Rob

Good, thanks Peter - that makes me feel better - I only paid a fiver for it. GVF money would have made me feel guilty! Ignore our resident pessimist - those aren't so much 'knocks' as 'faint taps, almost inaudible' I have to confess it never leapt out at me either. In all honesty i don't think I'd be unhappy if I'd bought GVF blind and your coin arrived! I'll give you a fiver for it, Declan, then you won't have to feel guilty about it anymore! A deformed rim/edge is an imperfection, however obvious. I'm on Peter's side.

Farthing

The obverse looks like an Austin traders token.

Thanks John

If it is the JS & AB Wyon medal it is BHM 2702 (believed struck c1872). Thanks John, that's the one. Presumably common and of little value? Having said that, I couldn't find any listed on ebay or elsewhere though - hence the question.

Does anyone have a reference for the HRH Albert Prince Consort b.1819 d.1861/National Memorial medal in presumably tin. Weighs 15.81g. Approx. 32mm diameter. Thanks.

It isn't a case of non-portrait pillar dollars being uncollectable in isolation. The BOE issues as a whole are unpopular probably because there is not much variety of design and in the case of the countermarked pieces you would be collecting what is primarily foreign coinage. For countermarked coins there is a choice of two countermark shapes and two varieties of design, portrait or not. You have a few mints represented but it is the Spanish American equivalent of say lighthouse type or leaves and berries in the wreath. The average collector of British material won't be clued up on Spanish American coinage to differentiate between the types of finer detail. The oddballs such as the French and US currency countermarked pieces are so rare that most would never see an example for sale, let alone in the hand. Then you have the 4R pieces which are suspect as to whether they actually circulated or not, having no proclaimed value unlike the 4s.9d of the pillar dollars. Then you have the 5/- dollars (one basic design) plus the large number of patterns - the latter never as popular as currency. Finally you have the 3/-, 1s.6d & 9d bank tokens, but again only 2 obverses and 2 reverses. You also have the problem that they simply don't fit into a denomination collection with the exception of the 5/- dollar. As a contrarian, I quite like the diversity these issues provide when compared to standard RM output of the time. Every unfocussed collection should include an example or two.

In auctions, probably one every couple of years. There wasn't one in the long run of BOE dollars sold in St. James's 18. They are unquestionably rare, but relatively uncollected.

There's a slight difference in the chin and mouth profile, but that could just be the lighting. Looks good to me. Doubtless Seuk will be able to quote chapter and verse about the different copies or false countermarks in existence. I saw one about 9 months ago that could be identified as dodgy because the truncation was straight but the rest looked ok. Presumably the weight and edge are ok?

I'm not sure about the countermark (which is the bit that gets added to the basic coin to give a x10 uplift in prices). The only one I have is attached. It is slightly different in detail, but not obviously iffy. A better resolution image would help as the existing one gets pixelated.

Depends on whether it is the portrait or non-portrait type. The latter are rare in genuine, relatively common in copies. There are copies of both, but the number of genuine examples of the portrait type makes them easier to spot. The problem with shifting them is that the countermark might be EF, but the host is frequently only fine. An as struck example of both host and countermark is definitely worth the money.

If you ship on a temporary export licence, there is no duty payable if the returning item matches the exported item. People travelling abroad with equipment for their job (tool kits etc) do this all the time. Contents have to be itemised, but customs are pretty realistic and flexible when large quantities of items worth pence each are involved. The problem arises with the Royal Mail or whatever courier acting for HMRC. In this case you will probably have to appeal against the costs and provide the evidence within the time allowed to avoid charges.

I have to confess that I haven't looked at any auctions since Davisson's sale in November, so I couldn't tell you. Too busy tied up renovating a property, so funds are a bit tight at the moment as I have to buy a new roof, kitchen, CH boiler, windows and all the internals such as plumbing, plastering, wiring etc. Not to mention a couple lots of university fees and accommodation due this month. On the plus side, many repossessed properties (as this is) have the contents trashed and gutted by the evicted party so there is relatively little clearing out to do.

Notice how the bidding went from £255 to £333 in one leap? No-one is going to tell me that's not suspicious! No reason why a leap of that magnitude should be any more suspicious than small increments. If I bid on a coin at £200 and put a max of 400, then it will go to the next bid up from 200 (205 or 210 or whatever it is). If a second person puts in a bid of £450, then it will go to £400 + one increment with the second person winning. Far more suspicious is the anonymity issue where a shill bidder can beat the high bidder repeatedly without third parties being able to identify the person responsible.

Despite having done my homework by finding out which pieces he had struggled to find and which were the best examples he had found, I still dropped out too easily and came second on far too many in that sale - sometimes you need to be bolder because you will certainly regret it later on. Pieces that spring to mind are the pair of numbered field YHs, the 60/59, a few 1797 Soho pieces, a couple of Moore patterns, one of the 1806 currencies and the P1299 was another I really should have pursued being the only one available(?) to collectors. :( :( :( :( :( On the plus side, I picked up Adams 36, the P1133A with raised dots on the rock for £200 incl. in 2008 from London Coins against a sale price of £500 incl. in 2003. That's because it couldn't satisfy those who pray to the number god, only being a CGS 78. Personally I couldn't give a s**t. Having never seen better in the hand, it'll do.

Begs the question why he quotes the VF and EF price, calls it EF and then prices it just over VF book. Could ask the question, though you are unlikely to be given the correct answer of 'I've overgraded it to make it sound more attractive than it really is and underpriced on the quoted grade to give the impression of a bargain.' Honest grading on ebay mostly results in no sale and pricing correctly at around book means sellers need to buy really cheaply to make any money. Both conspire to produce listings of overgraded and overpriced crap.

Around VF, but looks a bit water worn to me and too weak in the middle of the reverse for my taste.

The blurb says he doesn't know whether it's an 8 or a 9 which explains the description. Might be worth bidding on below melt if he throws in the attractive pink background to hide the coin in the tray.

Stacks don't have a monopoly on this sort of behaviour.

Firstly, I'm not sure how you could use the picture in a way which would add £6395.99 to its value. Secondly, £100 for a new one is a bit extortionate for any image of a TV person. If they want the exposure they should pay people to take them off their hands.

That would sure fool me! Any clues? It would fool most people! Looking closely at that, I would say one clue would be the Tyrannosaurus Rex head on the Scottish lion, and the 3 English sheep instead of leopards. But seriously, if you got that in change, you wouldn't look twice at it. Despite the looks, the rampant lion is still a passing resemblance to the real thing.

A Happy New Year to all.

Graham is a very nice man and extremely helpful, gives a good talk and is willing to share knowledge. He does spend some time at the Mint even though retired as he passed on some information about the Weyl patterns whilst looking through their material doing research. The Mint didn't reply to my initial enquiry, though he did having been the referee for the paper and remembered after the event! That is someone with a consummate interest in all things milled.

It's in the Spink archive section, but the image is only 41K so doesn't tell you much.

I still think Colin's was better. The right breast was better struck up and the fingers crisper. Also this has a couple of small marks. But the other one had a couple of small spots in the obverse legend. Even after nearly 10 years I still regret not carrying on.