1949threepence

I must be (expletive) idiot A7351, with this purchase which I made in 2010:-

I am absolutely fed up to the teeth with the whole business. Government and parliament in general have badly let down the country over this one. They're a bloody shambles and a disgrace. The lot of them.

Welcome back Colin. Best of luck in the new line of work.

It does. Objectively clarifies the position. Thanks @Colin G.

I can't pretend to be an expert on coin minting, and certainly not on letter/numeral repairs - which is where the 8 over 6 and 6 over 8 are touted to originate from. But I'd imagine that it might have to do with the attempted removal of the incorrectly punched number, prior to the correct number being stamped.

Well I suppose best described as a thinner line than might be expected - hence wiry. Never heard the expression before though, not as it relates to a coins overdate any rate. In a paradoxical sort of way, I'm actually quite pleased I bought it. It will go nicely in the oddments drawer and could prove a talking point in the future.

It is. They can surely afford high end photographic equipment, together with suitable rooms and lighting. Even hire top drawer professional photographers if necessary. Doing it on the cheap is surely a false economy.

Thanks & sorry Ian. I actually put in an advance e mail bid of £300, knowing virtually for certain that there would be other bids for the same coin, well above the £175 upper estimate. To be honest, even at that, I half expected to fail. I don't get it, Richard. If I can get a half decent shot using my tablet in a basic Heath Robinson way, from an armchair in my spare bedroom, why do large organisations struggle with what is an essential component of coin trading.

Probably not much help, but I don't suppose there's an abbreviations page towards the back of the book, is there? If not somebody on here will know straight off, I'd bet.

So this coin became available again at the latest LCA, and I bid for it, and won it - before I became aware of this thread from a couple or so years back. Lot No 1253: Penny 1861 8 over wiry 6, Gouby AA dies D+d, of the same style as the overdate pictures in Gouby page 41, with the underlying digit similarly positioned, but of a more wiry style Fair My fault for not checking properly. It's obverse 2, not 6 - so it's not a 33A. But whether 8 over 8 or 8 over 6, not certain. Probably 8 over 8 and misattributed by LCA. Still an interesting acquisition either way This is ex Baldwins 3.11.12, Lot 558.

Post contents amended and transferred to the "opinions on lot 558 of june LCA auction - 1861 8/6" thread.

Absolutely Pete. Never a need to upgrade buying something like that.

Very pleased with the 1902 LT (lot 1285) I won at the LCA. True, I did pay over the usual odds for it. But well worth it in my view, as it's about as close to flawless as it's possible to get for a currency strike of that age.

I agree Jon. It's up to the punter what they buy. Stupid yes, but their money and their call, at the end of the day. The only ever serious advice I would ever give is that if you're going to buy chintzy crap, make sure it's gold chintzy crap - at least that will always hold its bullion value.

It's obvious that many lots went unsold over the weekend.

Managed to get through a few minutes ago. They confirmed they'd received my payment and will be despatching the items today. So if you've transferred your payment into their account, you should get your bid wins tomorrow (obviously if you rang up to pay, then you'll already know this, assuming you asked them)

Just realised I received an e mail from LCA this morning and have paid into their bank account - once I'd managed to enlarge the tiny font in the banking details box.

Can't get through to pay. Either engaged tone, or no reply. Bound to be busy though.

I won both of the lots I bid for - first time I've ever won anything at a March LCA

Possibly, although there is a huge difference between obverse and reverse. Difficult to tell from the photo. You could always ask the seller for his opinion. He is a member here although he's not posted for a bit @argentumandcoins

Chinese animal years - this one's (2019) the Pig, I understand.

Seriously though, I think somebody's just added one too many 0's.

I wonder if anyone has ever asked Michael Freeman what he thinks about these "A's" being conveniently added to different types by different auction houses? Maybe it's the toning.......

Well as far as lot 109 is concerned, they say this:- Obviously that will carry considerable weight in terms of provenance. Although neither lot 109, nor 112 look anything other than currency strikes to me. Maybe in hand they might look more convincing. As you say Chris, we must defer to the experts.

There you go, Chris ETA: How are you meant to meaningfully view the item, with those tichy little photos? Also, with lot 116 how do they know it's from 1902 if it's a blank piece of metal? Not sure this is a completely convincing explanation:- A bag of pennies from 1902, doesn't necessarily mean they were all minted in 1902. Not specified that it was a mint bag.