1949threepence

Yes, in an ideal world every point of view would be taken into account. But the nature of a referendum is to take a snapshot view at a given point in time, from those who are able and willing to vote. That's their very essence. There was a referendum in 1975 to confirm us staying in the then Common Market. I don't imagine too much thought was given then to the 33% who voted against, nor to those who didn't bother voting. Nor to those too young to vote at that time, or to those (including me) who were not yet born. As far as those who for whatever reason decide not to vote when they could do, I've got no time. Their opinion is the least important as they have passed up their opportunity of their volition. For those of a younger demographic who feel their opinion is more important than anybody else's - sorry, no. Democracy is based on every vote being of equal value, with no vote or group more important than anybody else's. To stray away from that principle is to go down an extremely dangerous path. One which essentially compromises democracy and would cause deep resentment among some, and an artificial feeling of self importance among others. For those who were too young to vote in 2016, well hard luck. Again, a referendum takes that snapshot view at a given point in time. How else can it be done? In conclusion, we were told that the result of the referendum would be honoured, and people voted in good faith based on that. If that result was not to your liking, then in democratic spirit you should bow to the majority will. To now see the current shambles in parliament caused by a bunch of mainly remainer MP's manifestly hell bent on stopping brexit, is appalling. Puffed up with their own arrogant self importance, they clearly are quite happy to "piss all over" the majority of voters in that 2016 referendum. Not my expression by the way. I heard it today at work in connection with the same topic, and thought it was quite apt

That's obverse 2. So if it is reverse B, it's a F177.

Another looming issue concerns the possibility of it soon being too late to organise polling cards and stations in time for the EU elections if we do get an extension. On the news this morning (Radio 4).

Hmmm, their actions may have been within the letter of the law, but certainly not in the spirit of it.

Thanks gents. Some poor unsuspecting individual might well have fallen for that one. I wish auction houses would do their homework a bit more thoroughly. Seems they just accept the vendor's word for it.

I've only got one memory of Neil Kinnock, and that was when he tripped on the beach. Was it during the 1992 election campaign?

I'm not convinced this is a Freeman 112, 1882 No H, as touted by DNW. I don't think it's obverse 11 as the nose is not hooked. Thoughts?

Doesn't really inspire confidence that they had to resort to calling the police, rather than treating a dissatisfied customer with some modicum of respect. Just looked up his terms and conditions - link to Apparently items are sent on seven days approval - which kind of runs counter to "add to cart" and pay at exit. So the 7 day approval thing is not well flagged up. I think if I do see anything else that might be of interest, I will e mail and ask for it on approval in accordance with their conditions. ETA: I missed this bit at the bottom of the page "we can provide a refund for returned coins" - note: not "we will except for damaged returns":- Craigy - maybe you should have asked him to call the police and have them meet you at the premises, because it sounds to me as though they were going against their own guidelines in your dispute. Presumably you were within the requisite 7 days and wanted your 50p's back?

You're right. A list of the members can be seen here Their name isn't amongst them. I note you do have to be proposed by two existing members.

What was wrong with the coins, Craigy, and why wouldn't they accept them back?

Pete, I think the difference is that although Dave C doesn't do photos, you can trust his description of the coin, which is always correct. With Ingram & Ingram, you can't rely on the written description, so need a photo. You then can't rely on the photo.

To be honest I'm so irritated by the arrogant way parliament have behaved over this matter, I'm really beginning to hope that the EU reject any further extension, and that we're left with either immediate acceptance of the deal, or immediate revocation of article 50 - and zero further time to decide. If no acceptance or revocation by 23:59 our time on 12th April, then that's it, we're out for good. Final and absolute deadline. I think I'm very far from alone in this view. I know if I was them, that's what I'd do. "Your call UK, we can't go on pussyfooting round you forever."

Mostly "on approval for 7 days". That's how Dave Craddock runs his business. No pics, just an e mail list. Handwritten invoice. Whatever its limitations, it seems to work well, and I've bought several coins this way from Dave. ETA: But I should add that Dave is a totally different guy to those two characters at Southampton. For a start the description would have included an accurate grade, the Freeman number (if a bronze pre-decimal) and be very fairly priced. Also amenable to a phone call where he speaks with considerable knowledge.

I hope they do - clean break divorce. Bumpy road at first, but we'll get over it.

Marked "comprehensively shafted"?

So May's deal defeated again, albeit by a further reduced majority, but parliament won't accept a no deal brexit. So back we go to the EU, cap in hand once again, to seek what will this time be a much longer extension wholly on their terms. Plus having to field candidates for the June EU elections. So much for democracy.

Interesting. Thanks for the link. There's a very reasonably priced EF 1849 penny, albeit slightly damaged, and a gorgeous plain 4 1864 penny - probably the best plain 4 1864, I've seen. Expensive mind, but you wouldn't expect anything different for such a choice item.

It's bizarre isn't it? Given they obviously have a huge stock on their hands, you'd think they'd at least make a better effort with photography, as well as dealing more effectively with customer queries. I never mentioned the other e mail exchanges. It would appear that Michael Ingram doesn't do any of the photography, since enquiries made on a Friday night result in him replying with a promise that Rendel will do it Monday. But at least he is polite and friendly. Conversely, Rendel is abrupt, doesn't start off an e mail with "Hi" or "Dear (whoever), and his messages are short and terse.....which would be OK if he even bothered to read what you asked for, and reply accordingly. I don't need friendly if people do their jobs competently, but he fails at that too. Initially, they had listed three 1908's, including a slabbed version, and two 1913's, including a slabbed version. They clearly hadn't any idea of the Freeman No's, so Rendel initially sent me two pictures only, of the five requested. They were the slabbed ones. Then when I queried that, he sent me the picture shown above. When I pointed out that the first was a 1903, I received this reply from Michael:- I rest my case. I did eventually get a "sorry" and a pic of the correct coin, which was a 166. In fairness and to balance the sheet, I should just point out that I've also actually bought a few very nice coins from them which I've been well satisfied with.

Chris was replying to Rob's post, which itself had quoted and commented on Chris's standalone post above. I've already stated above why he might reply the way he does - a point which you completely ignored. Now when he has written a standalone post and he responds to the poster replying to it, you're still having a pop at him. What's your problem?

Recently I noticed a couple of 1908's and a 1913 offered for sale on Rendel's site, not photographed and not with a Freeman number. I asked what Freeman types they were, and instead got photos, and this is what I got. One of them is a 1903, and the picture quality is appalling. Not only is the 1903 the wrong date, but in addition, he couldn't even be bothered to take it out of the plastic holder.

Agreed. It is a great shame.

Agreed. As one of the big three, our voice would always make a difference. The problem is that the UK has always acted a bit like a petulant rebellious schoolkid. Rather than a fully fledged member on the inside, with worthwhile ideas to discuss. At any rate, that's the way it's always come across.

Problem being, of course, that nobody is able to come up with anything better. Also, as we saw last night, not even anything out of 8 possible indicative votes, that any of them can agree on.

It's actually a shame that they aren't all issued as a currency strike - some with very limited number. Now that would encourage collection in the years to come. By the way, that Wedgwood design is a particularly attractive one.

I wonder if they received a complaint, Jon, and are just altering the landscape of new additions. Don't know. 100% agreed.