VickySilver

NOT! He has got to be kidding. An interesting combo, but errors just don't bring that even in the US of A. I can see that as a max 2k quid coin that I would go maybe to 500 on.

Likely cleaned/dipped without obvious hairlines which usually means market-acceptable. Pleasant appearing coin there.

I just bought an upgrade MS64 1882 for about 500 pounds, and it was a nice specimen... Anyway, the later Young Head 2/6 are overpriced IMO in Spink (1874-1887), even for nicer specimens; sometimes I think they just put an automatic ratchet on the prices of certain cons. Anyway, Let Peace Reign gentleman.

Postscript: I did manage to secure the 1853 groat from the recent Heritage sale but yet to have it in hand. Graded NGC45 but actually looks a bit nicer, if slightly toned, and comparable to the nicer "currency" Placsom coin above. Yay! The pattern of Mr. Fass would be exceedingly rare & I think two of those have shown in the last 10 years or so - at times that I just couldn't compete. Interesting to see what competition for such a coin would lead to price wise.

I'd like to see some more details, though the 1839 pleasant.

Wow! A beautiful coin. I've left these alone entirely (along with the 1 1/2d, and the 2d)....

Weigh the halfpenny please. I believe it should be just under 5.7 gm (maybe 5.5 or so with some wear) and not much less; less would mean likely smoothing down of the reverse with metal loss.

Also have seen such baked with aluminium foil!

I like that newly coined (LOL) "spurious damage" there SS!

Ha ha, funny. Looked through there - nice 1862 but the key 1848 & 54 really not up to snuff. Sorta feel like doing a "beat down" as this is the heart of "my territory" but will stay out of the fray....

Pretty well struck and PL surfaces. Rim not super sharp. There are some very proofy looking currency strikes from this era however. Can we see the obverse?

Wow, sounds like a watching affair with all that competition; too bad they are not live on the 'net!

Don't think they would be listed separately from all other sovs in specie payment. I am still not sure that these are not just a bit more common than thought and IMO overpriced in the current market. Let's not forget the counterfeits out there as at least one discussed on these boards. Romance is fine, but a bit fantastical so I think it hard to ascribe a lot of value to a coin even if it had been touched by the great Lawrence. These are but coins after all.

Yes, believe it was DNW by recall. Rob is the man for this sort of thing - even though my area! I can assure you that the price would have been multiples if the buyer was challenged (not me).

Looks very much like proofs I have seen, mine is plain edge though not as brilliantly toned; the edges look about typical - I have not seen these to be knife-edged. I really would not rule a coin in or out by orientation, even if one is seen as the norm. It is true that there are currency Vickies of this era that can be very prooflike, especially the 6d and shilling denominations but think at least by the photo that this one does not appear objectionable. Hate to say it, but I just can not get myself to count milling & the "third face" or surface is important in an exclusionary sense I suppose. I tend to favour the denticle and edge configuration with respect to this. I like to look at details of the bust and strike of the rev. crown and leaves as well....blah, blah.

Wow, interesting in that it has been circulated more than most....@100 quid, I'm in. Well, don't need the date so somebody else should report on their success.

Interesting, I guess to me if the coin leaves the die without an "H", that it is a "no H" regardless of how that got to be; if somehow it could be pinned by some other method to either London or Heaton. It should be interesting to see if finally another die pairing may gain acceptance as a "no H".

Please see citation of US 1922 cent "no D". I guess my point is that besides there being numerous examples with interesting appearances in the location of where the H would be, I have heard of many being summarily dismissed because of the die pairing only - IMO, not good science or logic. That having been said, I quite agree a jaundiced eye must be turned to each claimed specimen and a high level of certainty be obtained before accepting it.

Second paragraph typo: if all accepted 1882 "H"s should read as "no H"s.

Yikes, I know Bernie et al get a bit upset as I say this but I don't see how we can be sure "no H" 1882s were not struck with other die combos. And whether the coin was struck in Heaton without the requisite "H" or London correctly with no mintmark would seem to be somewhat moot unless one attempted to match with metallurgy (even then would be a problem as I recall that planchet blanks derived from different sources). The coin would be a "no H" in either instance. If all accepted 1882 "H"s came from one particular die combo, it would seem logically to indicate that those are "no H" specimens but do not preclude another, or even multiple die combination(s) - though it does seem a bit farfetched; the point being that a particular coin or its brethren from the same die are what they are and do not directly exclude other possibilities. Another interesting bit are examples in other series such as the 1922 US cent with "no D" that in fact was a Denver mint product wherein it was said the die was filled but evidently was struck by different dies!?!

SEM - scanning electron microscopy. Linus Pauling many years ago used to use this showing white cells ingesting viruses & the like, but can be used on larger objects at lesser mag. The University near me wanted to charge 350 quid for the service. There should be other imaging technology though.

Or not, don't think they're quite like quads....

A lot of secrecy, well no big deal it is his or her business. I don't recall Colin Adams or Ms. Norweb having any issues with his & her coins. A well-known collector (as opposed to investor) might have a reputation and therefore provenance that would add to value reached at time of sale IMHO.

Uh, well, that depends. For my six year old, he is not..... Anyway, glad to see a few leaning my way with respect to "hypervarietals" - even though I have a few varieties.

55ish - EF 75 - that sov is very nice, although date not rare - could go 78 75 - looks dipped but not quite removing all the oxidation on reverse, otherwise unc. How much are they charging for submissions now? Best of luck!