Leaderboard

If only it was a picture of him on the treatment table at Newcastle whilst counting his huge wad of weekly sick pay I would have been in like a shot!

was 10 pm as i was walking of the field last night in the Moonlight, love them last signal on the way back to the car hammy's, nice Sixpence of Elizabeth I, Mint mark is not clear, Went back this morning but no luck, there's always this evening though ;0)

Hi , thought I'd share this William & Mary tin halfpenny, I Found metal detecting a couple of years ago. Has 1691 in ex and 1692 on edge. Also has Maltese crosses and the Latin inscription. Thanks for looking.

I now have examples of all 5 of the Cinque Ports halfpenny Conder tokens, this is Hastings, the only one of the 5 in Sussex

Same here. Reported it again. That description is still misleading. I urge others to do the same we may get it pulled again , hopefully ?

You have £16.50 worth of notes/coins. Spend them or donate to a worthy charity.

You can't even message him now. I've reported it.

That's correct, Matteo. Peck: 1692 (Obv 6, Rev F) Freeman: 70 (Obv 7, Rev G)Gouby: C (Obv K, Rev g)

Thanks John, what's your eBay account?

Sorry, I can't decipher the first section so I am uncertain what you want. Using English would help immensely. As for the image referred to in the second section, they would be worth £5, £5, £5, 50p, 50p, 50p respectively. There is no reason for anything other than AA01s with very low serial numbers or alternatively those notes with errors to be worth anything more than £5 each. The 50 pences are worn from circulation and worth their face value.

That's a King compared to most Mike!

But come on, he does have 90.7% positive feedback. What more could you ask of a seller?

Yes, same seller who has the replica sixpence listed. I've reported both.

Maybe not yesterday, but possibly in the last few months.........

Ah yes, controversy arises again on these boards, even if of a lesser magnitude. I would beg to differ in opinion and am of the opinion that most high grade 3ds from earlier Victorian years are Maundies and that in particular 1839 through 1860 or so are VERY scarce if of currency type. The problem is that not all Maundies are prooflike, and many have been struck with cracked dies & lettering errors, etc. Also the obverses may not "match" the reverses as dies appear to have been utilised in multiple years. Some Maundies were definately struck with satiny surface dies which make them resemble currency strikes; reverse strike details and sharpness have sometimes helped to differentiate between the two. I have disagreed with the attribution of many 3ds that have been encapsulated by TPGs - third party graders - in the USA. Be highly suspect of Maundies sold as currency in the years 1839 - 1844, 1846-1848, 1851-1853 in particular as they are almost always NOT. Well, will not exhaust this but welcome any other opinions.