Test Jump to content
The British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

1949threepence

Expert Grader
  • Posts

    8,081
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    262

Everything posted by 1949threepence

  1. Right. Well to cut right to the chase, I don't think I would be disputing anything with the Royal Mint, based on the figures supplied by one of their (essentially) private sub contractors. Nor would I trust anything I saw on e bay. So far I've seen zero evidence that the Royal MInt themselves have given contradictory information about the mintage of this item. Indeed, I can't see any information at all about its mintage on their website.
  2. What I'm trying to get at is where you got your figure of 500 from, initially. Presumably from the APMEX site, and also what exactly the Royal Mint said to you. I can't see any mintages for that piece on the Royal Mint site. Surely the obvious question to ask the RM is why APMEX are using a figure of 500 for the mintage - or have you asked this already?
  3. Your call, but if you are planning to sell, don't forget to acknowledge and thank the buyer. Courtesy goes a long way, if you get my drift
  4. I did wonder how quickly any of them would be found, as the venture wasn't that massively publicised. Articles like the above are also soon forgotten.
  5. Thanks. That looks normal, plus all the 1889's have the same reverse (N)
  6. Yes, I found that one as well. Does APMEX have any link to the Royal Mint itself? They look like a private company to me. So @youliveyoulean is that the site you got your 500 mintage from?
  7. Here's the other one, slightly shaded to emphasise the lettering, and turned to one side. Having compared them with yours, I have to conclude that your example is not quite as it should be. The letter spacing definitely looks different.
  8. Here's one of my 1889's. I was hoping to get them both on, but the saved image only shows the one fully.
  9. Hmmm - the top of the C does look a little squashed up towards the T. Have checked my 1889's and they look more regular. Maybe an optical illusion.
  10. Agree with the others, definitely a die flaw, Rick. Very common in buns, especially the older ones. If it were an overstrike, it wouldn't run up to and cross the linear circle.
  11. Do you have a link to precisely where you got that information from initially?
  12. Thanks a lot, Bob.
  13. Don't think I ever showed any of these three - Freemans 80, 82 & 87 all in very pleasing conditions. The 80 from LCA, the 82 off e bay (was allegedly broken out of an MS65 slab, and I think is ex Alderley) and the 87 from Colin Cooke. All in 2014 when I wasn't really posting to the forum too much.
  14. Oh well, the gender of this seller is as mysterious as his/her written ramblings
  15. The guy - signs himself as Tony, although seller name is Shelly - obviously has major issues with written communication. In the link Jon posted just a few minutes ago, he entitles his worn and overpriced 1926 ME penny, as follows:- What does that even mean?
  16. Well if nothing else, this thread has at least raised awareness of a couple of different high quality cabinet makers. Smokerings and the Italian supplier, Alberto Zecchi.
  17. Thanks. Extremely nice & exquisite craftsmanship.
  18. I've heard this name before, but I can't find him. All I get for smokerings on e bay is this and when I put "coin cabinets" in the search, I just get this and I can't see a mention of smokerings. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong place. Do you have a link, as I'd be really interested in viewing his work? Cheers
  19. Thanks gents. Think the message is to stay well clear of this seller.
  20. What do you guys make of this offering on e bay He is supposedly selling 6 rare 1860 penny varieties, and I do see the F6 & a nice F7, but I don't see an F8. Also I think he's confused with his die pairings towards the end. It doesn't help that the coins aren't shown separately, but are instead on a slide show that seems to move two frames at a time. Moreover, he really ought to have got someone to do the write up, as his English is appallingly bad. Neverthless an interesting and intriguing offer. Not worth £2.5K in my opinion. Leastways, not from what I can see.
  21. I'd say NVF/VF. Also a lot of ding marks on the obverse. I wouldn't buy it if priced at AEF money.
  22. Great find, but whatever is done to it, will never be any great shakes, condition wise. Often the case with rare finds, unfortunately.
  23. They'd be of interest to anybody if they got one lol
×
×
  • Create New...
Test