Rob

It isn't a mule because the obverse changed in this year. A mule occurs when 2 dies that were not intended to be used together are in fact utilised eg. the 20p with no date, or the 1711 3rd bust shilling. In the case of the latter, the 4th bust was introduced on Anne's shillings in 1710 and so the use of the preceding obverse die in 1711 would not be expected.

Start off with a type example across the date range you want to collect. It will give diversity even with a small population of coins in the cabinet and will give you food for thought as to where you want to expand.

No question. Always buy the best you can afford. Work harder, earn more money and be able to afford the rarer ones, but don't drop standards as it's false economy. When the time comes to sell, nobody wants a selection of badly worn coins as the auction rooms are full of low grade accumulations. A top grade coin will always find a new home. There are exceptions to collecting low grade material such as if you are conducting a census or doing a die study. Collecting low to middle grade material also leads to the numismatic equivalent of mission creep. Say you have a dozen coins in VF or thereabouts. If you then acquire a coin close to EF for just a fraction more than you have paid for the rest, you compare the nicer coin and decide to upgrade the others. You then have to dispose of the VFs which are not going to be too attractive to a lot of collectors if high grade pieces are readily available and so you have difficulty shifting them and/or you lose money. If you decide to cherry pick nice uncirculated pieces but only make occasional purchases, in all probability you won't feel the need to improve the grades. The down side of doing this is that you get frustrated waiting for the next purchase, or even for a suitable piece to appear. Patience is a definite virtue. A lot of money is spent on ebay overpaying for mid grade coins. Don't fall into that trap. Visit coin fairs, speak to dealers, peruse websites, attend auctions even if you don't buy. Just the act of viewing will stand you in good stead as you will gradually get a feel for what is on offer and how much interest there is in the room for specific items. Ask yourself why two nominally identical items (same denomination, date and listed grade) sell for significantly different prices. Was it eye appeal? Did the lower priced coin have faults such as scratches, nicks etc? Was one cleaned and the other not? All these things will be pertinent the next time the coin is sold, and if you are the next vendor, you owe it to yourself to buy things that others would want too.

The 1548 gold coin is a half sovereign, not a full one. The dated ones (S2436) were struck only at Durham House under the indenture to Sir Martin Bowes some time in the last 3 months or so of the year as the documentary evidence states that the mint wasn't set up until 2nd December.

It is possible there was some sort of trial going on at the mint given that Lavrillier also did a pattern penny in that year. The mint would only make coins depending on demand for the various denominations. This explains the random absences in certain years. I would contest that the 1933 penny wasn't struck simply so the King could place a full set under the foundation stones, because, as you note there is no 1934 florin, yet he will almost certainly have performed opening ceremonies during the year. I don't have an example, but assume he did - correct me if you know anything to the contrary. Moreover, the Royal Mint produced official boxes for the proof sets in this year that were missing the florin, so the decision not to strike any of this denomination was presumably made late in 1933. This should indicate that there was no absolute requirement for a set including each denomination.

Are they on the telly? Second thoughts, don't answer that. My daughter watches crap so she is bound to know.

The important thing now is what will City do given they have achieved the height of their ambition by beating Utd. Everything from now on is down. C'mon Stoke. And for entertainment's sake we need a banner next season stating 36 years (since City won anything).

The tray will have much more value than the coin which will be a normal Cu-Ni type or at least in the case of the Churchill. The Silver Wedding might be silver, but assume not. It is unlikely that many coin collectors would be interested, and even if they were it would only be as a novelty. The coins themselves will be irrepairably damaged having been polished and in all probability soldered to the silverware.

City are in uncharted territory now. As the last point on the graph of their season shows, anything can happen and nothing can be inferred for the next game. Also, they usually conform to type and play in sky blue which is a watered down version of Stockport, Oldham, Macclesfield,... appropriately.

I'll never say no to an opportunity to ogle Holly Willoughby (congrats on her new daughter btw!) http://xfactor-updates.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/holly-willoughby-featured.jpg http://www.mastcelebs.com/upload/Holly-Willoughby.jpg Enjoy! Oh - todays selection... Jessica Simpson, Halle Berry, Kate Middleton (vastly better than her Royal Mint image!) and Natalie Portman's ass! Ok, that's a start. Never seen her before, but nice t**s, funny mouth. What does she do? Dance, sing or adult entertainment? Or is it just a case of the media fulfilling their need to find someone or something to fill the pages?

This is getting too clique-like in nature. Stop throwing names around that I can't relate to. The only Holly I've ever known had the surname Bush and was decidedly prickly in nature. I've never fancied a name. Post an image or at least a link so that we can at least ogle on equal terms.

I will guarantee he bought a few though.

It probably is an I that has been used, but the relief of the I looks higher than the surrounding legend which suggests to me the die may have been reinforced. It's difficult to be certain though in 2D.

Mine's a pint.

