TomGoodheart

Very nice coins John. And not slabbed (also nice IMHO)! Welcome.

I feel foolish for only just realising this but of course, the question also comes down to what sort of collector we are. When I started I was I guess a 'completist'. I had a book with all varieties illustrated and I wanted to assemble a collection, like that. One example of each type/ variety. Hence I was prepared to accept this: A coin for which three examples are known. Now? I wouldn't bother. Because my focus has shifted. I realised that while I do get a slight thrill from owning one of the very few examples of a really rare coin, I get far more pleasure from better looking coins. And on my budget I can't afford to collect both, so there are some gaps that will remain until budget and opportunity come together. And if they don't? That no longer troubles me as much as it once did. I am happy to have a representative collection of the types, sometimes several, as hammered coins are never perfect and different examples can have different pleasing strengths.

This. Eye appeal for me is everything these days. If I don't like the look of it I will inevitably want to get rid of it further down the line. For example I just exchanged a very rare coin (3 known) for a lesser rarity (perhaps as many as 20 examples) because I couldn't live with it any more. Neither is a 'perfect' coin, not by a long shot. Almost no hammered coins are! But I like the look of my new acquisition and can see myself happy with it for some time to come. As to a scale, well, it's really difficult to generalise. Better grade coins usually appeal more, but 'faults' will count against it. It's possible that in my head there's a system of awarding plus and minus points (nice toning/ good portrait/ full flan, plus. Cleaned, blotchy/ poor or weak portrait/lopsided strike/ small flan, minuses) but I've tried in the past to summarise it in words and failed. When it comes down to it, it's really a matter of looking at two coins and, almost inevitably, one will stand out as my preference. And as Jaggy says. I'm generally prepared to wait to fill a gap. While I may stray, my aim is never to buy crap again and I'd rather have a gap for years than something that I can't bear to look at... however rare.

My worst (to date!) was a shilling I bought for over £200 and sold for .. .. under £40

I think if the cleaning removed gilding to the extent the underlying metal showed through it might detract a bit. As Rob says, they were made to be worn so some signs of that are to be expected. But an "uncirculated" one would surely command a premium?

The bust and shield are wrong for the Rose mint mark, even given artistic licence ... so while it's not illustrated as Briot's characteristic harp, the Daisy mm seem the most likely option to me. Curious ... And a shame this doesn't have a KI (K1) mark ... http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1634-39-GREAT-BRITAIN-CHARLES-I-SHILLING-COIN-/191808545943?hash=item2ca8ae2497:g:KIAAAOSwKtVWxNnz LOL

LOL The advantage of hammered coinage is that I can get away with just using one of these. Never felt the need to look much closer than identifying a mint mark:

No idea. But the 'Mullet Man' does. Examples I've seen are all decent quality (or rare in the case of the queen Mary penny) too.

Example of the 'mullet' mark (so called by Lloyd Bennett) at top of the reverse:

I wonder if it's more a 'collector's mark'? Similar to the 'mullet' (which appears to have been made using a small Torx screwdriver) found more recently.

Hi James. Just checking. This is for all coin collectors? Just your website is geared towards Irish currency (nice resource by the way) and I wasn't sure if you wanted collectors from other areas too? (The survey (which I've completed) is quite general and quick, for anyone interested).

Bravo someone! 191810207129 Though a bit ridiculous people are forced to take such actions because eBay does nothing ...

That's OK Viking. And welcome!

Yes. I used a 10 year old copy of Spink for the basic ID then searched for that online to confirm moneyer and town...

Mmm .. not a series I know much about but I'm thinking second hand (because of the sceptre), Spink 1146. Moneyer? Looks like LVDA M-O EXACEAST, ie Luda of Exeter. Only a moneyer for Aethelred II and only for Exeter I believe. Rarity? Can't help there I'm afraid. Hopefully another member will chip in later. Example (but first hand) illustrated with that reading for Exeter here: Baldwins 55 Lot 2249 Another example, this time second hand and with the pellets your coin has (but different legend) but sadly no illustration: DNW March 1995

Doesn't look right to me. And I know 34s are rare and so have desirability... but you could get a nice '27 for 1/10th the price ... .

Turing it on, did you say? That'll be an engine with a difference!

LOL. Yeah that did it! Thanks Matt

If I tap the menu (hamburger) icon all that happens is the screen grays out...

Silly question but... How do I view messages when I'm on my mobile? I can't see a button to press or a menu option...

I still get the odd gap where the "Bid now" bit is so it still doesn't fill the whole screen as there's a blank bit to the right ... I just feel it should auto-size itself.

I had the 'earlier quote' problem the other day on my (Windows) laptop. Couldn't get rid of it without coming out of the thread completely and starting again. And on my phone I still get a lot of wasted space and have to scroll down a long way before I reach the actual topics .. feels like it ought to be designed to fit the screen better.

Ah, well I shan't post a pic of my hammered shillings then. They are all sorts of odd shapes and sizes making it impossible to choose a tray that is ideal for all of them. And just when I thought I'd got the best compromise, a friend gave me one on such a large flan I had to enlarge the recess to get it in at all! However, with milled coinage, you could choose capsules that just fit the tray recesses and then buy spacing rings to hold the smaller coins centrally to the capsule ...

Yes. And the detailing on the doors makes it unique. Well done him!

This you mean? (From Clive's post a while back) Sorry!