Rob

Hi Rob. No coin is perfect. One has to view a coin with how it compares to others. These two coins are probably close to the finest business strikes you will see, but are they perfect down to 100x or more? Of course not. As I'm sure you know, if one seeks absolute perfection, one will constantly be disappointed, whether in coins or people. Modern proofs might be the exception, but where is the history of that cookie cutter perfection? The knowledge that for these pictured coins to endure in such a well preserved state, there had to have been collectors down through the years that lovingly treasured them, and, for me, this is part of the allure of coins as an inheritor of their trust. I never meant to imply that these two of my coins were perfect, just that they are glorious examples of the engraver's art and the technology of the Royal mint at the time. And one must remember that, at least for the crown, the dies were cut directly by the engraver into the steel - no reducer used. With the magnified picture (thank you photographer), one can see the painstaking nature of the engraving that went into the hair and fully appreciate the dynamism of the St. George reverse. With the YH half crown, one can appreciate the care that Wyon took with her hair and the girlish nature and openness of her gaze. It wasn't meant as a put-down, just a genuine expression of regret that it was so close to being perfect without looking too hard. A tiny dig in the field, a little scratch in the hair, a miniscule rim ding, bagmarks - we have all been there.

Nice coins. It's a real shame about the couple of tiny marks on the crown bust.

Very good again. You might get a permanent position soon as the man who can defeat binary bloody-mindedness. Ta.

Very good, thank you. Next question. Why does it have A4 pages on the right hand side at least as far as box DX and probably further. All I want is a file about a thousand boxes long, and 6 wide to fit on A4 in x pages. Ta.

The wife cleaned my keyboard. and now an excel file is infinitely wide(?) and hitting the up/down/left/right arrows moves the whole document instead of going to the appropriate box on the page. I previously had it set to fit A4. Recoverable or start again?

Edward IV second reign groat, im. cinquefoil. I suggest you get yourself a copy of North volumes 1 & 2 as this has a considerable number of images - more than Spink, which would be the other book of choice. Value - what someone is prepared to pay on the day.

Nothing wrong with it as far as I can see. An honest example of a fairly common type.

It depends on whether ANANO is the result of double striking, or a wrongly lettered edge. No double striking should ever make the variety list because every one must by definition be different to the next. The use of an edge with the wrong legend is a different matter.

You can call anything you like a variety - it's your coin to do what you like. What it isn't, is a deliberate design difference, an incorrect letter, a spelling mistake or any other major fault. Given it takes a few blows with the hammer to punch in a letter, you must appreciate that to correctly align the characters required considerable skill. These coins predated the reducing equipment now used, so all work was done at the micro level and so a somewhat misaligned legend on a coin should be expected from time to time. For a good selection of unevenly punched legends look at the early copper fractions. If you are going to include small variations in the vertical alignment, then you would also have to list the various separations found in the hoirizontal axis. As discussed previously, this would result in a comprehensive list of dies produced, but I question whether it would do much for the typical variety collector.

Ah. given the options of £70, the BIN or make an offer, I was going to suggest you sling it.

I would think it was first used in the late 19th century. Spink Circulars from the 1890s use it as did Montagu in the first edition of his copper book (1885). Auction catalogues seem to use obv and rev going back over 200 years irrespective of saleroom. Snelling (1762) uses reverse as does Ruding 1819-1840. None of the handful of references contemporary with Montagu that I have appear to use it. Hawkins in his various editions from 1841 -1887 doesn't, which suggests the 1880s as a guesstimate. Montagu was quite an influential character, so given he had just written 'the definitive reference' for copper, it is possible that he was responsible. Not a clue as to its name or where it came from. I can see the sense in using a distinctive variation on the letter R due to its common use as an abbreviation for REX in legends.

No problem.

HB from me too. Just in time.

http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fkokkieh.files.wordpress.com%2F2013%2F07%2Ftrackback-spam.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fkokkieh.wordpress.com%2F2013%2F07%2F26%2Fon-spam-a-history%2F&h=530&w=709&tbnid=r6o3_GxbWU-sQM%3A&zoom=1&docid=Ual5frKFIpK5wM&hl=en&ei=xZtBVKX9MsjbaJaJgpgL&tbm=isch&ved=0CC8QMygOMA4&iact=rc&uact=3&dur=569&page=1&start=0&ndsp=36

I think many ebay buyers think it is now a right that all things should cost 99p (with free P&P).

