Rob

In that case the 2/- ought to pre-date the siege that started in the autumn, i.e June, July or August/early-Sept. It should be possible to confirm this by comparing punch wear for the letters given the same dies are involved. It would also imply the dies used are the first ones made at Pontefract. The question really is, who would be that important? Charles is locked up, Prince Charles is in France, Rupert and Maurice are in exile on the continent. There aren't a large number of important Royalists about. In the overall scheme of things, Langdale was one of Charles' most important commanders, running the show in the north of England.

Not so sure about presentation pieces. Why would an emergency siege issue have presentation pieces? It is allegedly money of necessity, not an ego trip.

The two previous sales show 3 small brighter marks before the N, up from the tail of the 2 and before the C. That isn't seen on the latest listing. If taken out and replaced, what's to say it isn't a mule of the wrong sort i.e. a 1983 obverse milled out and a NEW PENCE reverse dropped in (or vice-versa)? I notice that no feedback was left for either of the two previous listings.

It helps the balance of a collection to be in similar grades though. There's nothing worse than a row of BU pieces with a black sheep in the middle. Having said that, sometimes the best known is only Fine or VF at which point you have to either accept it or move on. If a coin is simply rare in a certain grade, you are better off waiting.

Presumably thicker. I've never had it in the hand.

It is an opinion based on weight and nothing else. The 2/- is 9.85g, the shillings are normally 5g - ish.

Hasn't he twigged that deliberate misrepresentation is also a breach of eBay policy, and an offence to boot when designed to increase the return by choosing the rare option every time? It looks like he would be well advised to spend any court winnings on a literacy course. I hope that he isn't going to claim that he was unaware of any misrepresentation, as a feedback of over 20000 would belie that claim. Whilst it might be apparent that he hasn't a clue, I don't think it is the case. It's very tempting to send him on a course in numismatics - in Dundee.

How often does he get reported to eBay for incorrect or misleading descriptions? Presumably reasonably frequently, but I assume nothing gets done on account of the large amount of cash that eBay make through his listings. An occasional wrong description will happen to everyone at some point because of copy and paste fouling up, but when they default to the more expensive option it would be unreasonable to assume an accidental error. This guy is so bad he would even list a mangled1967 penny as Richard III. I remember when he first started on eBay and quickly noted that description and grade were normally at odds with my own assessment. I see nothing has changed in the last 10 years and is still a by-word for a seller to avoid. On the plus side, nobody is useless - they can always be used as a bad example. He could really up his game if he sub-contracted the identification bit, and the grading bit, and the description bit........Everything is graded very good or very fine or especially fine ( that's Extremely Fine to coinies). Remarkably, fine doesn't seem to exist as a grade in his listings. It's all very depressing.

This is £25K for a sub-£100 coin. No argument about stores of wealth is going to hold in cases like this unless you are referring to someone storing their wealth at Saxby's

My why? was directed at anybody who would even think about bidding £25K for a London short cross. The Lichfield cl.2 short cross would only sell for between 5 & 10K in all probability, so why take a London mint short cross and bid it to these levels unless someone is taking the p***. I'll have a fiver on it not completing. If it does, they can afford to buy their own sanitorium.

Why?

I would say that more importantly it doesn't look as if the coin has had any abrasive applied to remove dirt. That's the killer, not lifting off dirt with soapy water or acetone which can give variable results depending on where and how much dirt was present.

Welcome to the forum. There is a coin fair on the last Sunday of every month except December at the Cedar Court Hotel, just off junction 39 of the M1. It opens at 9:30 am and would be your best bet. As Paulus mentioned, the Harrogate fair is on Friday 21st and Saturday 22nd at the Swan Hotel, but I would be amazed if you managed to pick up anything dated 1967 there. As a rule, something as common as 1967 coins are not taken to fairs because the dealer knows he is unlikely to sell any. Harrogate is more akin to the York fairs (January & July) where there are dealers from across the country and typically with higher quality stock (for which read more expensive). When you go to a fair, don't be afraid to ask questions. We are all more than happy to help, not rip people off.

