Rob

For currency coins just about every rarity attribution underestimates the quantity available. For patterns and proofs the numbers tend to be reasonably accurate but with a few glaring exceptions. Many rarity values assigned by Peck, Freeman, Rayner or whoever are numbers plucked out of the air and should be disregarded. It is worth doing your own research from past sales because you will be surprised by the results obtained. Rare currrency pieces in high grade will almost always be recorded and illustrated which helps. I know of R7s in ESC where there are many more known and equally an R rating where I can't find a single example. The job is harder for base metal because until Peck and Freeman published, you were an oddball if you collected pennies et infra and they were rarely listed in catalogues, rather lumped together as job lots sometimes running into hundreds of coins. So to answer your question, given they are all inaccurate, correlating the different numbers is a pointless task.

Well it might be my vivid imagination but if you look at first scan it looks like a numeral '7' in the rim just below the D of 'DEI' its small but can you see what I am on about now??? Russ777 I see a vague shape which is presumably what you mean, but it is in minimal relief. There is also a stop between the G & R of GRATIA which is more prominent than the '7' but which also shouldn't be there. Given the condition of the coin, any non-standard feature would have to be very prominent to gain any credibility. Unless you can show a similar feature on one that is close to mint state or where there is no question of environmental damage, you are on a hiding to nothing.

Which is precisely what every politician has done since they have had the inconvenience of the public voting them into office.

The PCS are hardly a model of neutral assessment. What they fail to do is make an objective argument based on the overall liabilities of the nation, i.e. they are living for today because tomorrow is too horrible to contemplate. I note they are getting their public debt figures out before the real ones are released. Not included in their figures are the costs of buying the stakes in the banks which have yet to appear in the public financial statements, the PFI future costs and the enormous future liability of unfunded public sector pensions, which don't show up in the current statistics because they are laibilities whose cost has yet to be crystallised. If you take on board all the off-balance sheet items such as PFI so beloved by GB (as the cost would only be realised once he was gone)and the liabilities not yet showing up in the national debt statistics then you get an entirely different picture. Figures bandied about vary from £2 trillion up to £5.5 trillion for the true national debt depending on who was providing the argument. The answer is usually somewhere in the middle and indeed the ONS puts the number at £4 trillion. That's a very big number - over 250% of GDP, but shows the true cost of public sector employment and fiddling the balance sheet. The public sector pensions do not figure in the national debt, yet most left of centre people desire an expansion of the public sector with the consequent increase in future liabilities beyond even today's stratostpheric level. If the banks can resume steady earnings and profits then the state can cash in its stake at a convenient time to maximise the return. (As with the private individual, it is much better for nations to pay down debt than to pay interest over the rate of inflation). This is probably the best and only option as things stand to recoup money because PFI was a commitment to spend lots of money way into the future on the taxpayers' behalf and the public sector unions are unlikely to willingly give up their future pensions amounting to around the £1 trillion mark. So repaying debt and stopping excavation work on the already large hole we are in should be the order of the day. Cutting the future liabilities is a fundamental part of solving the public sector problem. And for the record I am not, nor am I every likely to be a member of or affiliated to any political party - I just believe everyone, nation states and myself included should be living within their means. So no triple unite for me (as this is a coin forum).

The deficit appeared as a result of Gordon Brown's incompetent housekeeping. From coming to power in 1997 up to 2000 he broadly balanced the books in an attempt to show that he was fiscally responsible. All that went out of the window between 2000 & 2005 when he spent 44% more than he took in taxation. The only way that can not be described as a deficit is if the sum involved is zero. 44% of f*** a** being f*** a** etc. etc.. On top of that he continued the time honoured tradition of politicians of wanting to be loved by handing out freebies to whoever labour decided was in need, all provided by vast armies of public sector workers. You can't have a successful economy based on a booming cost base, and sure enough chickens came home to roost because now the outlay has to be paid for. Very, very few public sector jobs directly create wealth for the country. Sure banks do irresponsible lending sometimes. They always have done, factoring in an allowance for an historical average percentage of bad debts. But, and this is equally important, the availability of credit has to be matched by someone equally willing to spend it without considering repayments. Anyone who has a credit card knows the limits get moved ever higher, but nobody is forced to buy goods they can't afford and in particular the large ticket dicretionary items. A little mea culpa is due from most of roughly half the population who don't pay the cards off every month. Used sensibly a credit card is an asset, used irresponsibly it may land you in the shit; but don't worry, New Labour also made it much easier for bankrupts by allowing people to walk away from their debts and have a clean slate after a year. I think that principle is a disgrace and believe everyone should honour their debts for as long as it takes. If there was a stigma attached to being unable to pay your debts - good!! it might make a lot of people take steps to avoid getting in that position in the first place. If Labour had stopped trying to play Father Christmas and concentrated on being the miserable git in charge of the bank of 50 years ago, there would likely be little or no credit crisis here.

It's a farthing (P922), not a halfpenny. The weight is 8.85g which is marginally above the average recorded by Peck. This frequently causes confusion as the halfpenny weighs a whopping 17g or so. The coin is actually the one from the Oxford collection (217) which made £1000 when sold by Colin Cooke. The image on their site shows a much more honest image as there are quite a few marks which you can't see in the Swiss catalogue, so not so desirable and not for me. The estimate is too high given the problems. Have you ever seen the subsequent lot 448 before? Based on the identical toothed border and a possible trace of spotting between A & N on the reverse in the Spink 95 catalogue, I'd say it was this sale's lot 330 referred to in the Nicholson lot 308 notes. Despite the crap picture in the catalogue, it clearly isn't Nicholson's piece which had a different border profile and which in any case is now slabbed and probably in the US at the moment as NEN had it.

