Rob

The relative value of the sovereign to wages and general prices had to restrict its use to larger purchases and to a small section of the population. A pound or even a half was simply too impractical for daily transactions where bread or beer cost pence and the weekly wage for many was less than a quid. You only have to look at the relatively low numbers of crowns in circulation to establish that the day to day use of higher denominations was not extensive because the crown would be the first coin of choice to be given as change and they effectively stopped making them in 1900/1902. One obvious use was by travellers abroad who could take a readily convertible coin to foreign countries. Think in terms of Smithson, or the Duoro, where clearly large sums were moved around the planet. Having the highest intrinsic value, gold has long been used for settling trading debts, but was of little use to the masses.

The area immediately above has a clearly rounded line which suggests it might possibly be badly mixed metal with a little inclusion spot

http://www.1messydesk.com/MTTs/m_theresia_talers.html

You still have the same issues that apply to the lighthouse trays. Unless the coins fit the holes in the tray exactly, you will still get plenty of movement if you carry the case around. I'm not sure the carrying handle was the best addition to the case unless you are looking at those with a top handle?

That looks unattractive. It was probably dipped at some time and not washed properly. TPGs don't seem to mind dipped coins for some reason. Cleaning is a variable exercise.

It's a question with no 'right' answer. It boils down to what suits you best. If you want to pick them up and look at them on a regular basis then some on here use quadrum capsules. Ask Nonmortuous for advice about these. Adherents of slabs will of course suggest that these are best because they are sealed, but the downside is that it eliminates any research because the surfaces are always viewed through plastic. When you say put them in a tray resting on a ticket, I am assuming you mean the Lighthouse trays which are a bit inflexible, but convenient for stacking etc. I also assume you would be careful when taking the tray out to minimise friction whichever system you use. You should obviously avoid contact with potentially chemically active substances if you are unsure, so that would eliminate resting the coin on a ticket, but if using the trays with square holes, then you could cut up Mylar sleeves to fit which would eliminate contact with the ticket, stop the coin rubbing against the synthetic surface of the tray and also provide a barrier when examining the coin in hand as it would be sandwiched between the flaps. If you were looking at a cabinet then the felt would be removable and you would put the ticket under this. The felts used in wooden cabinets is much softer than the Lighthouse trays. And they look good.

Certainly is in the world of pattern halfpennies

Why not look to buy from places other than eBay? Sure eBay is convenient, but they wash their hands when it comes to dodgy listings, preferring instead to just take their cut and ensure the business is satisfying their shareholders. They are both judge and jury, so any dispute will end in their favour. If you recognise there is a problem and have an issue with them, it's incumbent on you to alleviate your problems. You can only change your side, you will not change anything within eBay. Part of this is not throwing good money after bad. This forum is regularly asked if a purchase was a good one after the event. The principle of caveat emptor should rule. Do your homework in advance. Virtually nothing for sale is a one-off lifetime changing purchase. There is far too much reliance on others and their opinions, with taking responsibility for one's own action a distant last. There is little point in 'bombarding' the seller with questions - all he has to do is ignore them. If you know something is wrong, don't buy it and report it.

Thanks Pete. That's this one, which I bought in 2008.

Things have moved on. Also need images of R41 halfpennies - either P1050 or P1051. When the logic fails, it's the human bit that's wrong. I've got a new derivative die, so all R42s are not equal

Oh dear. I'm not sure why they accept lots they know nothing about as they are ultimately liable for the description. If there are a few lots with obvious copies, then steer clear of everything unless you know better. Given the 8R and the Anne, it would be a fair bet that the G4 crowns are also iffy.

You'll know whether it is real or not by checking the ring, weight and edge. Should be about 27g, silver rings lower than cupro-nickel or white metal etc and the edge will be the usual circles and squares. Looks too good to be on a market stall and in any case, why would a market advertise individual's coins? Seems strange.

Broken punches, die flaws, filled dies........... All the usual reasons for the effects seen and normal wear and tear, hence there is no logical reason to include them as varieties by design which is the purpose of most references. The same goes for the obsession with filled dies on £2 coin edges seen today etc. Just normal wear and tear..

The area I'm interested in is as highlighted below. If anyone has an aluminium example, I assume it would be very late given the metal was only commercially available from the 1880s. I don't have a copper example either All pictures gratefully received. TIA.

I'm looking for any quality images people might have of Peck type R42, i.e. P1052-1056. Any metal will do, but preferably the commonest type which are the bronzed finish. I'm satisfied that the earliest types are the gilt P1052 and brass P1055. Less certain is what subsequently happened to the obverse die as I have 2 bronzed examples with traces of curls below the truncation and one without where this area is devoid of traces of curls. The basic type is as pictured.

