VickySilver

Which is a plug for the TPGs (or at least the respectable ones), and a whole different angle to this thread. Accumulator got his coin, and hope he is happy with it. I think there are possibly shades of gray to this whole argument, and that it still boils down to the buyer being knowledgeable and to be able to recognise "treated" coins for what they are; unfortunately this does take advantage of the newer collector to some degree. I also think that it is shady for dealers to buy coins, tweak them to deceive and to sell them at unseemly profit. At some point ethics might have a chance to sneak in?

Wow, the W4 shilling cleaned most definately. I have bought a few from MP, but as has been said, Caveat emptor!

Yes, consensus amont "experts" a real task as there isn't any. The London mint 1882 piece discussed on these boards is a perfect example. A lot harder to put out a catalogue that people take as gospel than to criticize and being complete is well-nigh impossible.

Problem is demand...If the 75H is scarcer than the 69, and I think it is, somehow it just does not capture the interest of buyers to the same degree and so the price is probably condemned to a lower level. I remember being the buyer of a 75H about 10 or more years ago and mention made of it in the Coin News because a price of 759 pounds with the "juice" was paid - this however for a superior specimen!

And now at 770. Nice coin but NOT unc.or even AU in my opinion. These buns are getting crazy!Seller quotes price of 1850 pounds in Spink 2010, but in unc.

Eeeeeeeeekkkkkk...................2560 pounds it closed at!!!!!!!!Readers keep alert as to if this coin shows again on the 'bay or another venue. I simply can not believe it. If real, maybe time to sell!

That 19KN has some wear as well as lustre breaks and an average strike. Could "body bag" it at a TPG like PCGS. I do not like the areas of blotch that looked to have been attacked by some oxidant and perhaps cleaned or treated. The 69 will be a wonder if a true sale, as private bidders do not constitute a confirmed sale in my book.

Yes, my thoughts - the 1882 London mint penny in VF or above is prohibitively rare. The discs and aFair pieces would make up the bulk of extant specimens I would imagine. The total based on sales in recent years would be a hazard guess of 40 or so also in my opinion. As I have hinted earlier, I am not at all sure these are of one obverse and reverse pairing and reminds me of ancients where people think only one ot two die pairs until new combos are discovered...

2050 and rising! Where will this 69 go?

Sometimes I think London mint 1882 pennies (if authentic) in high grade may be just as rare as the '33. And IMO would crush for real world value those idiotic narrow date buns.

Think I need to visit my optometrist....Just do not see anything I would consider remarkable. Good somebody has eyes, but seriously I think it would have to be a bit more prominent to be of note. Keep up the alert level to scouting these coins. Did you just happen to glance at the coin and see this or do you look at all your coins in such detail?

Pictures PLEASE!

I think I was speculating on a deeper answer as to why the Australian demand - is there not some sort of tax advantage? I seem to recall something of that sort...

I am certainly no expert in Aussie gold, but it looks to be long tail. This coin's value appears even at 400 pounds to be numismatically based rather than bullion based so I would not expect it to move proportionate to gold's gains (or heaven forbid, losses). They are noticing this in the American market for slabbed MS62-64 commoner double eagles I read - numismatic value does not gain with gold and is being "eaten up" by the gold rise. My infantile understanding is that the coin market in Aussieland is supported by the government letting people to put coins into retirement plans and ???tax protection. Perhaps another poster can improve our knowledge on this...

Yes, I think Baldwin would be a good way to go, or else Heritage in the USA with PCGS certification/slab. You might be able to get surprising money for such.

You know, Peck, I was thinking this only because of stories I have heard about untold hundreds, if not thousands of dies laying around mint property(ies?) which certainly left room for "sport". I know that the mint wizards at the Philadelphia mint carried on with such activities in the 19th century and even into the 20th, so to me kind of a black box situation. Bernie's penny is much nicer than most and I believe Rob would be able to locate a picture of the mint state, or so, piece that Spink had in one of their SNCs about 1980 or so that was far and away the best I have seen. I believe I have seen one 1882 London penny that is not strictly following the F11 format and it is in GVF or better condition with no problems other than poor planchet with no "monkey business" in the erstwhile mintmark area. The reaction when shown was that it was not F11 and therefore could not be London minted coin. That is NOT de facto data, and such intrepretation quite poor as opposed to the opinion that further study was needed. Electron microscopy in the area of the mintmark should show metal manipulation but access and cost of such testing may not be feasible. I vote for cautious openminded approach to such coins overall, with the coin having to essentially prove itself if possible...I can not condemn even this coin without further study but think that there are serious questions about the mintmark area.

My question is: why is Freeman gospel on there being only one die combination for this coin (the 1882 London penny)? I simply do not understand how another obv. die, or even rev. die might not have been employed at another occasion that year, or even another year. This possibility does not seem to be excluded in arguments I have seen thus far.

Counterfeit. OK, I will try to post some halfcrown pics this weekend at great hazard (uggh, drag me kicking and screaming into the 21st century).

IMHO, interesting but not of any sensational value. Good to keep sharp eyes though! To give you an idea, and sorry I have yet to master pictures, I have an 1953 Coronation Crown with the entire edge lettering done twice and about 90 degrees out of sync. Price on ebay? L95.

And yet, playing the devil's advocate, the entire GB coin market is but a flea in comparison to the enormity of the elephant-sized American market in US coins and their slabbing - remember these are all milled and thus a bit more amenable to TPG grading. I think I am more of a mind that these TPGs run into a bit more of a problem (for many of the reasons discussed)with hammered coins; still I am not sure if they are any worse than some mainline dealers in the UK, names unmentioned, who have made major attribution errors even in the milled series. Their (TPGs) strength is in the grading of Morgan dollars and the like but some of this may be able to cross into grading 20th or even 19th C. silver GB coins, and they may prove of value here. Not to resurrect the lustre issue again but I daresay many otherwise uncirculated Vicky bronzes would have retained a much better appearance had they been slabbed instead of being handled by hamfisted dealers (amongst others) who even in recent times seem not averse to holding coins with finger contact to the fields, or by dropping them, or by allowing staple scarring, etc. IMO, there is no absolute accounting for taste or rightness or wrongness of these slabs.

Rob, I think that sometimes we see a PCGS58 and that it is reflecting a more technical grade so that especially on an older coin which may have had a rather poor strike and be hammered, as opposed to milled, with actually only minimal wear/friction to the resultant coin achieve the 58. When the coin is graded by how much detail remains on the coin that it may come out as a VF only. That having been said, I have had more that a couple of disagreements with their grade number on more recent milled coinage and feel that the coin obviously must be considered on its own merits as opposed to putting too much stock in their number as you have said before.

Now I have seen the 1987 Cayman Islands set and the 50c and $1 kept the same reverses, complete with the Franklin Mint monogram mintmark. I would guess, but have not seen, that the 1988 set coins of the same denomination will also bear the FM mintmark.

That was you that profitted? Congratulations, and I mean than!

Caveat emptor, and I agree with what has been said but will add that I have bought from him going on the coin itself and not the plastic. His plastic, but not grading, is on par with NGC (do not get them confused!).

Hussolo, great pics as usual and thanks for elucidating. It would have been strange that two would all of the sudden show up (though that is what happens with hoards after all)...