1949threepence

It probably isn't, Pete, but it is careless and ultimately a misrepresentation of fact. Above all it's irritating - however, as it's such a tiny amount of money, no harm done. I was half joking about naming the seller, that's why I used the old fashioned term "bounder".

Tough call, Matt. I agree with the others, name and shame this bounder.

Sorry to hear that the venture didn't work out as planned, Declan. I don't think I'd be suited to the corporate thing, either.

This is exactly what I was referring to. Ads interfering with reading and/or posting. Surprised at block not working for you.

How do you tell the difference?

Verd is often quite difficult to spot on photos. It can be mistaken for something else, and vice versa. The F15 I obtained quite cheaply off e bay recently, has a tiny spot of verd on the reverse, which because the seller's photo was so dark, I couldn't see. One of those things.

Actually, to be fair, I think LCA grades quite conservatively. At any rate, I've never seen one that I've looked at and/or been interested in, overgraded. If anything, they go marginally under. Others may disagree.

Another irritating facet of modern life - predictive text. Fortunately the latest phones/tablets will auto "correct" the first time you type in a word it disagrees with. But when you delete the replacement and re-type your original, it will hold, and the next time you start the same sequence of words, it will show your word at the top for selection, having remembered it.

Certainly no urge to look like him. Moreover, how many people would actually know that wearing clothes massively too big for you, was a fashion. As you say, you'd just look like a complete tool wearing them. Can't abide that condescending, sneering leftie rag.

The payment button was probably for a more advanced version. The basic program is usually free. To be honest, that's all you generally need. It just blocks the ads. To be honest, it's a shame, as many forum sites rely on ads to remain subscription free. But the advertisers abuse the software by loading really intrusive ads, which obscure half the page, or start playing a video, unprompted. Or even load another page when you click on the cross which should close them. It's a totally counter productive routine, as all it does is piss off the forum members/readers.

Absolutely. I think I will download an ad blocker app on my phone.

Pete, the screenshot I just posted shows the ad I get on my phone. Whilst I've got no issue with ads in and of themselves, it's when they start to interfere with posting or reading, that they become a bloody nuisance.

I use ad blocker on my PC, so don't get any ads on there. On my tablet I get the ads you mention above, Matt. But on my phone I get an ad for "Confused.com", which gets in the way of my keyboard when I try and post a reply, which is a nuisance. here is a screenshot

There's already a thread on this topic in the "free for all" part of the forum.

If it was just the one, and they'd looked at the lot, rather than stopping at the first one they found, then it's only a 0.08% find rate, and probably quite representative as it was a fair sized sample. Either that, or there were more, but they were so good, they escaped scrutiny.

Congratulations, Neil, and may I extend a big thank you for all the excellent servce you have provided at Colin Cooke over the years. Hope your new role is successful, and fulfilling. Well played. Will Lee now assume the reins at CC?

Tiny pic, yes

Cheers No worries, Matt. As long as it appears, that's the main thing.

Yes, its just great fun, Matt. Not to mention the 1861's. Many rare varieties to collect.

Right, so the title of the series then. Understandable. With such a title, participants are kind of on a defensive backfoot before they even say a word, so I see exactly where you are coming from. Also "investment coins" is looking at the situation from a very mercenary non collector type angle. The job of the producers will clearly be to trip up any coin dealers, so those taking part wll do so with an advance health warning.

What was the title?

Saw it, thanks for heads up, Matt. Very interesting. It appears that a particularly convincing fake has been produced - most likely from China, as the seizure of batches of bi metallic Euro coins was mentioned, after travelling from Shanghai to Naples. The fake coins seem to be mainly, if not exclusively, dated 2011, and are the normal £2.00 reverse design. £2,500 worth of £2 coins were withdrawn from a bank for testing. All passed machine validation for weight, and subsequently 30 out of 30 times in a vending machine mechanism, successfully. However, the two testers decided to sift all the coins by hand. A fake was found - not sure if anymore were, but there are thought to be many in circulation. What drew the attention of the testers to this particular coin was the fact that the obverse was many degrees out of rotation with the reverse. I know we see this on genuine coins from the Victorian era, but these days it shouldn't happen. On closer inspection under strong magnification, the inscription mint mark on the side, was found to be defective compared to the real thing. What made the coins even more convincing was that the weight was very close to the 12 grams it should weigh, plus a minus a few decimal points. However, an x ray machine designed to produce a breakdown of the metals used, revealed a discrepancy. Not a major one, but the genuine one was I think 73% Cu, and the fake 68%, The Royal Mint are concerned, but I'm really not sure what they can do. They did say that a very sophisticated piece of kit would be required to produce fakes of this standard. At the start of the segment, when the presenter held both the fake and a genuine one side by side, I knew instantly which was the fake. Don't ask me how. Could have been a lucky guess, but there was just something about the appearance. I will be keeping a close eye on £2.00 coins from now on, especially ones dated 2011.

OK, thanks Matt. I appreciate your time and trouble. I'll try something else. Hadn't realised imageshack was a problem with forums. Does this show?

So I've done that and I can still see the image. Even more bizarrely I can see it on my phone whilst logged out of PD and there is no possible connection between me and imageshack on there as I use a different e mail address and rely on 4G, not a PC server. I just don't get it, although there has to be a logical explanation.

Will do, Matt. Thanks.