TomGoodheart

But aren't those lovely old toned-uncirculated coins, with the toning lightened at the high spots, but not worn, isn't that cabinet/storage friction/wear? Yes. But "cabinet friction" is of course still wear. Though I'm not sure about it being a myth. OK, I'm pretty sure nobody here with a cabinet sits their coins straight in the recesses without a felt cushion first. And the holes in the trays are appropriate to the size of the coins, minimising their sliding about. But I can imagine that at a dealers, or in a museum, where all the coins are popped into a crown-size tray, if the felt inserts had gone missing and were the tray to be slid in and out of the cabinet all day long,... or even the coins just taken out and returned to a paper envelope over a year or two ... over time you'd get that very effect. Whether it still happens, I don't know. Most dealers I've seen seem to sit their coins on felt or in 'Lindner' type trays. But possibly back a few years ago .... As to the wear quotient, well, yes. It's been packaged up to make it sound more acceptable .. a sort of 'Yes it's worn,.. but only because it's been in a (possibly premium) collection somewhere!" .. Acceptable or not? That's down to eye appeal and individual collectors maybe. I've a couple of coins that exhibit high point wear quite attractively, I think ..

LOL I have to say I've never seen one before (although I've not looke that hard) though there was reference to one in the BNJ and I was curious. A small coin for a weight (usually it's the more valuble gold denominations that people want to check obviously!) It got me wondering if this example is a good weight or not ..

I do find these things interesting. In that while there are a few counterfeits that are shockingly crude, such as this Charles shilling others are quite .. artful ... such as (particularly the reverse of) this one and I do wonder if ex-mint employees didn't sometimes get into the act of fake diemaking?

Weeeeell ... I'm not sure I'd go that far .. in that I'm sure there are collectors by date and so on for whom a Freeman, Sharp or Peck number not only wouldn't mean anything, but might just not be of interest. Because we all collect in different ways. And poor beginners can't be expected to know everything from the get go. It's a learning process that never really stops as far as I can tell. And yet, we repeatedly tell noobs 'buy the best you can afford'! But yes, I'd expect someone who adds detail to a coin's description to have the knowledge to back up their claims. And as for authentification, well, that's what dealers and auction houses used to do. And as far as I know, still do. Look at Chris Rudd's 'double your money' guarantee for example. In theory, if you buy from a reputable source, you should be able to expect to get what you are buying, at least in terms of authenticity. Grading, well, that's another matter as I'm sure we've all observed how a coin graded nVF 10 years ago can be found to have crept up to gVF in the intervening years. But is that so different from slabbed coins being 'set free' and resubmitted in the hope of an upgrade?

Wouldn't you want your coinweight heavy, so you can tell people 'oh, I'm sorry, your coin is a bit under so I'm only giving you 11d for it'? Or have I misunderstood how it works? This weight (according to the listing) is 5.67g (87.5gr) so quite a bit under the 5.96g 'ideal'. And below what in practice I've found is a more common weight for a shilling (about 5.8g).

A new 'want', just in case anyone spots one .. not actually a shilling this time! But a shilling coin weight. Pretty sure this isn't an official issue, but I don't have Withers to check. It's Withers 1064 apparently. This one is from Antony Wilson's site, but I'd be interested to see a better example (not necessarily to buy, but to know the weight of it) if such a thing exists. Any info would be appreciated!

I tend to agree Dave. At least .. it's a very different sort of collecting when you can just set up a search for "1882 Penny MS-66" and tick the box when you get one. What I can't decide is whether the Royal Mint is doing more to 'alienate collectors' than poor old TPGSs could ever do, by turning out endless commemorative tat, or will in the end be seen to have revitalised the hobby by encouraging a few youngsters to start collecting ...? It will be interesting to revisit this topic in 10 or 15 years time to see how (whether) things have changed ..!

Ah, but is a more attractive market for investors a good thing for numismatists/ coin collectors ....?

Richard the brutal terroriser of French towns, never in his own kingdom, "lionised" by later generations, and a right bastard by all accounts Yeah, that too! But from a numismatic perspective ...

I thought this was interesting. Written in 1996. Coin Market Slang.

Interesting little article in Coin News I thought. Though I have to say I disagree with one point in it: "Any trip to an American fair will show you one very important difference between the US and the UK markets— “slabbingâ€. This practice, of encapsulating a coin in a permanent plastic holder, along with the associated grading system that is quite different from our standard “F, VF, EF†allows purchasers of coins to buy them knowing that their grade, and thus their value has been professionally appraised and, because of the slabbing process the coin will remain that way forever. This has, in turn allowed people to buy coins for investment, safe in the knowledge that they have bought coins that will not be affected by time, this has encouraged big money to come into the hobby and as a result coin prices have continued an upward trend—culminating in records such as this." NO! (is my response!) Firstly, we are getting suggestions that coins do not stay forever the way they are when slabbed (check for mentions of gassing coins in slabs to 'enhance' the colours on US coin sites). But most importantly it seems to me that ANY investment is subject to the whims of sentiment and the market ... and hence time.. There is NO guarantee (unless you get a legal contract enabling you to get back what you paid) that when you come to sell something there will be someone prepared to take it off your hands, let alone buy it to yield a profit. Trading in the South Seas, tulip bulbs, shares in the 1920s, dot-com companies and now stamps. Big money comes in .... and then leaves again as everyone gets the bug for the latest Beanie Babies instead. So have your coins slabbed and graded by all means. But please don't think that the result is anything other than a nice coin in a plastic case. Because a slab is not some financial equivalent of an invisibility cloak. If the speculative market for coins evaporates (as I believe it did in the 1970s) then yes, better coins will be better protected ... but I doubt much will be immune. [/rant]

OOh! Richard the Lionheart? Nice!

