1949threepence

The full stop between the "REG" and the "FID" looks odd. Something gone wrong there. Also, there appears to be some false lettering underneath the Queen's chin. Not sure what that is. The streak above the "R" of "REG" is presumably a light anomaly from the camera shot. Send it to the Royal MInt for an explanation, maybe. With it being so recent, they really should know.

I see your point, Rob. But whilst natural attrition of those well known celebrities now in their 60's and 70's, is to be expected, it would be more normal to anticipate these over a longer term, and to crop up from time to time. What marks 2016 out from the rest, is the sheer volume of deaths concentrated into a very short period, timewise. Of course, 2016, like any other year, is essentially an artificial construct. So logically, you wouldn't necessarily see a sudden decline in deaths the moment 2017 starts.

New Year soon. Let's hope there will be fewer celebrity deaths in 2017, than this year. Truly bizarre.

Are they a bit thick in Rotherham?

It's a fact that most of the pre 1860 years have a low mintage, and are notably much cheaper coin for coin, than the bun penny era. The obvious expensive exceptions being 1837, 1843, 1849, 1856 and the 1860/59. Easier to obtain in good - though not necessarily - top grade as well (no washers) as they were demonetised in 1869, so never really had a chance to wear right down, unlike the post 1860, many of which were circulating for over a century,

Well Pete, I've not actually started yet. But I'm approaching the end of what I can meaningfully obtain in the 1860 to 1901 series, so I'll be turning my attention to the young head soon, and to the post 1901 era.

Possibly, although judging by the appearance, it would be the wrong way round. Or is it an 8?

I think there's also some shadowing due to the light striking the figures at an angle, which is slightly distracting. As above, the fourth figure could well be over a 7, but the third is a mystery.

Interesting. The last two do also look like an overstrike of sorts has occurred, but over what, I don't know. I don't think it's a year flagged up for halfpenny overstrikes.

Well you don't know yet. There may be a complete collection of them making an appearance in due course. Let's hope so.

Seriously though, how can anybody write such (scuse my French) effing crap as this, and imagine it won't be spotted:- Beggars belief.

I think he's tooled off the H to the left of 1927 - cheating bastard

He's probably forgotten that the smaller portrait only started in 1928.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all

Oh sure, but LCA are saying it's the finest 1862 small date they've handled, which isn't true.

Yep, some crackers there. Although I don't agree that the 1862 small date is the finest they have handled. The ex Freeman, ex Bamford specimen, offered for bids at the March 2016 auction was somewhat better, but didn't sell at the auction itself. Because of that it isn't shown on their past auction realised prices, but here it is at the Bamford auction.

For what it's worth, and it's nowhere near the quality of Brian's, here is a pic of my 1975 reverse, for comparative purposes. Unfortunately it's quite toned and is actually the worst affected of my1975 coin set. The "1" is obviously more akin to Brian's No 110 above.

Here's a reasonable close up of one - the 1985 proof set 20p - which shows the effect of frosting relief against the mirror like field. It's only a rough one, as I found it really difficult to avoid glare through the casing. Hopefully Brian can do better than me.

The difference being that with frosted, all those parts of the coin other than the field, have a sort of perfect matt finish.

Crikey, I'd have bought it myself for £1350, and kept it together with the (apparent) provenance.

Interesting. I've got all the sets from 1970 to 1990, and on mine the frosting starts on both sides from 1980. Prior to that there is no frosting on either side. But of course, that's only my sets. There may well have been some frosting of earlier specimens as well.

Much less tendency to tone on the frosted ones, I notice. Not sure why that is.

I'd agree with that. If I found one, I wouldn't want to keep it, but I would be interested in getting any money on offer.

Those are ballpark snapshot odds at any given time. Actually they would be greater than that, given the number of new fivers produced. But probability theory suggests that over a longer period of time, if the remaining three are still not located - or more probably forgotten about, by those who were even aware in the first place - those odds gradually lessen as you have endless opportunities to look. It certainly won't do any harm to keep an eye out, it's a bit of fun, and unlike the lottery, it's totally free and can be done at any time !

What the hell kind of photography is this "Masterpiece" ? - I mean, c'mon, you're 'avin a larf my son