Leaderboard

I emailed the seller earlier. It makes interesting reading: Me: Can you confirm that the obverse photograph is of the same coin as the reverse photograph ? They are a different colour and taken with different backgrounds. Thanks Him: It's the same I have a crappie phone all my items I removed because I take hundreds photos. I already sent a video to a lady and I did polish the front with a silver jewllery cloth. The lady offered to buy it off here last night need to remove it but ebay got massive fees Me: You've been rumbled - That reverse photo is taken from London Coins website directly ! And who knows where the obverse is from. Best to take it down before you're in trouble Him: Well I've a video so no rumbled here lol I was asked for a live video which I sent the buyer they are happy and will be buying I've never once lied cheated so the fact you say that tells me your probably a scammer. Anyone could ask me for as msy photos videos with today's news on and they'd have it no problem. Seems a smart lady dealer was the only one so watch for the review after. And I've found a buyer for the rest of the collection too. you'll see the other penny also the one I was told wasn't real thank god I don't listen

My 1893 penny shows the same feature:

There used to be a way of reporting an item to ebay for plagiarised pictures, I think. The illiteracy of both his listing and his email to you reminds me of a certain marleybob and her numerous 1933 pennies!! Current high (and repeat) bidder has a feedback of just 1. Shill bidding going on??

I've just looked at 8 photos of 1893 over 2 and they all feature that weakness in the horizontal bar.

No, I can’t see it either. I wonder whether this flaw was on a master that was used to make several dies/dates over the 1892 to 93 period. You have a nice doubled inner circle to the lower left of the date too! (Spellcheck initially converted ‘doubled inner’ to ‘double dinner’ , quite a nice interpretation I thought!). Jerry

So do my 1893 over 2 pennies (all three) but not my plain 1893's. Jerry

Weak patches can be due to various things. Wear is the most obvious, but also blocked dies or soft strikes. If it is an area of lower relief, then it is usually something filling the die. It may be metal dust or could also be grease. Unused dies are stored in grease to prevent rusting, and sometimes this is not fully removed prior to use. Because the grease will not compress under pressure, the flan is not struck up at this point.

I know it's common for people (dealers, eBay sellers) to misattribute the tides on 1895, 1897, 1902, but I'm looking at the NGC slabbed offerings, and they often seem off. I'm not wrong am I, that these two 1897 labelled as High Tide aren't actually high tide? https://www.ebay.com/itm/186136288294 https://www.ebay.com/itm/232339243134 It rather muddies the waters more if every available slabbed "High Tide" isn't, (or Low Tide for 1902), and lends credence to every other seller thinking they also have the rarer tide. The damage NGC does is infuriating, doubly so as they're raking in so much, while throwing fuel in this fire. They need to work a bit on earning expertise credentials.

Hello! New to the Forum. What are people thoughts on missing horizontal line. Apologies if the image as low resolution I'm trying to understand how to load pictures within the limit. Cheers

When my Uncle was very old, we covered him in grease. He went downhill pretty quickly after that.

I have an 1892 & 94, but no 93 yet. Anyhow, this isn't on my 92 or 94. I'll try to share my 92

Which is nothing like enough for a genuine coin/sale. The "bidder" with 1 feedback "won" it. What chance we see it again at some point in the future with similar cock and bull accompanying...? 😀

Well, there really ought to be some 1892’s with the flaw, unless there was just a single batch of flawed 1892 dies which were all updated into the progression of altered ‘3’s including the clear ‘ 3/2’ that Gouby shows in detail. Or the ‘3/2’ could be regarded as a ‘2/3’, an 1893 die mis-repaired using a ‘2’ punch, which I do not favour. Either way I feel that there must have been a flawed master die to enable the missing line to occur on dies producing both overstrike and normal coins. Jerry

Neither my 1892 or 1894 show any sign of the missing bar. Interesting the double inner circle - I hadn't noticed that before. As I suggested, I am blind to variations until someone rubs my nose in it!

Not as far as I can see. (I am notoriously bad at spotting variations!):

Yet it looks the same flaw. Not sure what to make of that. Does yours have the bulge under the upper loop of the ‘3’ that you see on 3/2 coins? Jerry

Interesting. My 1893 is not 3 over 2:

Unquestionably. A gold halfpenny formerly in my possession had a large scuff to the cheek which was subsequently filled and magically achieved a proof 64 cameo grade 6 months after I sold it. It sounds better and sells better than unc details damaged, and adds to the TPG coffers. And it cost the US buyer in excess of $30K in 2010, but hey, he was happy as it had been certified as genuine and not tampered with. Doubles all round - everyone's happy. If they are going to have variable standards for certain high price items, it would help their reputation if they introduced a special label to reflect that.

Thanks for your reply Jerry! Your explanation makes more sense to me. This is from a 1893 reverse N penny, yes most probably you will be able to see it in other 1893 pennies. Cheers

That is interesting, I wonder whether a partly filled die could have been repaired by re-engraving the vertical lines? What coin is this? It might be possible to track the die fill and repair by looking at other examples . Jerry

Neither of those offerings is F148. If purchased, the seller gets the wrath of the buyer when the true value of the coin is known, not the grading company, so this is just laziness on the seller's part, so they deserve all they get. I love the pricing disparity as well!

