VickySilver

Top coin will go perhaps 50 pounds. It takes some exotica to go more. I have a uniface 1971 10 P full weight that went for about 60 and a 1981 New Pence struck over a 1953 6d in gem that I bought some while ago for about 175, if memory serves but that coin is a bit more "out there".

I think it will go more than 7k, and there are a few more to add if you get the Heaton coins (40). Also, try finding a mint 1882 London - that is a crushing proposition. If you just pick the most common for each year, then you could get away with the 1882 Heaton; also, mint 1867 through 1871 will bust that price average. Still, fun things to collect & rewarding if you take your time.

Yes, I think that the 1915 and '16 pennies may be a bit tougher well struck and with good lustre than are given credit . The 1917 - 1921 well struck and with good luster are good coins as well, even London Mint. I have had pretty good luck (well maybe a bit of persistence as well) in the penny series so have learned them very well by date and can answer some questions. I DO NOT collect the hypervarietals and let the big fights be fought by others over these bits; a big fight over an "open 3" in VF I just can not see, but more power to those collectors.

Yes, this thread got railroaded just a bit. It did not look like there were universal great prices but it seemed to me at least that a few prices were remarkable: 1956 proof farthing at 1550 plus comission,,,,,what about 1750 or so afterwards seems a pretty big number. 1839 silver proof farthing at 3100 plus fees...about 3600 or so. The later rare but sadly looked to be a bit mishandled. Well, what do others think and/or did they have any wins?

Well responders including me will beg off and say they need to see the coin in hand, but I think that the curiosities of toning include phenomena related to the metal alloy itself (which at least to me appear to be "woodgraining" which is thought to be incomplete mixing of the metals) and the environment in which the coin was in. If the coin initially oxidized in one environment and then was moved and suffered surface friction it could appear as such. Many people think that pennies are copper and therefore red but the alloy is a mix and referred to as bronze by many which may have variably yellow colour in appearance as well.

Russ, I would not get too excited by a bit of metal as planchet and striking flaws of this nature are not special and so would not have added value IMO (in my opinion).

What do readers think of the bidding STARTING at low estimate? It is therefore de facto reserve at that price - I might even prefer an unannounced reserve and see where the bidding takes the prices.

Is this the famous ebay debate coin? I love this date and looks nice!

I am going to predict it goes for 1200 pounds anyway. Well, count me out at that price but I would say a good price at 1k. Legitimate in hand would probably be more like 1500, but could be wrong as I find I am having trouble finding the pulse in this market.

Well, I for one also love these somewhat unloved "VIP" proofs, and have noted that there are also as has been said prooflike specimens extant. Sometimes this can be confusing even to more expert eyes. This is also confused by the fact that there are coins that are definately coins that appear to have been prepared specially and yet not proof although I have seen a bit more of this from the George VI era (1943-1951). From the photos, the obverse appears to have suffered from friction, possibly from cabinet contacts or cleaning. Better quality pictures might be more helpful. As a postscript, there was an interesting discussion of ordinary currency vs. prooflike/specimen vs. proof in the Bowers and Merena Norweb Sale of Canadian from about 1997-1999 era. No definitive answers in there but some interesting points brought up.

And probably the weight being crucial as well. I am out at the moment and so do not have the figure for the correct weight available for now. I have a 1971 10p that is unc. also with only the reverse and it is appropriate weight so these do exist. If it is correct weight, it is possible it was stuck in the strike chamber with another flan and only struck up on the one side. There was a lot of two pennies from the early '60s that was in the Colin Adams' Sale that demonstrated this as well...

Should be interesting, I would hate to even be thinking about going for that 1864 copper! I think this will be one of the "Chinese water torture" auctions that have the potential to be interminable. Good for the seller and the buyer has plenty of time to get his or her coin. It will be interesting to see how these auctions turn out as there may some battles over some of these bits with many collectors (including me) of coins in the penny and farthing series.

