VickySilver

For some reason I like the off metal strikes like the 10p struck on a 2p planchet & such...

Dave, I think that may be a bit of an optical illusion in that the edge or "rim" portion that is clipped makes it appear to reverse clip curvature.

Not a lot of value I would think. I got a bunch of these in diff. denoms and some with multi-clips that I got in a lot. Bleh...

Too much crystal meth about methinks to call in "metho"....LOL. Think I might shy away from paper towels and the like with all the sulphurous compounds used in processing the paper. I still recommend the clean white towel with good nap (i.e. not old and scratchy).

Wow, 900 for that '25. Not this collector! There are much nicer 1912s about as I've said & the grade is perhaps "fair for wear" even with the dearth of aesthetics...

I do it to nearly all my coins, just make sure it is pure. Also, I tamp rather than rub with Q-tip or high nap white cotton towel. Interestingly, a totally different solvent is ammonia but this is a lot trickier - this has helped me on copper nickel better than the acetone - not used it on copper bits at all. I kind of laugh when someone lets a coin sit in acetone and evaporate the solvent - just relayers the crap back on it!

Unslabbed, though a slightly scarcer date, this coin would languish in a dealer's tray. Much nicer available strike wise and wear/damage, but even these don't draw a lot of interest. Perhaps CGS are trying to drum up a near non-existent market.

I know of a 1920 pattern half penny, ex-Nicholson, in nickel as well as the 1923 nickel 3d that were all struck to a currency/matte (but NOT proof) standard. The Model Obverses of the 1920s and 1937 also range from currency appearance to light matte mostly, a few more definite.

I agree with Rob that the consignor is all important when it comes to grade, even and despite the protestations of blind grading. One really interesting example is when it comes to matte proof grading, both the "Standard year" 1902 and the much rarer mattes of years like 1926, 1927, 1937, 1951 and 1953. The '02s were nearly all rubbed by mint workers with some sort of cloth evidently and show hairlines to smaller or greater extent. How much is deducted for these varies tremendously by PCGS and NGC in my opinion. I have also seen in the later much scarcer bits some ridiculous grading, both high and low. Another example is with 19th C proof gold and silver where the buyer needs to really look at the coins - I have seen lowly 62s clearly better than 64s (see for example, 1853 proof florins and half crowns, or even the 1862 & 1864 proof half crowns). Caveat emptor!

Quite, key word "general". I can think of at least one expert who agrees with my thoughts on this issue - unfortunately to remain unnamed at this juncture. I think it quite right that people buy coins based on slab or history and not de facto the coins themselves.

In my opinion it is somewhat dangerous to rule out the existence of a particular piece(s) based on characteristics of the opposite side of coin. IMO, not strictly logical. We have pieces confirmed with obv 11 and then other pieces evidently not tampered with that are obv. 12 that seemingly show "no H". I just do not see how we can be certain that obv. 12 dies may not have been used in a few instances. I do however agree that an increased level of alertness should be the case in the event of an obv 12 specimen.

Looks plugged to me as well. The OP coin looks to be rather high relief with well struck devices, but not my series.

Especially 5 guinea pieces! Nada for me there; it seems I remember many of these pieces almost as old friends...

The ordinary 2015 Britannia lost a bit of the reverse appeal with the "pebbly/rough" background IMO. I liked the last Proof 2014 Britannia complete with Pipa Middleton (sp?) rendition of Britannia.

Ah yes, well you answered my question. Interestingly, I was able to get the '99 set from BoJ but they did not seem to know anything about anything which was a bit of a shame. I actually have an extra 2000 set I have aside for you if we can figure an economic way to get it to you.

Very good! Since I posted I was able to obtain the '97 set, which I believe is probably fairly rare. I have been looking for the 2002 set which I believe to exist as well. The '02 crown was sold on eBay earlier this year and I missed it. BTW, have you seen any of the matte 1975-77 issues - either gold or copper-nickel? Feel free to PM me any time you 'd like as these are something of a sidelight for me....

Oh, can't we go more back to coins and the market and what may or may not be going on with the Bunhead market. There may in fact be only a few buyers at the top of the pyramid (at least as far as prices paid) with saturation point possibly reached even with nicer coins such as the proofs or '64s starting to lag a bit....??

Uhhh, those were top flight coins off of the Spink Numismatic Circular in their absolute heydey. These were and are superior coins, just high priced IMO.

Yikes, those coins would have gone for maybe 40% that even in the Heritage sale!

Meanwhile, nicer Bunheads like the 1864s and some proofs of that era and later languished. How deep is the market for top end pennies?

I would imagine there to be some adjustments coming. One thing I noticed is that they ran through the lots with rapidity, without fanfare or announcements save for the above-mentioned Una.

With the "juice", an evidently nicer specimen of the famed Una and the Lion went for over 250,000 Dollars at Heritage yesterday. As usual fancy gold bits went high, and copper relatively languished with multiple Lots unsold. The 1851 florin, which sadly I guess I will never own went for about 25k USD by memory. Interesting that Colonial bits such as New Zealand in many instances went for less than half low estimate or went unsold. Reserves/starting prices on many lots seemed very high in many instances IMO.

I will have to post the currency A4 although its on loan at the moment. I bought it in the UK some years ago, complete with a flowery description by the seller who I gather had been a collector, proclaiming it as the "discovery piece". Honestly I don't even remember what I paid for it!

Hope you were able to get that lot. I have an "ordinary" Maundy 3d of that date in satin variety. I guess I wouldn't necessarily have thought of Heritage for an obscure varietal.

Wow, nice bit of research there Nick. That looks Maundy to me as well. So that seems to support that there are Maundy. The Heritage bit does not look quite as nice as the DNW piece which ended up not selling in 2012 but did sell as Lot 580 in March of 2013. Can you give away the trade secret as to your search function?