Yes, none of the fake copper coins have that wider tooth under the date. Their teeth are incredibly uniform.

Here is a date close up on a genuine coin, which shows spacing compared to the above coin. There are a few different date styles on 1849 pennies but, to my knowledge, all of them have a numeral 9 with a different font to that seen on the fakes. The top loop on the genuine coins are always more oval (elongated) shaped, whereas the fakes are circular. This is probably the easiest way to spot the fake. Also, on genuine coins I believe that the 1 is always over an underneath 1 (to a greater or lesser extent, as more than one die like that), and sometimes the 4 is over an underneath 4. The 4 itself is also different (but not so easy to spot) in that genuine coins still have a small part remaining of the tail pointing upwards. The attached picture demonstrates some of these features

Seemed as good a place to post as any ,this in my opinion is ridiculous 😯 RWB Auctions - Fine Art & Numismatics Auctioneers based in Wiltshire | 1953 Queen Elizabeth II proof nickel brass Threepence, graded PF 69 Ultra Cameo by NGC (S 4152). Obverse: Mary Gillick's first definitive portrait... The sixpence went for over £1K and although they may well be nice and worth a premium ,those prices have gone out of sight.

If you like something different, there's a book called "Newton and the Counterfeiter". It covers the period when Sir Isaac Newton (the scientist) was Master of the Royal Mint (1699-1727) and his dealing with William Chaloner, serial counterfeiter and con-man. It's an amazing story and well written. I have done a book review at https://coinparade.co.uk/newton-and-the-counterfeiter-book-review/

I got in contact and they say it will be back soon.

Agreed. Similarly, auction houses have a patina of reputation, which presumably they are keen to maintain in their lot descriptions as justification to the sellers for the premiums they charge. I am usually more likely to buy TPG graded for the same reason (as I always buy over distance) and crack them out on arrival if they are keepers. None of these methods are risk free though. Only risk management. It can be a perilous hobby. 🤣

Even buying from pictures can sometimes hide cleaning and not be a true likeness of the coin in hand and we rely on an honest description ,yes i agree it is however much better with pictures unless your buying off a dealer who you can trust to describe and grade correctly. Just post it back for a refund and perhaps next time phone them up first to confirm the coin is problem free before buying ,or dont buy from them again 👍

If no pictures are presented, you ought to be able to rely on the expertise of the vendor, but there are no guarantees. If described as BUnc, you would expect pretty much perfect condition. After a while one learns which dealers to trust and which not. A list without pictures sounds a bit like Mr Ingram and son?

Yes, I will try to post the coin in the next couple of days if any interested. The 1871 is a rare date that I had been looking for a good example of. Very similar to the 1867 above (except for the die crack).

Yes, although the tricky side is the obverse. Don't get me started on the "H"s!

There is a penny on Ebay claiming to be a 1922 F192A (https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/315165500518?itmmeta=01HQ4BZS9A4NM7ZVFA9MG6MAZ0&hash=item496153e466:g:y9gAAOSwvNFl04mN&itmprp=enc%3AAQAIAAAA4N7kipPiTz0BCXQMgWC6iSMHj%2F5zvSQuQxWjY2cu6yNpjIZ%2F525P%2FMzwhnjKHRdVzwKOh6%2FxD6k4m96TMefoC3i%2FZ2un8azd78R6UEDf2IuGAYr0HhlODfACMlsManI4g1BRVpGQ5Sq39AMYB3bjQ5wmJK2xzvaT1gCcKIVsvA3uVJ8yJrk51DdWtXHwbQQI8xiym02pABGTJhbO165Zxo9HC4Zs5OB9xVhJ%2FunFcmFvno8bmwJUwd9jETHNc%2Bywt3%2Bkx7mF%2BLRWFiUYuLO2T%2FUNKhZ%2F9BZwQh8JWTUektfo|tkp%3ABk9SR96U_4u5Yw but is the same reverse (same photo actually) as the coin sold by London Coins in September 2019 but with a different obverse photo - different colour, different background !!!!!!!!! (https://londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Pastresults&searchterm=1922+Penny&searchtype=1) I smell a rat.

The problem is that if you mention it in the US, which is the main market, you either get pilloried for questioning the system, or completely ignored so as not to rock the boat. The US is too heavily invested in the label culture for many to raise a finger - and so standards change. TPGs have 'special knowledge' that allows them to get away with things nobody else is. Many things are incorrectly attributed, so all you can do is make sure you understand your field and exploit their mistakes. Anything cleaned which isn't will usually bring a good bonus. Anything repaired but passed as a straight grade will bring a good bonus when it shouldn't. It is well known they have variable standards across the board. In terms of British coins they are from 6 figure coins downwards. Norweb's Petition Crown has been noted as having initials and a date scratched in the obverse field for at least 170 years and in my view was pierced, or an attempted piercing made and subsequently filled. Graffiti has been nearly polished out, but anyone with any knowledge will know this. It didn't stop the TPG giving it an AU53. Presumably the large fee for grading outstripped the details fee?