Yes, I will try to find a way to get a picture up. I assure you the coin is genuine, and not because (actually NGC) the TPG says so. The undertype is clear, the coin is quite a nice example and the gem classification not unreasonably applied. So, not just on OMS (off metal strike) but clearly struck on the earlier bit. I have been asked to evaluate such esoterica before and difficult to evaluate; in a sense it does not matter as it is not up for sale but then again we tend to have such prurient interests...

Probably will not give the error one above to him for those purposes. Chris, what do you think such a coin might be worth; usually I have a pretty good idea, but it is apparently a one-off and suppose the price would be then dependent on what two (or more) bidders might take it to???

I think in the US, the cotton buds are referred to as Q-tips and some can be quite hard so be careful with friction on these. Presoaking the tip gets them a bit softer but if you've the inclination to rub out that persistant spot, you'd best not. Some spots are just going to be resistant to all but the most aggressive agents but then they leave their mark.

The thing that is interesting is that the 6d date shows up perfectly in the gap in the legend on the overstruck 1 pence. I actually bought it about 4 or 5 years ago from a smaller auction, can't remember at the moment. Rather a sore thumb in a hopper full of copper blanks as it is of course coppernickel with excellent lustre.

Well, what about cases where there is just residual dirt adhering to the surface - would you not clean with mild soap and water at least? I too have a bit of experience and can tell you that copper must be approached with temerity, although mild treatments can be tried. I suggest if you have the time or inclination that you experiment with bits of lesser to no value to see how metal reacts in certain circumstances. A few "pearls": no abrasives no copper magic or other acid dips acetone which is pure should be safe tamping, as opposed to rubbing surface with clean white cotton towel is good way for removal of excess solvent always wash thoroughly with water and then tamp down as the water itself may have harmful electolytes Well, more if you ask.

I wonder if anybody else has either seen or heard of any others. I curently have (NOT FOR SALE) a 1981 New Pence struck over a 1953 sixpence with underdate type and date readable. Coin is gem unc. by US standards, but would likely be by UK standards as well in a PCGS65 tomb/plastic. It may have been oriented on the die on purpose, versus chance alignment because it would have been hard to show the earlier date under the overstrike. Out of curiosity, what do you think it might be worth? Sorry about not being able to show a picture, one day I will figure it out.

Half sov is 4.00 gm of 22k (which is 0.916). If math is right that is 3.664 net gm. versus the 4.16 x 0.900, or 3.74 gm. pure gold....

I did see one some years ago that came up in a Spink Numismatic Circular List that was probably "undergraded" at GEF and subsequently got back a PCGS 65RB and is in their census (or at least was). That coin had beautiful unbroken silky lustre, strike and surfaces that may have surpassed the numerical grade - I believe such a coin would be worthy of a bidding war if it were to come up at major auction.

No doubt a simple error to them, not to us. I think they do not take British coins seriously. These people sell coins for into the 100s of thousands in USD, so a measly 800 pound coin means little to them unfortunately. As an aside, I wonder what a truly nice ME would bring (in numericals, a CGS 85 or PCGS 65)?

Those copper "oxide" states reflect levels of ionization and would reflect generically the state of the copper and not the specific salt such as chloride, sulfide, etc. It is the right general idea, however it is the oxidizing substance that determines the appearance of the surface of the coin with the chloride and chloride compounds giving the familiar green and usually the sulfides that give the "rainbow toning". The anion is not usually oxygen. I do not pretend to be an expert but the reactions can actually be quite complex and many times more than one type going on with respect to the surface of any one coin.

Some have postulated (and I agree) that the problem with fingerprints is not the oil or electrolytes in the sweat directly, but rather the action of bacteria on the oil that generates acidic metabolites that selectively oxidize the contact points from the print.

You can find Vickie coppers and Edward VII as well...

I agree with the bit about having fresh designs, but the logic of reissues being fresh eludes me. Also, probably not too many of these collector specials will be reaching the man in the street (or woman either!).