I'm not sure I understand your question. Die cracks can appear at any time, but mostly towards the end of a die's life. All dies of whatever year can be affected, so there is no reason why any die crack should attract any premium. As they aren't a design feature of a specific die, assigning rarity to them is meaningless. Any rarity is down to the mintage figures or surviving example known of a type or date.

yes

Dealers are reacting to what the market is demanding, not the other way round. If sufficient buyers of decent middle grade or better don't appear, then no one is going to hold stock. The VF - gVF area is the biggest problem. It is where the price curve gradient starts to take off appreciably. Take something that often crops up in sales such as Chas 2 crowns. Spink prices these at a couple hundred in Fine, with a VF going for about 3 times that. The gulf is in the next jump to EF where previously a multiple of 2 or 3 times the VF price was about right, but now it is 6 or 7. That's where the reluctance to pay too much comes into play, be it dealer or collector. The potential difference in value for an almost imperceptible difference in quality gives both parties a pricing headache. If in doubt, leave it out, is the general rule adopted. Of course, vendors don't want to sell too cheaply, so put on a reserve which isn't met. Buyers are afraid to pay too much for a potentially sub-standard coin as perceived by the market and so don't bid. It's a real chicken and egg situation. Another point that seems to apply is that grading in auction catalogues is often taken as gospel, possibly with the bidder having relied on images on his computer when deciding how much to pay. This is also going to cause a headache further down the line because there are a lot of things in my opinion that are either very fully graded or overgraded - something which can only be determined by many hours spent looking at different grades of coins in hand. The marketing effect of a higher catalogue grade cannot be overstated. As a rule of thumb, I reckon on marking down at least 10 coins (and probably more) for every one that I feel is undergraded, though many have to be said are ok. Just depends on whose auction catalogue you are looking at. This factor I believe has led to appreciably higher prices at the top end where an EF coin looks uncirculated to the untrained eye. Bids are then made according to perception.

There is a large gulf opening between the top pieces and the rest. The top pieces sell quicker than you can list them, but anything below is increasingly difficult to shift. There is very little incentive to buy in lesser material if you are going to sit on it for a long time, hence the reluctance to buy on the part of dealers. Anything will shift if priced cheaply enough, but then a dealer will have to buy in at an even lower price. Dealers will always be willing to sell pieces that give them a return. I get asked if I want to buy collections almost on a daily basis, but the majority get rejected because of the prices asked. As you are usually asked to take the collection in its entirety, prices have to reflect the pieces that won't sell easily as well as the desirable ones. It isn't an exact science.

Gut feeling is that nobody is selling, more people are entering the hobby, and prices are a reflection of the new entrants desire to build a collection. Very often, it appears they have no reference points from past sales as you regularly see people appearing at auction who you have never seen before and they bid higher than one might expect. If you supplement those people with dealers acting on commission for collectors, it soon becomes apparent that the general market has moved higher for all the quality pieces. The ebay side of things is taken care of by people who bid on multiple bulk lots, again at prices that make you wince in the saleroom. I look at what I can realise from the components of a bulk lot and frequently find that it sells for the same price, sometimes more. I don't feel there is anywhere for me to go buying at that level. The sharp end is rising to fill the lists of people like Baldwins or CNG. They get good prices for what they list or auction off in the case of the latter. There is a ready market for anything of good quality, but alongside that I think there will be a number of new collectors who haven't taken time to do a bit of background research who are paying way over the odds for common material. Eventually the wheels will come off the bus, just as they always must do. In the context of a long collecting period, a few OTT prices will not do any harm, but anyone looking for a short term investment/gain is likely to be on a sticky wicket as they will not have the benefit of time to offset the recent purchase costs. Examples of this are known.

No, way short. You won't pick up a Cromwell for less than 6 or 7.

Kunker aren't setting the prices, it is the explosion in freely available information that is responsible for the prices realised. 20 years ago you would have said "Kunker? Who?" with only a few people kept up to date regarding foreign sale info. Today, that info is available to all and sundry who can bid from the comfort of their armchair half a world away. There is the reason for your price increase. Like many things, the internet is a double edged sword. It enables the purchaser to find cheaper than might be locally available, but for competitive bidding, the number of potential contestants expands to proportions you could never have imagined 20 or even 10 years ago.

Yep. That's what I had set aside for it. Only one other Ed Conf Langport penny has gone through salerooms since WW2 and that was the ex-Lockett and Elmore-Jones expanding cross. Given there are only 9 or 10 coins of the mint in private hands and most of these are Cnuts, I'm just amazed at the lack of interest in what is a significant rarity. The Shrewsbury pyramids sold two lots later went for 1900. That's a relatively common type for the mint and did have a super portrait, but at 60% of the price there isn't much difference between the two.

There were some big, big prices in that sale. Henry 8th groat, 3800 hammer; ditto for a Mary groat, and today, 60000 for a 1692 5 guineas. I had two I was looking at and got 1. The 1709 E* 1/- hammered at 2200 which was too much, but I did pick up the unique Langport Edward the Confessor Pointed Helmet penny for a very cheap 3200. I was expecting it to go to 5 or 6 which would have been in keeping with the other prices. I'm chuffed and have been walking around all week with a large grin on my face.

Warwick and Warwick next week. You have just missed the Kunker sale in Germany, but should probably be grateful as it was a bloodbath.