VickySilver

Well, there were soom missing bits in the date and variety runs and think they will be in the Part 2 portion of the sale.I will not be competing as it just happens that upgrades I am looking for are not there, so strike off one other competitor.

Wow, all this makes the purchase seem to be a two thumbs down proposition...

Hiya, thanks as to the value thoughts. What about scarcity? I know the 1860s are prohibitively rare, these likely not quite so.

I noticed that in the last Heritage Sale at the ANA in Boston that there was a proof(64) 1839 Isle of Man Half Penny on sale that ultimately fetched $1150 with "the juice"/commission. Is this a rare coin, as I had not seen it previously, and I wonder what the value would be in merrye olde Englande? A bit out of my area but wondering if any readers had knowledge or thoughts with regards to this.

Ah, yes, Roland Harris was the name I remembered...

PS Have always loved these 1934 crowns and had a hoard of three (LOL), now down to two. Do any readers recall who it was that was hoarding this date - I think he (she?) was the source of so many coming to market in the last 3-4 years.

Well packaging and associated "goodies" are fun, but sure a pain when it comes to storage. I always hope that the authentication letters, etc. be preserved but this is separately of necessity and there is risk of loss. This brings to mind the dangers of TPG grading, slabs, and losss of provenance. I got an ex-Norweb piece at London auction and it was NOT identified as such. Sorry, did not mean to pirate the thread...

Looks to be a 50 pound coin (at best), poss. specimen but even this might be in doubt as a little wheelwork with a buffer may bring this appearance.

I am thinking 1100-1200 but only a guess. I do like this date, and considerably more than many of the bunheads that have been going crazy pricewise of late.

So what is the bid going to be that wins?

I second that opinion; question is, what is fair value as I think that is near value at current bid?

Yes, interesting post. I have found the 1915 & 1916 in well struck unc. with lustre a challenge as well and rather settled with what I have in the pursuit of the rarities. I always like an 1918 or 1919 of any mint well struck with pleasant lustre as well.

Darn, will have to ask the seller for a new picture. I think this is the chance I have been waiting for, and a starting bid of only 5k is the bargain!

Pretty nice strike, esp. the reverse. Bit of contact on Georgie's hair but attractive overall; I should think 400 pounds equivalent might have been slightly high but 460 euros a good price in my book. Love nice 18/19 H & KNs well struck and preserved!

AU58 (GEF) 1845 1/2 sov. @ 220 pounds - ebay ~4 yrs ago MS65 Gem Unc. 1841 1/2 sov @ 400 pounds - this coin with tremendous luster - ebay ~also 4 years ago.

Not to butt in but this is why the grading services such as PCGS have good value in certification.

Ugggh, only fair, but scary what it should reach given the levels reached by, well, the imposters of 1863 and 1877...OK, relax, just kidding?!?

I believe that an '82 London mint specimen in aEF (gVF?) sold for in the neighborhood of 2.8k some 4-5 years ago. My point is that such a coin should draw much more interest that a narrow date 1877 at twice the price (or even up at 6k). BTW, what grade on the upcoming Spink 1882 London piece?

I too feel genuine, but there do look to be some issues with the cheek and I think with the flash that a bit of the contacts that would downgrade it are disguised. Will have a look at my own in an hour or two...

BCC - that is a lot of excitement going on there with you. Easy, easy... That having been said, I confess to being a Vicky copper nut and especially for pennies. I have spent some money on specimens before, including "eye raising" amounts for certain coins (not without a lot of study first however). I would be much much much more impressed with big prices for a date and mintmark rarity such as the 1882 London mint penny = that coin in EF or better ought to lay absolute waste to this narrow date 77 or that 1863 penny. I am not in the least jealous of the purchaser and glad if they want to collect esoterica, especially if they are less keen on date rarities; it absolutely reminds me of the lunacy in the State over paying multiples for higher grade "condition rarities" that fit into a census set. Collecting by die state is another hot one - collect coins from the same die that show its deterioration. Mmmmmm, mmmmm, those are some interesting collections.

Yes, well the fact that ESC records die numbers as high as 262 does not mean that ALL numbers up to that have been recorded. Although I dearly love the Vicky silver series and might know a bit (except when Rob catches me out!) the collecting by die numbers has eluded my interests and can not speak as expertly as with other areas...

Hi, can you post pictures = it was my thought that die numbers were dropped prior to 1883

Excellent point there. In fact I had left that bit out about use of Maundy dies; not sure but a strong likelihood that dies were used interchangeably to some degree. I think people (including myself) were very intrigued at the low mintage of currency 3ds struck duing these years. To further support your point: I have seen 1853 Maundy sets (not proofs) go for 600-800 pounds over the last 1-2 years. Still certainly not ridiculous when compared to the "slender 3" madness on the bunhead pennies I would say, not that it excuses the 3d "controversy".

Ah yes, controversy arises again on these boards, even if of a lesser magnitude. I would beg to differ in opinion and am of the opinion that most high grade 3ds from earlier Victorian years are Maundies and that in particular 1839 through 1860 or so are VERY scarce if of currency type. The problem is that not all Maundies are prooflike, and many have been struck with cracked dies & lettering errors, etc. Also the obverses may not "match" the reverses as dies appear to have been utilised in multiple years. Some Maundies were definately struck with satiny surface dies which make them resemble currency strikes; reverse strike details and sharpness have sometimes helped to differentiate between the two. I have disagreed with the attribution of many 3ds that have been encapsulated by TPGs - third party graders - in the USA. Be highly suspect of Maundies sold as currency in the years 1839 - 1844, 1846-1848, 1851-1853 in particular as they are almost always NOT. Well, will not exhaust this but welcome any other opinions.