Rob

Nor do a lot of people. It is much to do with bragging rights - my average score is better than yours, nah nah nah nah nah etc. I would like to brag that I own one slabbed CGS coin - an 1826 proof shilling graded unc 88 which I left in the slab as it was going into the bank and the box had space left. I also have an eclectic mix of a dozen formerly slabbed coins from AU78 to UNC 90. Or as we must now say UNC78 - UNC90. It's always good to upgrade.

You will need a copy of Derek Allen's Grading Guide, Freeman - bronze, Davies - silver and Dave Groom's silver and bronze books to act as references. Stick your nose into them and learn the identifiers thoroughly and you are set up to collect.

Bad call. With the scrap man paying £4/kg for copper and at roughly 100 pennies to the kg, that's 4p value in scrap. Buying 4p's for 2p's is a no-brainer. Even with the exact figures it works.

Oh dear, that table didn't come out too well did it. Try again !!! 100 FDC MS70 99 FDC MS70 98 FDC MS70 97 FDC MS70 96 FDC MS69 95 FDC MS68 - 69 94 AFDC MS68 93 AFDC MS67 - 68 92 AFDC MS67 91 AFDC MS66 - 67 90 NFDC MS66 88 BU - NFDC MS65 - 66 85 Choice UNC - BU MS65 82 Choice UNC MS64 - 65 80 UNC MS63 - 64 78 UNC MS63 - 64 75 UNC or near so MS62 - 63 70 AU MS60 - 61 65 GEF MS60 - 61 60 EF AU58 - MS60 55 NEF AU55 50 GVF AU55 45 GVF AU53 40 VF AU50 35 NVF EF45 30 GF EF40 25 GF F35 20 F F30 15 NF 10 VG 8 VG 5 Good 4 Fair 3 2 1 Sorry, still a bit wonky, but at least readable, just !!! I think the comparison is too heavily tilted in favor of the UK 100 scale, especially in the lower grades. Without going through the whole list, I think the following is a better comparison of grades. UK Fine20 = US F12 GF30 = VF20 EF60 = AU50 At the grade of "Fine" both scales are very close to the same (I think). The biggest variances, are above that grade. IMHO! Ha,Ha. This is going to make a for some interesting conversation. LOL! This still means they have changed their own grading system. A 75 or 78 started out life as EF, then migrated to aUNC because punters like to see references to the word uncirculated in their collections, and now we find the same grades are given as UNC. This is giving collectors rose-tinted spectacles. If sub-80 wasn't uncirculated before, it isn't now. However, if it is a case of keeping the customer satisfied because they think the grading system is too harsh, then clearly the numbers are fairly meaningless when tied to a 'traditional' grade as they can't be translated over time wherever you look on the scales. i.e. is today's unc, also yesterday's unc or not? This has done nothing to enhance the credibility which was somewhat diminished when they changed the labeling to reflect the customer's preference for using aUNC. If you set any standards in stone, the most important thing is to do nothing under external pressure. That is why they are called standards - things you can use for a reference point. I guess it just means that another variable has crept into the mix which we need to consider when assessing what a coin's grade is. It certainly means less reliance on the label is in order. 60 on both scales seems about right. MS60 is absolutely not mint state and yet again is an instance of pandering to customers' vanity. You will rarely see an MS60 better than EF, though owners of MS60 coins (particularly in the US) will proudly tout them as mint state. And as for AU50 whatever, carry on down the grading scale. Most AU grades are gVF or a bit better, though neither VF or EF are unknown. So it's a clear case of as you were chaps. Buy the coin, not the opinion/TPG/attribution/whatever else marketing tool is used.

I doubt anyone would bid with only one side pictured. Caveat emptor, you never know what the other side looks like - could be a bit of a dog and is probably worse than the reverse.

Yep. There's grade inflation for you over time. They used to give a 78 aunc, and before that EF. A grade is as you say in the eye of the beholder and as consistent as a politician's word. But at least it's consistently inconsistent. Every cloud..........

