Madness

All sorted, thanks. They finally responded with a tracking number. The coin left France on 15 October, so shouldn't be too far away. Case closed.

I think there's something in that for all of us.

Thanks for the suggestion. I'm in Australia and they're in France. Would be an expensive call even if the phone were answered by someone who could speak English.

On 10 October I won an auction being conducted by the Parisian auction house, iNumis. I made payment on 11 October and since then have sent two emails asking for acknowledgement of payment and shipping information. I've not yet received a response. Has anyone dealt with them before? If so, are they trustworthy. If not, should I be worried by their lack of communication? It's actually making me sick in the stomach as the amount involved isn't trivial.

Have you tried using a different browser?

I was fully aware of the buyer's premium, but $50 USD for postage and $10 USD for insurance was covered by some phrase to the effect of "postage may be higher for international destinations". For heaven's sake! The coin only weighs three grams! $35 USD wire charge? Hmm. I could ask them to consider using a more economical postal service, but don't like my chances. I'll certainly be challenging the wire charge, though.

With one final roll of the dice I put in a bid below estimate and won the auction for the MS-65 1787 Sixpence. Comparison of the coin to my database shows it to probably be a HS27 with a weakish strike that obscures the seventh string. https://auctions.stacksbowers.com/lots/view/3-DO12Z Unfortunately Stacks Bowers' invoice includes unexpected items such as a wire fee, insurance and an exorbitant shipping charge. My winning bid was $280 USD. The final price with all fees included is an eye-watering $431.50 USD. Wouldn't have bid if I knew it would cost this much but I'm committed now. In short, I'm unable to pay them immediately. Has anyone dealt with them recently? Are they harsh on defaulters? Is there any possibility of working out a payment plan with them? Thanks!

Here's a hypothesis that's indirectly related to what you're talking about. I'm posting it here because, well, a tributary deserves a tributary of its own. There are five interrelated variables that affect the coin market: Awareness, availability, rarity, popularity and price. Although the population of a particular variety is absolute, it's unknowable unless precise and accurate mintage figures are published and each of these specimens is accounted for. The perceived rarity of a coin is subject to change and, therefore, a variable. That said, there are degrees of probability of the order of magnitude of a coin's absolute population. Each of these five variables are truly interrelated in the sense that each influences all of the other four. Two examples: The availability of a coin is related to the quantity of a particular variety that's on the market at any one time and the frequency at which each specimen becomes available for sale. The variety's availability is influenced by its awareness within the collecting community, its collector value (market corrections when its perceived value to investors or collectors changes and more or fewer are listed for sale), its rarity and its popularity. The rarity of a coin is related to its absolute population and the portion of this figure to have been identified. The variety's rarity is influenced by its awareness within the collecting community, its collector value, its popularity and its availability, each of which will encourage collectors to seek out specimens. I haven't thought this through thoroughly, but if I don't write it down somewhere I'll forget about it. Feedback?

If there were a risk that the price of less common varieties of 1787 sixpences were to rise I'd be loath to publish. Surely this is the dilemma that faces all specialist collectors that decide to conduct die studies. Perhaps I'll delay presenting the results of my research until I've collected everything I want. That could take quite some time. Another benefit, though, would be that I could illustrate the research with photos of my own specimens rather than wading through the legalities of obtaining permission to publish others' material. Has anyone else here been in a similar position?

My mistake. I usually welcome criticism from people such as yourself anyway as it shows errors in my thinking concerning a subject about which I know very little.

It's possible to not be offended by criticism, as in this instance.

I don't want advice on this one. It's the only example of this coin I've seen, whether you call it a "variety" or not. This term is a construct that makes categorisation easier, allows the analysis of rarity, is tied to market psychology and appeal to collectors and sellers alike. I don't care whether or not it will ever be "listed" as a variety. It's still a variety. Besides, I liked it, a could afford it and I bought it. End of story. Criticism in this case is falling on deaf ears.

Ha! Every penny I had wasn't a great amount. I paid 50 Euro below the estimate and my ceiling was 30 Euro above. I don't think there are any listed varieties of business strikes of the 1787 sixpence apart from with-hearts and without-hearts. Not even the I/D Obverse is listed, and I've seen over ten of them. A variety does not need to be officially recorded in order to exist. I don't think it would be possible to do any more research than I have done. No offence taken.

Moot point now. I have, unsurprisingly, been outbid.

I've circled the feature I'm talking about: Whether you interpret this as part of the harp's body or part of the shortest string, it's a unique representative of a die or reworked die among my database of 500 or so 1787 sixpences. I've only identified dies for about 14% of the reverse images so far, but it appears that the strings and date-dots (in addition to some of the numerals) were added by hand after the dies had been punched as they differ from die to die. I assume that this little detail was engraved at the same time. Perhaps it's a bit like a kid writing "Harry waz 'ere" in wet cement. I was the only bidder on the example at this auction here: http://www.inumis.com/us/vso//grande-bretagne-georges-iii-six-pence-1787-londres-a61577.html I don't care if anyone says I overpaid. I threw every penny I had at it so that I could acquire the coin's quirkiness.

What do you mean by "main upright"?

Thanks for playing, gentlemen! Please make your selection from our showcase of marvelous prizes. The "game" was actually intended for @Peckris 2 to illustrate the scroll form at the end of the shortest string. Only example I've seen.

Let's play a game of "spot the differences":

Never mind

Thanks Rob. Will remove from the slab in the event I'm successful. I'm a collector, not an investor.

No longer for sale. Have decided to keep it.

This coin will be sticking around. Calmer heads than mine have prevailed. After all, I will be getting to a 1787 shilling die study and it would be a shame to rob myself of resources that will come in handy then.

If I were to win a slabbed MS-65 coin at auction, would it be madness to remove it from its slab? The OCD lunatic within me cries out to put it into a quadrum like all my other coins.