examples peddled on ebay, Alibaba etc) can be got for maybe a fiver, so a disingenuous soul can easily make a huge profit... See above!

It does look a bit odd now you mention it. The lines under the eyes and BM don't look quite right either. Here's the link: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/267686864594?_trksid=p4375194.c102726.m162918 Does seem a strange one to copy though.

I am here to eat humble pie! Having considered this coin for a while I finally got round to doing some direct comparison work, and have to conclude the doubters were right and it is not a recessed ear. Here is a comparison picture: On the left is my "normal" 1915. In the centre is my existing 1915 "recessed ear" complete with the indicative broken tooth. On the right is the one I hoped was a better "recessed ear", but side by side it clearly isn't. I had put too much faith in the depth of the trench to the left of the ear, whereas the fineness of the top of the ear and the absence of the rib in the centre of the ear seem to be better indicators when the broken tooth is absent.

Yes, I would go with repro too. The over-detailed eyebrows and moustache just don't seem to occur on genuine coins, even proofs.

It's possibly more difficult to tell when the attached picture is of an entire webpage rather than a screenshot of just the coin, but it simply just doesn't look right. It looks wrong in exactly the same way as a Victorian YH repro looks wrong. So my money's on a repro unless we can see the coin isolated from the webpage.