HENRI (London)? Class V (with sceptre)?? Just guessing really!

I think your V is part of an M and the G/C an E, making it []MER ? AIMER ON LUND? Henry II? That double barred N should be a clue, but it's really not my area, I'm afraid.

Yes, very nice. Even if the overmark does look a bit like (that excessively rare mark only issued for one day, on 1 April 1573) a squished ant.

Quite. And being hammered, each of my coins is unique as I can't just buy a S.whatever in gVF as a replacement. Many would take considerable time and effort to even find another of the same design and where they have been published or are from a particular collection, again, once they are gone .. that's it. I guess if forced to choose I'd pick the most expensive since if I sold it I could buy a handful more coins! But as to favourites... that changes depending on my mood I'm afraid. As to which I'd happily sell today for the price I paid for it .. now, that's a much easier choice!!!

I think 17% is quite reasonable! Most I buy from seem to be in the 20%s and you have to add postage costs (and potential import fees from overseas). I work on the principle that as a collector I can pay more than most dealers, because they need to be able to add their profit margin and still end up with a price people will pay. So I work out what I think a coin is 'worth' to me and work backwards from there. Of course, some days people are willing to spend stupid money and there's no way to allow for that, unless you join them. Fortunately my budget doesn't allow me much scope to go crazy!

Hi and welcome jodape! I would say the important thing is to find a coin series you like. That includes size, designs, metal. ALL coin series will have their 'micro' varieties that are subtly different and need experience to spot and may be challenging to find, but most within the last 100 years will provide a range of designs and grades and prices to look through. I myself started with shillings. I remember using them as a child so they had a sentimental value, plus they aren't too pricy for the later ones, the series goes back several hundred years (strictly to Edward VI/ Henry VIII) and I liked the size. And there were Commonwealth (New Zealand, South Africa etc) issues too, to add to the diversity. Costly? Well you can pick up coins for a couple of quid or hundreds+, so it's sort of relative to your budget. But even 'old' coins, such as shillings of Charles I from the 17th century can be found for £15 upwards. Though for that price they won't be in terribly good condition, but should be recognisable for design and rough date of issue. Just remember, you don't have to stick with whatever you start with (we all have a few coins we've found that don't fit into the collection!), changing your mind is fine, you can always ask for advice here about grades etc and as others have said, start with cheaper coins until you know a bit about what makes a particular coin desirable and expensive. (That's not the same thing as desirable and expensive on ebay!!)

Was it particularly a Unite or Laurel? How about this? Click on the photo for details. £2400

Depends on the coin Nek. My personal preference is toned. Here for example is one of mine, which 'in the hand' is a nice almost-black-with-hints-of-golden brown. Obviously I've adjusted the photo so it's as close to real life on my laptop, so might appear different to you. But I'd hope you'd agree, it's not unpleasing? However I have had coins where the toning was patchy, speckly or oddly uneven and so the coin wasn't as attractive. But generally I like my coins to look as if they have been around a few years (which they have) rather than freshly minted. Of course it's all a matter of personal preference I guess. And perhaps the age of the coin. Modern stuff ( post 1816) I don't find so bad if it's bright, though I still prefer a bit of colour. And oddly, ancients, like Roman and Greek, it's common to find they have been dipped to clean off the centuries of crud. Just be careful to only experiment on cheap coins, don't use anything abrasive that leaves scratches and leave copper alone I reckon.

Seeing as someone has drilled holes in them to attached them to the mount, I'm hoping so!

Oh well, if we're talking bullets, mine's bigger than yours! 40mm Bofors gun shell with what I think are two from a four-inch (102 mm) anti-aircraft gun.

I guess the risk is that, without the company to pursue such issues, it would be easy for someone to start making their slabs with any old tat in and it could be a while before the market realises. And of course if that happened, confidence in (and saleability of) genuine CGS graded coins would suffer. As to Australia, it appears both CGA (Coin Grading Australia) and ACGS (Australian Coin Grading Service) failed to get off the ground. Possibly an indication that the coin market in America is just different (despite CGS' best efforts) from everywhere else? And more reasons why it's essential to buy the coin, not the slab. As for myself, despite Bill's generous and attentive explanations, I remain to be convinced of the usefulness to me of someone else giving a grade to my coins. Setting aside the fairly major flaws that only one grade is given for an item that can be quite different on the obverse and reverse and that grading takes (or should take if it really is just an assesment of wear) no account of whether a coin is a better or worse example than normally encountered, a third party just can't tell me whether I will like a coin when I see it or not because that's subjective and down to me alone.

Ah, yes. There's a point. If ever Bill ran out of coins for CGS to grade and they consequently went broke, where would their guarantees stand then? Because as far as I can tell from this thread, Bill is (apart perhaps from London Coins) their main (or certainly a major) customer after all ....

It's odd really. When I was in Lille last year there were several shops devoted to stamps and coins. More than you'd find in a similar sized town here in England. And if you think of the Prinz or Lighthouse ranges, they do as many philatelic as numismatic accessories. I wonder if it's just the UK that has gone off the boil for stamps? I do think things like First day Covers have done the hobby no good. I have albums of them from my Dad and they are worth next to nothing. Certainly not the £00s he spent on the ruddy things! OK, he did collect other stamps and maybe they are worth a bit more. But if he'd collected good condition coins from the same period, I suspect they would be worth quite a bit more now. Apart from the 50ps with hands on he had a liking for anyway!