VickySilver

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)...

Well, caveat emptor.I think you have to look for warning signs and even with apparently none that you may get "caught out" on a few bits. At least in my experience, the good has far outweighed the bad and very happy in balance with ebay.

Yes, quite right with the weighing. That particular coin would not be hurt to much by lightly bouncing it off a wooden surface or even kitchen sideboard,etc. Odd appearance but the worn details incl. rim, etc. not too bad looking from the picture.

Looks plated for sure, but can not tell about the underlying coin. Maybe a couple of other pictures, but coin below pretty dirty for sterling silver.

Well, I will try to find out more about this set. It strikes me that the former librarian to the Royal Mint Graham Dyer may be of assistance and will try to contact him if possible. I believe that the 50c and dollar coins of the following 1987 and 1988 years as the reverse types are unchanged from 1984 and 1986. Not trying to suggest anything but seems a bit of an unholy alliance between the Royal and Franklin Mints - the latter has been castigated for varied business practices and excesses as readers may recall...

For what it is worth, I have noticed basically what Rob has stated - I have not seen these pieces in any state of preservation beyond fair and dates do appear a bit sharp in comparison to the other legend. For some reason, I have seen more of the 1861s and have been tempted to get one even though they "smell" counterfeit, or at least not what I would consider a contemporary piece of any relation to the Royal Mint (ie dies and/or planchets). 300 pounds max would be a price on these to me, certainly not 900. Interesting bit there.

Wow, I had really tried hard to separate colour from lustre and evidently failed. They are actually semi-independent variables.Well, I guess I will let it all rest in any case I do agree with buying the coin for the coin's sake, and hope this CCC Sale of the Workmen pennies comes out well - well could have said "works" out well...