Chris Perkins

I've seen fantasy gold modern restrike Gothic coins recently. They were not quite as good as the original, but they were bloody close, I can tell you. I have 'Fantasy' coins, wouldn't give bullion worth for them!

That sounds like it may be a barrel of laughs!

Oi, don't you start giving the nice chaps in here any ideas!

Yes, the 53's are awful, that's why they re engraved things in '54, sharpish. (At first I didn't intend that pun, but there you go, I'll throw it in fee!)

Well, no, not really, just what goes into it changed! Or did it? So surely a 5p is still a shilling, is it?? The Govt will only let us vote on the Euro when they are sure they cannot loose!

Even the very rare 1934 Wreath saw circulation, I handled one that was worn to AEF. I think although they were given as gifts, the fact that they were made by the thousand and as far as I know were not specialy housed, like the 1935 commem, or the 1927 Proof, then surely they are not strictly speaking commemoratives. I don't think the modern commens will ever be as sought after as a good ole Wreath. Ignore Sylvester, and contact me personally, I always give the best prices to forumees!

Yes of course, but if you take the basic currency as the Pound (and it's forerunners) then our currency is much older. But you're right of course, decimal put a stop to the real ancient currency in '71.

I suppose it also depends on how many are out there. It's all very well stating the mintages left right and centre...But how many were melted down later on, lost at sea, buried in the ground, or found their way down the back of antique sofas etc. The rarity is a rough measure of how many are out there, and that, in the case of Extremely Rare and the commoner, is not really all that important, because they could probably never all be accounted for anyway. Well done on your extremely rare coin Sylvester, I think the 1868 Cu-Ni Proof that I got from Dan is also R3.

I just put them on today, I can see that 250 subscribers have viewed them from the newsletter, but nothing yet. The last 1931 I had, got snapped up in a jiffy.

Well I imagine every publication is slightly different. In 'The English Silver Coinage since 1649' by Rayner, and published by Spink, it says: C3 Extremely common C2 Very Common C Commom N Normal, neither scarce or common (Hmmmm!!???) S Scarce R Rare R2 Very Rare R3 Extremely Rare R4 11-20 examples known R5 5-10 examples known R6 3-4 examples known R7 1 or 2 examples known. I think Very Rare must be a mintage of around 1000 or less, because the 1934 Crown is R2 (mintage 932). So perhaps Extremely Rare is 30-100, and maybe Very rare is 101-1000, or something like that.

Absolutely correct, so everyone get into my Crown section and snap up those Wreath Crowns!

You know I think it's a government ploy that seems to be working, the way everyone assumes that it is just a matter of time before we adopt the Euro. In saying that, it is probably true of course! In Germany they still make gold coins, but have them denominated in Euros, and the face value tends to be closer to the bullion value I think. I mean the face value of our gold coins is a complete fiction now isn't it, so why shouldn't they continue with the Sovereign, but to keep Brussels happy call it a EUR1.50 coin, or a EUR90.00 coin or whatever. I like what the French did, when they issued commemorative coins basically in Francs, but that they actually had a 6.55957 Franc coin, which was funnily enough, a EUR10.00 coin. Isn't that really a very French thing to do!

I had noticed, that one or two (well ok, just one) forum member had been editing his/her posts in order to get him/herself out of the big controversial hole he/she had just dug and thrown themselves into. So, just for fun, when you edit a message now, everybody can see that you have done so! That new rule does not apply to me or the Expert members.

I think you are old chap. There are a few before you obviously, but I'm not aware that any have ever been back much.

William, are you a cow, or am I not quite making it out properly?

Well, not only do you have to be a regular forum contributor, you also have to answer questions posed by passers by accurately, and have to also be noticed by the other members as being knowledgable in your field. Geoff received a few comments from other forum members about his knowledge and there was a little talk, so I thought it was fair. I noticed Sylvester way back, when it was basically just him and me in here! He helps me out a lot responding to queries, so does Geoff, and it's certianly good to rely on the collective knowledge of you two, and indeed all the other members. I may notice others too in the future. Any ideas?

As of just now I have put Geoff into the 'Expert Member' group. Geoff will enjoy a few extra benefits now, like being able to store more personal messages, being able to send messages to more people at once, being able to edit his own messages with no restictions and other practically useless little technicalities that he'll never even notice! Most importantly, he gets the special 'Expert Member' title next to his name/id so that people can recognise him as someone who knows a thing or two. Well done Geoff, you one of the very few!

All this Northern talk, I feel alienated! I know a girl in Manchester. Very pretty she is, and living proof that it's not all grim up there. Are they all like that?

I know. I knew about your post an hour before you made it, as I had not adjusted my head yet!

Have a look in the technical area...

Clocks have changed, but if the time the forum displays to you is incorrect, you'll have to go to 'My Controls' and then to 'Board Settings' to make it right again!

Ok, let me explain.... Sylvester is an expert member because like he said, he did (and still does) add valuable accurate replies to questions posted on the forum. He also knows his area very well, so I manually upgraded him to an 'Expert Member'. And you're right, perhaps it's about time I added some new expert members, Geoff particularly. There is a basic scale that you climb dependant on how many posts you have made. But I do the odd thing manually, because I can, and it's much more fun. When a member is 'Validating' it means that they have not yet confirmed their email address. All new members get an email, and have to respond to it before they are a proper member. That's an automatic forum thing, it does not rely on my input.

Well done William!

Lustre is the shiny like new appearance that all new coins have when new and un touched. Coin collectors and dealers can easily tell the difference between a coin posessing original lustre and an aftificial polished coin. As you know, once the original lustre has faded, it can never be brought back. That 1963 Threepence has about full original lustre, and original lustre always tends to look about that kind of colour on threepences of EII. Although on some early George VI coins it often a different hue. It's difficult to show you in a scan, but over time if you get a few full original lustre threepences from reputable dealers (like me for example ;-)) then you'll soon learn what they should look like. As they are normally not expensive and normally not that widely collected (compared to other types), I would think it unlikely that your threepences have been polished. Post pics of them, and we'll see.

I've emailed her, she's usually very busy.