It's a farthing (P922), not a halfpenny. The weight is 8.85g which is marginally above the average recorded by Peck. This frequently causes confusion as the halfpenny weighs a whopping 17g or so. The coin is actually the one from the Oxford collection (217) which made £1000 when sold by Colin Cooke. The image on their site shows a much more honest image as there are quite a few marks which you can't see in the Swiss catalogue, so not so desirable and not for me. The estimate is too high given the problems.

Highly desirable, what catalogue is it from?

The price of Aussie gold is going through the roof because of Aussie demand. Almost any piece in UNC will be snapped up for a 4 figure sum. Even slightly impaired top grade pieces are mopped up easily. A genuine UNC will easily surpass Spink prices which are playing catchup. My Melbourne Victoria sovereign cost more than Spink book, and in the case of the Sydney & Perth coins I have bid on recently I didn't even come close, despite bids over book. All that is without premiums.

Quite agree. Ever since the introduction of credit cards in the 1970s, people have been deferring payment as there is no requirement to pay up front for the luxuries you covet but are unwilling to work or wait for. It's no coincidence that Germany doesn't have a credit problem and the populace are reluctant to embrace credit cards. As you say, if you can't pay cash, don't buy it - and they don't. As a rule they don't fritter away their hard earned savings on depreciating liabilities like the latest fashionable item that has to be bought because it is available, yet discarded tomorrow because it's old hat. They tend to buy quality and insist on it lasting for years or even decades. I'm glad my wife is German - or maybe I was born in the wrong country.

The proofs and patterns of this series have plain edges. This also applies to the shillings.

Be careful what you ask for. The Cerne Abbas Giant is rumoured to have connections to Oliver Cromwell according to the blurb at the viewing point. Looking at it, it is easy to see why this country opted for the restoration of the monarchy.

The man is a complete twat. With a name like styx collectables, it is entirely appropriate that he likes holes.

A decent library will always pay dividends. You can never have too many books.

My maximum snipe is the amount I would happily pay....anything less is a bonus. Sensible Peter. I usually go to a bit above what I think will be the maximum snipe from elsewhere. For example, if the current bid is £40 and the approximate value of the coin is £75, then I might bid £100. Typically, I might then get it for £55 to £60. You might also get it for £100 when it is only worth 75. Much better to get it for £55-60 with a bid of that amount.

It isn't unknown for letters to made from the punches of other letters with additions. A good example is the V being used for the A with the crossbar being added later. When the crossbar is forgotten a variety is created. As has been noted previously, William III is notorious for the number of misprunts (sic) and other errors.

Graffiti is undesirable unless it is of historical importance and would make this coin difficult to sell, but as the coin is not in high grade it can't reduce the value by too much. The price would probably reduce to a couple of pounds at best, however with plenty of low grade examples around to satisfy collector demand wouldn't get many takers even at this price. As it isn't wear as such the grade is unaffected, but a description would be qualified with reference to the defacement.

Nope, damaged die. The filled 2 is raised on the coin so must be incuse on the die. A bit has broken off the die at the inside angle of the 2, unless it is a bit of trapped metal which has attached itself to the flan. You don't have any relief perspective from the image.

Carlton Palmer. GVF or NEF ? Mediocre I think.

Whilst on the question of sponsorship, the best one that springs to mind was Carlton Palmer when he played for Southampton (maybe still does?) - he was sponsored by Bursledon Sunday Market and Car Boot.

In that case I am the headwind. NGC list one 1673 1/2d in MS65 and PCGS two in MS64 as top of the respective population reports. The MS65 and one of the MS64s both now out of the slabs and so safely out of reach of the number chasers. After all, they would be more interested in the pieces of plastic with the number on it - I'll see if I can find them if they haven't been thrown out. Ah, a mahogany man I presume? I'll give you a trillion for them (Zimbabwe note of course) Better make that two trillion as both had the wrong attribution. The NGC coin was my 1675/3/2 and the PCGS was a 1675/3. Both initially acquired because they were obviously wrong!!

In that case I am the headwind. NGC list one 1673 1/2d in MS65 and PCGS two in MS64 as top of the respective population reports. The MS65 and one of the MS64s both now out of the slabs and so safely out of reach of the number chasers. After all, they would be more interested in the pieces of plastic with the number on it - I'll see if I can find them if they haven't been thrown out.

Quite frankly, the TPGs are better steering clear of hammered as they are out of their depth most of the time. The argument that they are on a learning curve isn't a wise business proposition as any coin graded will retain that grade whether remotely accurate or not. They should be slabbing and grading them (- if they must) after they have gained the technical competence, not before or while they are learning. There are too many variables with hammered to apply a single number. It might work if there were multiple grades applied for shape, wear and strike, but that would confuse things beyond belief for the casual purchaser.

I've always found IGC to be consistent in their grading and have never seen one that was wildly at odds with my own assessment. I might not agree with many MS designations from any of the TPGs, but as long as any grading is consistent I know what to expect. A PCGS AU58 could be anything from a really nice VF or gVF upwards. I've seen too many overgraded earlier pieces to expect otherwise. Edited to add that as ICG and ANACS are less frequently encountered than the major players, so the sample size may not be large enough to give an opinion that is a true reflection. If the numbers encountered were larger then a different opinion might result, but to date I've not seen any howlers from either of these second tier companies. The same goes for ICCS.

It wouldn't be worth any more in cash terms as a variety for the same basic reasons as your half sovereign which is that there are insufficient collectors of the series with deep pockets. But a 6/5 would have a numismatic value as our knowledge base would be extended, i.e. the 1765 die was made but never used.