I'm not sure there is that much quality going into auctions either. I can make a list for every sale of reasonable size that starts off with a page or two of potentials, but by the time you have weeded out the overgraded or those with unmentioned faults, or those that simply don't cut it aesthetically even when the grade is right, the list is usually down to quite literally a few pieces - if you are lucky. I think there are buyers in today's auctions who are genuinely unaware of the better pieces that might become available in the future, but that has probably always been the case. The number of auctions is astronomical, so this must invariably dilute the quality of offerings. The near 25% typical buyer's premium means that to buy at auction for selling on, a dealer must mark up things by at least 50% of the hammer price to have a viable business. You can't do it, because everybody sees the increase over purchase price and cries foul - see elsewhere on the forum for examples. This can only result in fewer dealers long term, and that will not help the hobby. Or maybe our little hobby is not as important as some would believe, with a narrow customer base to match.

That's possible, but the world is larger than just pennies. The downturn seems to be across the board. Clearly eBay has taken its toll of dealers because mint state pieces aside, everyone expects to pick up lesser pieces for 99p with free postage, which in turn must be reflected in reduced sales off websites. In terms of listing specific varieties, that is always going to be the preserve of the specialist collector, who is likely to be the only person willing to pay a large premium. Specialists have always had to do their own legwork as you can't rely on the description of either dealer or auction house when it comes to small variations. Things are esoteric for a reason - i.e. not many people are interested. Any pointers where you think this is the case? Decimals are obvious, but they tend to be the preserve of ebay bidders and facebook, not websites where few dealers carry decimals, or fairs which are similarly poorly supplied. It is quite clear the middle grade market has collapsed to some extent. The market has always had far more material than collectors to absorb it, so this is not the reason for the downturn. At the risk of repeating myself, it is clear there is little quality material to buy at the moment and this is reflected in dealers' stock. It is not worth paying inflated prices for indifferent material when there is nobody to sell it on to.

Which reflects what I was saying on the York Fair thread. All the dealers I spoke to have noticed it has been quiet for a few months, with some selling nothing off their sites for a week or more. If you contrast that with the auction results where people are prepared to buy at virtually any cost, it paints a contradictory picture. Comments would be good from people on the other side of the fence, as I am having difficulty understanding what is going on - and I'm not alone.

STEWART, B H I H (Lord Stewartby) Collection sold at Spink over 6 sales 2016-7. Tickets are usually cream card, approximately 22-24mm diameter, though others are encountered. At the sale, some coins were sold with 2x2 envelopes giving descriptions and the acquisition details on the reverse. The pencil annotation seen is a later addition. Some coins came in envelopes with a very basic description and reference number written in a different style - this was for cataloguing purposes.

BLUNT, C E In addition to those tickets illustrated in Eaglen's article, there is a considerable number of tickets as below with the coin's details on one side and the other indicating that the coin came from the Shirley-Fox bequest to Blunt in 1939. The tickets for the smaller coins are typically 24mm, but large flans may have larger tickets. Around 200 of these found their way into Lord Stewartby's collection, sold at Spink in 2016-7.

Webb, H Henry Webb Snr, the main collection sold by Sotheby in 1894 and 1895. Some coins appear to have been re-acquired by the family and kept until sold by H Webb Jnr to Baldwin sometime around WW2. Lockett bought a considerable number of pieces, the reverse of the ticket indicating that the coin was part of lot 1509 in his English part 2 sale in 1956 - this probably written by either Baldwin or the subsequent owner. The tickets are on flimsy paper and made octagonal, presumably to fit into the circular holes of a tray. They come in various sizes, reflecting the size of hole. The second ticket appears to be a very early Baldwin ticket with notes added by Webb. The coin relating to this ticket was acquired by Lockett from Baldwin having previously come from Webb and was also in the 1894 sale. As the references are to Hawkin and the sale referenced is that of Hugh Howard (d1738) sold at Sotheby 20-22 May 1874, it is reasonable to conclude that the finer hand is that of H Webb Senior.

ASHBY, J M J M Ashby's collection of English silver coins was sold at Spink in July 2000. Tickets are white card, 24mm diameter, description on one side, acquisition and provenance info on the other. The ticket below duplicates that written on the back of the Carter ticket for the same coin.

CARTER, E C Dr Ernest Christison Carter, collection acquired by Baldwin post-mortem in 1950. Tickets are usually 31-32mm, but other sizes are known. The second image shows a Carter ticket with the reverse by J M Ashby whose collection was sold at Spink in July 2000

I think there's a danger of the number of varieties being limited only by the ability to differentiate minescule differences. It could get very silly.

The average weights quoted in North from the start of Cnut to the end of Edward the Conf begin with 22 grains before dropping to 16 to 18 for much of the ensuing period to EdC expanding cross before regaining ground to 21 grains at the end of EdC (though facing bust/small X is an outlier at the lower weight). I don't think this necessarily accurately reflects and equates to the presumed prevailing standard, but the drift in weights might be a reflection of the market value of silver at the time. I presume it has always been a commodity because it has a tradable value and even when used as the standard for the coinage, must have reflected the availability of not of the metal.