Rob

Westminster isn't the Royal Mint. The former is a private company which is a distributor and also makes its own products which are usually only worth their intrinsic value in the secondary market. The Royal Mint is a company engaged in the manufacture of coins under contract for this country and many others. Logically it is a separate legal entity to the government which would otherwise leave the country potentially liable for unlimited claims if someone sued them. It is the usual way of limiting liability, so I'm not sure what the problem is here.

Someone called Philip Dinn springs to mind

If it is owned by the government, then any dividends pass to the treasury.

At the risk of stating the obvious, 7/6 seems the most likely candidate given what appears to be a trace of suitable curve to the right of the downstroke. Not the commonest date, but there should be enough around to find a better example. Nothing in Coincraft.

Prior to Victoria, higher denomination milled things that had their value indicated were very much the exception. The BoE tokens and the 1804 5/- Dollar spring to mind as probably the only issues to bear a value. The 1799 farthings and the small silver were marked, but again, hardly a case of universal adoption. Obviously there was far more extensive marking of the Tudor and Stuart hammered coinage.

Get a set that you can calibrate and buy a few weights. Given the variation in weights for what is the same item, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it yet. Equally, the other one could be light. Dodgy ones tend to have detail differences which become obvious in time.

Looks ok to me, but what makes you think it is wrong? If you have purchased it (presumably from an image) and then ask if it is iffy, I would question your rationale. Why not do your homework before spending the money? Unless money is no problem, in which case.............. You can always use a known good sovereign to calibrate your existing scales. It doesn't matter if the readings are out as long as they are consistent.

That doesn't look like any 6/5 I've ever seen. This is 6/5 as you can see the vertical bar of the 5 on the right of the 6 tail which thickens at the bottom. https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=1746+lima+6d&client=firefox-b&dcr=0&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiO3p_cg5HWAhVkKMAKHRw_BYoQsAQIJQ&biw=1920&bih=948#imgrc=odmP7sa_bGGF6M: Contrast that with Here the 6 tail is fairly uniform in thickness. On the 1745 you have something closely resembling the image in ESC. Not for the first time the latest revision of ESC doesn't inspire. I still use the old one because it was proof read, unlike the latest incarnation.

Yep. That's become a stock response. At least three times a day without fail.

1p

1d

Looks like a straight 5 to me.

Too many auctions this month with lots of boxes that could be ticked. I badly need a lottery win - yesterday.

Unsold

If you exit after posting and come back in you can upload another 500k. More importantly, trim the image so that the coin fills as much area as possible. OK, you are still stuck with an image that has a maximum of just over 78.5% coverage with the subject material, but it is a vast improvement on the 7.5% you are currently utilising. All foreground and background detail as posted is wasted image space.

Why not? The respected organisation that is the BBC produces programs like Eastenders and a whole raft of other s***e in its chosen field. Why should the RM have a monopoly on public service mediocrity?

Not so easy and always in demand. It is probably the most asked for decimal item at the table.

Don't know who bits and bobs is. Who is making these? Are they all Chinese or is someone else involved. The large number of types suggests an industrial scale operation. Anyway, 1851 halfcrown, just like the non-existent original won't fool anybody, but the others are a bit worrying.

I'm not sure which of these listings offers the best chance of ridicule. I'm going for 'Anne looks a bit butch' as my critical contribution.

Letters can be repunched to extend the life of a blocked die. Equally, dies can be polished to remove old detail and a new legend/design entered. Obviously this depends on the depth of the relief, and is mostly restricted to hammered coins. From the advent of milled coins up to the 19th century, it was quite common to fill the old die and punch new letters over the top of the filled section. Depending on how effectively the die was filled, you may or may not see traces of the underlying detail.

Throwing away £100 pounds because you won't spend a fiver on a cheap set of scales isn't too clever either.

Weight 11.8g! Assuming that is correct then not a sovereign. Assuming the scales were crap, the vendor has shot themself in the foot. Who knows?

It probably stands to reason that a top end coin is likely to have good eye-appeal in any case having encountered fewer potential sources of problems. Having said that, it therefore dilutes the credibility of the grading system as the number then becomes dependant on the aesthetic preferences of the grader. All aesthetic considerations are personal. Wear, bagmarks or other impediments are facts - present or not and to what degree, i.e. not personal.

Toning should have absolutely no effect on grade which is a measure of wear (allegedly).

With a description to suit all collector types - 'Rare aquatics lines on face 50p (gap filler) mint condition very shiny, ' Not too many mint condition gap fillers about, unless that is, the seller knows it isn't genuine. Perish the thought.