The feed is screwed up most of the time. Not only people on this forum, but others too. Here's an email sent to me shortly after the sale finished. Hello Rob Thought I would have a look at Scottish James V groats (653/654). The software stalled. Then I thought I would maybe have a bid on the Anne 1702, plumes and VIGO shillings (863/4). Guess what, stalled again. As far as I'm concerned I would never trust Spink Live Bidding if there was anything I really wanted. They're getting worse by the minute. Did you have any luck bidding on anything? Best wishes So you see. There are no plus points but a lot of negs. There wasn't a huge amount of material for me in the sale, but it would have been nice to actually manage to bid on the pieces I was interested in.

You didn't miss anything, trust me. You had a day well spent, whatever you were doing.

They could do better if they would buy in the mounds of large flan 5ps and 10ps, and 1947-67 'silver' as the extra weight means way more value in scrap vs face and more importantly a huge supply with nowhere to go - not collectable and mostly sitting in boxes/bags. Surely the RM as a government offshoot can see that this should be a no-brainer given the alloy has already been made. Or am I missing something? Sorry Rob, you are confusing common sense with policy/decision making...fatal!!! Thanks for clarifying the query John. Silly me. Just think how many Churchill crowns could be lost in this way. :) :) :)

They could do better if they would buy in the mounds of large flan 5ps and 10ps, and 1947-67 'silver' as the extra weight means way more value in scrap vs face and more importantly a huge supply with nowhere to go - not collectable and mostly sitting in boxes/bags. Surely the RM as a government offshoot can see that this should be a no-brainer given the alloy has already been made. Or am I missing something?

And yet yesterday I arrived home to find a glossy copy of Spink Insider magazine(?) on my door mat. Seems like maybe they are spending money on the wrong things ...? You were lucky. Besides the Insider, I also now receive banknote catalogues for some reason but not the stamp ones I used to get. Thankfully the coin catalogues are still coming through.

Like Colin G I had walked away by this point. Despite my best efforts to spend some money, it was not to be, so I engaged in an income producing activity.

What a 'pleasing' elephant - 1666 too - I must get me one of those one day, and a CII plumes of course, bit rich for me at the moment - £2,100 as I expect you know I knew what it was currently at because the sound was ok. The problem was the bid button didn't refresh or allow any action which was worse than useless. I wonder if it froze because I hit the bid button immediately the lot came up. Whatever, it was unusable. It was a decent coin too.

Nor me! I don't have an ever increasing bag of unidentified washers either. Unfortunately I have a bag of unidentified washers and another of identified washers. Thankfully the pile gets large enough to weigh in eventually.

I don't have one.

Bought in bulk from Austria: http://myworld.ebay.co.uk/oldtimermonger/ What? Like found in my letter box?

Clearly Spink est. 1666 stands for e-sales technology from 1666

And the only other lot I was interested in when I tried to bid said I had been outbid and wouldn't accept it or the lot had sold - that despite the bid button asking for what the auctioneer was calling. What a complete shambles. I wouldn't mind if it was above my limit, but I was prepared to go to more than they sold for.

I just tried to go on the elephant shilling. Having worked up to that point - it froze and said passed, which is a load of b*****ks.

I would still buy the right piece from them based on a personal assessment of what was on offer, just don't bid blind.

What? Warwick and Warwick? Aye, judging by what John has mentioned Methinks Rob had tongue firmly planted in cheek Dave Their grading alone is on a par with the majority of ebay graders (that was the reason that the BNTA had their pants down) and they have certainly been known to slip in fail to notice a couple of forgeries of rarish coins in bulk lots to catch out the unwary! Not to mention their refusal to ever list corrections. As a consequence you get things selling as the genuine article even though they have been told it isn't. They had a Cnut penny, allegedly from Hertford except that the legend alluded to a Hastings coin, or at least Haesti used to be Hastings when I was learning. No mention, mainly because the unrecorded penny was always going to make much more than a common type. Or two George III pattern halfpennies that were glaring Peck number gaps in my collection. Not a chance the description was accurate, with one of them being the gold painted currency piece noted a few years back by both Matt and myself. Or VF coins described as uncs. It is impossible to over-emphasise the need to view in person.

Christ! Were they making these back then? In that case the Royal Mint was a few hundred years too late getting its own version to market - but then institutions are always reluctant to change. I hope Seuk is going to reappraise the dates of his forgeries.

What? Warwick and Warwick?

Nope, not me.

Busy man. Now we know where you get it from.