Rob

If that is what purports to be a Bramah 25c then a halfpenny 9 would be a pretty good fit. Top loop would superimpose fairly well on the top loop of the 8, back of the 9 would fit the line joining the two loops and the tail of the 9 is slightly narrower than the loop with the end curled back as above.

I know it is what MG calls 8/2. I'm not saying he's wrong because I can't prove otherwise, but the 8 over 2 is problematic insofar as we can't be sure what a 2 would look like, being the only number not used on a copper penny (or at least not since 1827). On the image I posted, there is a line going through the top loop of the 8 approximately level with half way up the lump at the side - difficult to image with the microscope, but starts on the tip of the black mark RHS in the top loop. At the top of the protruding section is a small lump, which has a companion raised lump on the left hand side of the top loop at the same level, which may be an indicator of a filled die. There is no corresponding mark on the right side of the loop. The other interesting bit is the shape of the 5, the loop of which appears to join higher up the vertical. Plus there is a significant raised mark on the top bar. What was that? Going off on a tangent, there is also a flat topped 3 punch available as used on the 1839 penny and the IOM penny of the same date which is slightly smaller than the other 3 digits. If that is floating around within the number punches, it can't be discounted as being used in error. This is the smallest flaw I've had. Barely a trace on the 8 and similarly around Victoria. .

I concur. The ability to play with really fun things fostered a want to learn attitude. When I was a kid it seems like you were able to experiment with everything, from mini civil engineering projects, to making things explode, to exploring the country far and wide on your own as a very young teenager. Something today's paranoia and regulated environment has destroyed. Accidents could happen, accidents did happen, but then, they always will. Consider it a small niche of the greater experiment that is Darwinism.

My minor contribution. Doesn't agree with any of D to Dd for various reasons, nor G.

First bit is easy as it is the Peck coin which had been languishing in the dungeon since the Noble sale in 1973 - see below. It was listed on eBay within a couple days of the Baldwin sale in May 2006 as a BIN for £800, he having paid £360 hammer for it. I finally bought it in August. It came from a seller that always had bids on his coins (including this one) from a couple of dodgy bidders (tee2459 & matthews9289) with a combined feedback of 1. It transpired that he lived three miles up the road. Small world.

I think Ebay take a cut if you pull a listing when bids have already been placed, but a non-paying bidder means you can cancel the order and get fees refunded if unwilling to sell. Or if fed up as in my case, let the underbidder take it on a second offer. Usually I will reject a second offer on principle as I resent being taken for a ride, but on occasion it can be worth it.

I didn't get anything, but only put in low bids given there was no way to view.

You can have some fun here if you want the coin. Bid consistently to a given level that you would be willing to pay. When shilled and subsequently relisted, go to the same level. Repeat until the vendor gets fed up and lets you have it. That's what I did with the 1718 silver halfpenny. I consistently bid £10 above my max in the room at Baldwin's where I was the underbidder, leaving the owner to repeatedly outbid me. After a few listings, he gave up trying and let me have it at my max, leaving him to absorb a bit of a loss on the buyer's premium and me paying less than I would have done if I bought it in the room. He bought it speculatively hoping for a profit, so a small loss was all part of the game. Doubles all round.

I had one that was listed as such in a DNW sale, but wasn't convinced. Yes it had reflective fields, but fell a bit short including the rims IMO. If it was one, then I've seen plenty that could be considered candidates. It does worry me that Peck says they are all 5 ports but from different current dies, as this leaves open the possibility that they are just early strikes from well prepared dies, of which there must have been many given the output. In my view the jury should be out as to whether they exist, as it's certainly questionable. I've got half a dozen or more 1799 Soho proof/pattern (call them what you will) halfpennies here and by comparison, the fields and rims on these are much better. For what it's worth, my 7 gunports currency is just as good quality.

Looks like someone has been messing about.

Odd colour doesn't matter how it arose as long as the scrap value is greater than the price paid. But, if in doubt, leave it out and get a refund. i.e. if it doesn't appear to be silver, then get your money back.

Not sure why anyone would copy these. A mintage of 15 million will price them only a bit over melt at best. Krause lists them at $18 for MS63, which surely wouldn't be worth copying. The 1969 is noted in Krause as frequently found altered (presumably the shape of the 9), but the total mintage here is a million.

There are numerous varieties of patterns, but the only currency 5 ports is quoted by Peck as a proof (P1253). You can get proof-like currency pieces. I have my suspicions though as Peck notes they are all from different pairs of dies. I had one 10 years or more ago that was described as a proof, but wasn't convinced.

Less desirable for a collector, as they usually try to obtain examples in a suitable natural condition - which gilded certainly isn't. Coins are gilded for fun, or for use in jewelry.

It looks to be gilded, but I'm not sure how you can be diddled when something you have bought for £6 has £6.70 worth of silver in it with some free gold on top? Please elucidate.

Nothing to do with individuals' viewpoints, but I'm not sure what useful function easylive provides in the case of '3'. Why would anybody place a commission bid through them with their fee on top compared to sending a list of commission bids directly to the auction house. When you employ a dealer or whoever to bid on your behalf who then charges a commission for any lots purchased, you can at least say that the lots have been viewed in advance by the dealer, who has acted on his reasoned opinion. Easylive are not providing this service.

Trump is the archetypal narcissist and in good company along with most autocratic dictators that have ever existed. Putin, Erdogan, any number of leaders of former Russian areas, most South American and African countries, even this country. Politics or other forms of leadership breeds people who think highly of themselves - it is a real chicken and egg scenario. Confident people are rarely wrong (in their view). The masses should be grateful that he is only going to be President for one term or possibly two because the system is designed to ensure nobody can have an indefinite monopoly (that's a good thing) - unless he does a Putin, that is. His basic problem is that he seems to be in permanent campaign mode - and we all know that politicians say what they feel they need to say to be elected. Just treat it like any other soap opera on TV, i.e. something you switch off when the intro music comes on. We all have a big friendly off button on the remote.

I think the 1816 sixpence and shilling are going to win, as Peck suggested.

I've had it suggested it is Joe Linzalone of Wolfshead, a US dealer. Can anyone confirm? 25mm card.

When were guineas demonetised? We know they stopped making them in 1813, but as the weight was 5% over the sovereign i.e. pro-rata, there was no need to demonetise them. The sovereign of 20s was more convenient than the 21s guinea. The fact that the new coinage in 1817 was reduced pro-rata, suggests the guinea continued to be legal tender. In fact there was no case for demonetising these other than on account of their odd value.

Covering all bases there. Elizabeth I - maybe; medieval - maybe (but mutually exclusive with the first part); silver - best chance of being right; threepence - maybe; coin - maybe

It's only really 1920-22 which are the erratic issues. Once you get to 23 they seem to have the metal mix and striking parameters under control and for some reason there seems to be a good number of well struck up 1925 shillings in particular, i.e. no flattening of the nose.

It's a table that has been compiled by Ian as he indicates. Invoices would be headed either SB or FEDEX, not given as a summary with exchange rates etc.

Reduce it in size. It only has to be 1% smaller to be within the 500kb limit.

I was following Lockdales sale today and couldn't believe the prices paid for some of the bulk lots. Blue proof sets working out at £24 a pop delivered, or the early sets at over £13 each. Who is paying this much for them? If for resale, where are they selling them? Who is buying them at an even higher price? And finally, please could I have their address because I can't sell them for £25-30 each, nor much over £10 for the early sets, and that's on a good day. Prices seemed to be at or above retail for everything. e.g. A gVF Cnut PH penny of Stamford at £360 hammer! People have too much money, or maybe someone just wanted to pay extra for the crack.