It is one of a few reigns (Henry 1 is another) where the scarcity of the reign is almost as important as the mint. The premium for a rare mint rarely seems to exceed 30% for W2, whereas for common reigns such as Cnut, we are talking an order of magnitude (or more)

Tops. First issue is the best of a bad bunch. Luckily the rarity of the reign keeps the prices up a bit, but even for the best issue this one is a bit grim.

No I don't know. I think the 60/59 pennies were done as an interim measure maybe through a shortage of the new dies or properly prepared blanks. You could knock up an overdate in an hour and be ready to strike coins with it, but a full die would take longer. What was the life span of a die at the beginning of the bronze coinage? We also know they were having a problem with laminating flans on the decimal patterns of 1857-59 that were struck in bronze, as quite a few varieties show this defect, with some unknown without it.

Maybe someone owned a nice specimen, appreciated it every day, and died 10 years later. Someone come along, found a shiny copper that looked like so many others, and spent it. That must be wrong. Copper pennies were demonetised in 1869 which is only 9 years on. I was just wondering if the two smaller coins went earlier once supplies had been sufficient to cope with demand.

Pennies are seen in circulated condition far more frrequently than either of the others. In fact, I can't think of any seriously worn examples of either smaller denominations. Does anyone know if the copper halfpennies and farthings were demonetised before the pennies? Just thinking in terms of relative wear.

I'm not sure that the number of people who swear by slabbing is increasing any faster as a percentage than the number of collectors. CGS are essentially trying to take a share of the PCGS/NGC market from 0% at inception to whatever their aim is. There will always be adherents to slabbing, but for most collectors there simply isn't any reason to go down that route as the largest group of collectors do not collect high grade material (thank god). Whilst you cannot criticise CGS or anyone else for trying to set up a business in order to relieve customers of their hard earned cash, the cost of slabbing is prohibitve for anything less than a hundred quid or so, requiring the projected increase in value to be self-fulfilling. All it does is add inflationary pressures to the prices asked by dealers, and all to pay for someone to say a coin is what you say it is and is graded such and such. Slab presentation can't be that important as PCGS and NGC slabs are very different, yet both are successful. In my view PCGS ones are better, as the thin rim around the edge allows for easier removal and access to the contents (CGS slabs are as good as PCGS for getting in), but that doesn't explain the preferences of those who like slabbed coins. US slabs are successful because they allow collectors and dealers to buy and sell coins, sight unseen, leading to a more vibrant collector base and better or at least more numerous suppliers. Anybody with a thirst for knowledge is bu**ered however, as original thought over what it is and how good it is are incompatible with the superior knowledge of the 'experts'. The crazy prices for high number slabs are here to stay as long as you have plenty of money sloshing around the system and a collector/investor base who question nothing.

I thought there was a possible lump at 2pm on the 0 which would be right for a 7. The top bar of a 7 is ascending to the left, not horizontal, so the 7 upright would be under the rhs of the 0.

Sorry, ever the contrarian, but I don't necessarily. I usually put them date up, but even that relies on the customer having binocular vision - very unlikely. Many are as blind as a bat!

I'd say it's probably over 17, but I'm not sure you could see anything clearly in the hand other than the base of the 0 which isn't really conclusive.

It could work for getting rid of all the polished bling that the masses find so atttractive - assuming you have some, that is. Not sure what the footfall would be like though. Collectors rarely find anything worthwhile in these places as they tend to be filled with Churchill crowns at a fiver each, but uncollectable novelties (for the non-collector) might do ok.

The Henry 8 sovereign sold for 235K hammer against an estimate of 130-140. Several were unsold. Some estimates were too high though. I think most of the afternoon sale was MT's stock? Most had import duty attached for UK buyers. Some of the lesser pieces were reasonable with the 1821 halfcrown slabbed MS65 going for not much above Spink unc all in. I picked up lot 50 for just over 900 all in which was quite acceptable. The silver penny sold for £5K hammer, and the two 1806s were over £2K hammer. Pattern Military guinea over £50K hammer. A not very good 5 guineas, over £20K. That was too much.

Don't know, I was only interested in the afternoon sale. There were things I would have bought if good enough, but didn't cut the mustard.