R/I is not particularly rare. There are 3 R overs (I, V & which increase in rarity in that order with R/B undoubtedly the most difficult to acquire. It probably doesn't help that Spink only list R/V which is less common than R/I, so there is an automatic assumption that it is rarer than reality would suggest. I would suggest it is scarce.

That looks like a system malfunction at ebay - decimal point's in the wrong place.

How very true... I've struggled to get anything like the £30 I'd hope for for a nEF 1887 4s (roman I), but sell bags of junk like 58 1960's pennies for £3.85! At the bottom end it's buyers with a near total lack of knowledge thinking it must be worth more than it is. Think back to the lack of reference material held by most collectors. I would surmise that any thoughts they have about prices are restricted to "if several people think it is worth that much then it must be". i.e.Ebay sets the grade and price. I think that higher grade pieces are the preserve of experienced collectors who may also be wearing rose tinted spectacles at times. If you claim high grade then no one believes you and any grade given will be knocked back a point unless you can build a reputation at which point some of the uninitiated jump on board. Collectors actively seeking the higher grades will not want to rely on the frquently poor images. Better that you have a coin on approval from a dealer or seen in the flesh at a fair. Generally speaking though, mid grade coins (nVF-EF) are the difficult area. You can pick up a middling coin cheaply on ebay because the majority of buyers are in 99p mode, whilst the experienced will want to examine a coin under a glass - certainly so if the grade claimed is EF or thereabouts.

I'm on a roll too. Just had an order that has netted me a tenner! Sort of puts things in perspective.

Well, he did quite well buying the Geo.III 5 guineas in Japan for £84K and selling it in his sale the following May for £180K, so he isn't short of a bob or two.

Yes, it's Stephen Fenton, aka St.James's Auctions.

There was one in the Crocker Collection 1908 BMC 2214. F 164A. Dies 1*+C. Near Fine, buckled. Rare Sold For: £500 a very ugly coin too! It's at times like this when you really appreciate the aesthetic beauty of the felt in an empty hole in the tray over a piece of mangled/corroded/flat metal. I'd sooner leave the hole unfilled than have to look at that, after all it isn't unique so a better one will come along one day.

I have had problems with a couple of auction houses describing coins as 'Unc.' that patently were not. They all have their shortcomings which makes distance bids a harrowing process and I now prefer to attend sales as I was being forced to adopt my e-bay stance of 'if they say it's unc, then it's probably no better than EF'. The unfortunate thing is that taking this stance means that you don't actually win much in the higher grades. Fortunately I don't live a million miles from most of the salerooms and can make up my own mind about the lots up for sale. Having said that, the lighting and conditions under which the coins are viewed can be diabolical. The first ever time I viewed I put my foot in it. Having given over the list of lots I wanted to see and had them passed to me, a VF 6d fell out on the table. As the guy was only a couple of feet away and busy, I quickly called him back as the coin was obviously not one I had requested (the list was mostly UNCs according to the descriptions). He assured me it was correct and so I had a sort of road to Damascus moment when a bright light shone in the sky, the clouds parted and a big finger poked me in the eye. From that moment I saw the true light and understood fully. Another instance was where 2 pattern 1/2ds were listed which were the only gaps in a long run of Peck numbers I needed to fill. One was painted gold and described as gilt, the second a currency piece and showed no characteristics of the purported Peck variety. An enquiry as to whether a notice would be issued in view of the obvious errors was met with a negative. (Mat was there too for that one and also noticed the Christmas tree decoration). A hammered penny described as from Hertford with a mint reading of HEORT despite the coin actually reading HAESTI (Hastings) with the S on its side as normal for that type and clearly from the hoard of about 100 coins of the type from the toning was similarly dismissed when the catalogue error was pointed out well in advance of the sale. The odd mistake you can accept, but to not issue corrections is unforgivably wrong.

The problem I have with W&W is the issue aired on this forum a couple of years ago when everything was described using ebay standard grading or mis-described lots that they weren't prepared to issue a saleroom notice for. When that happens, you only bid in person having viewed the lots in advance. It helps nobody to return lots because they are not as described, so with there being plenty of fish in the sea you don't bid and move on. The lots may have been accurately graded and described in this instance; I don't know, but given the historical baggage I'm not going to bother finding out unless there is a coin that is on the Hobson's Choice list.

I didn't bother with them Colin after my last 2 attempts at buying there ended in 65-80 negatives! I didn't bother. I looked at the catalogue, felt underwhelmed, and decided to find something better to do. If by normal service you mean lower prices, then that would be expected because any initial weakness is likely to be in the mid-tier coins.

The first dated coins in this country were in fact two pattern shillings dated 1547 with im. Rose. North 1953 is dated MCXLVII and North 1954 is dated MDXL7. An image of the former is shown in Joe Bispham's article in the 1985 BNJ on p.143. The shillings dated 1548 (North 1896) are recorded in footnote 78 as being struck in brass alloy only and so are presumably patterns. There is no mention of a 1548 sovereign in North.