1949threepence

Plus, I'll be keeping the dedicated Copthorne Collection, hard copy catalogue, just received today.

Jon, I have to say that LCA tend to be quite conservative in their grading, such that - if anything - they undergrade.

Had a look. On this occasion I didn't see anything which especially interested me.

Probably, but even if not, I'd bet that Colin Cooke will keep it as a reference, just as they have the Alderley, Crocker, Edinburgh, Workman etc, collections. So that anybody can take a look at them in the future.

Your F77 is superb, Jerry. Really nice looking coin.

Last few days have been superb here in the UK - in the South at least.

Three questions I sent to Neil Paisley, and the answers I got. Very much in line with what we already thought, but at least it's confirmation:- Hi Neil, There are items I am definitely very interested in. But one or two quick questions:- 1/ Can we start bidding now, or do we have to wait until 17th May? 2/ Can we bid lower than the low estimate, or is that a minimum? 3/ When you relist any unsold coins at the low estimate, will there still be a buyer's premium? Thanks, Kind Regards, Michael

Yes, and with regard to lot 85, despite the sparkling description, there are what look like to me, disappointing score marks on the reverse, at 1 o'clock, radiating South Westwards into the field, and to some extent across Britannia. Although I note the coin is slabbed, so maybe the marks are on the slab itself?

Well, the following is the relevant extract from the rules pertaining to the auction, copied from Colin Cooke's website:- The emboldened bit is the most relevant in this regard. So essentially, if you made a bid at 11.59pm on 23rd May, the auction for the item you made the bid on would not close one minute later at midnight, unless you were the sole bidder. If there were other bidders, they would be notified of your late bid, and offered the chance to raise their bid. Obviously, if they declined, the item is yours. If one or more raised their bids above yours, then you and the others, in turn would be re-notified of that higher bid. This process would continue until such time as all but one of the bidders dropped out. Not sure how long would be given between your last competing high bid and the coin being yours, if there were no further bids. That's how I understand it anyway, Jon. Hope it makes sense.

I must say, i do like the sound of this auction. Not the least that the website is updated with the latest bids, and the fact that if your bid is topped, you get informed and can re-bid. Plus, no last second sniping - I'm as guilty as the next man where this is concerned, but in an auction of this magnitude it's absolutely fair that such bids are disallowed, and the auction will continue for such items. Very much looking forward to it.

I must admit, if you have to struggle to spot the difference with the naked eye, I lose interest. That includes whether something points to a dot or space. Although with most proofs, the difference is obvious.

Although F130 is an 1890 currency strike, I see what you mean. I might e mail Michael to see if he can offer any further insight. Thanks Richard.

You've probably got the right idea, Pete. Mind, the one sold in the Elstree, which I unsuccesfully bid on, is a very nice coin.

Thanks Matt - if it's ex R. Harris, it might be one of the ones Gouby doesn't think is a proof. I'll take a look.

He normally does, but the ones I am referring to are on page RH3, towards the back. There are four in total dated1889, one is marked with an A, and the other three with a C. It's two of the ones marked C that he doesn't think are proofs. Not sure if you can help me here, Richard, but I'm not getting a direct translation between the A's and C's shown on page RH3 and the R and r shown against the 1889 proof references on page VP19. Might be me being a bit thick.

Thanks Pete. Being perfectly honest, there really isn't much in that coin to distinguish it from a normal currency strike in GEF and a bit scruffy looking. Maybe it's the quality of the pic, but to me personally, not impressive and not prooflike - link

I wouldn't be now, either. But I'd like to see an actual true F129 "proof" and compare the two, side by side. My specimen against the real proof. Out of pure interest.

I suppose if the opportunity presents itself Pete, then you shell out accordingly.........

This is what is said about Heatons and specimen strikes, by (I assume) Neil Paisley of Colin Cooke with regard to Steve's 1874H Freeman 74 "proof" for auction:-

Link is here Pete. If it's out of sequence, scroll down to Lot No 1070. £60k is amazing, but I thought it might fetch over £50k to be honest.

Out of interest, I bought what was touted as a Freeman 129 in the December 2013 LCA. It's a lovely coin, but after careful examining, and taking account of information from other sources, I don't think it's a proof, but I'm confident it is a specimen strike. In a conversation with Martin Platt about this on facebook a couple of years back, and he too doesn't think it's a true "proof", which he highlights as nearly always having a thicker than normal rim. Moreover, interestingly, when listing the late Roland Harris collection, Gouby disagrees that two of his three 1889 proofs, were in fact proofs - not sure whether 129's or not, as Gouby has his own unique method of classification, and no Freeman equivalent is given on those pages. Anyway, here's the coin I bought as a Freeman 129, Lot No 2166:- Reverse Obverse

I don't think you could ever hope to get the lot, Pete. I'd just be happy to get about 4 or 5 decent ones as examples. Whilst I am a "completionist", I am a practical completionist in that I know there will always be a natural limit to most collections, especially one as variety laden as pennies.

I would like a few more proofs, especially those with provenance going back a long way. An example would be Steve's 1868 copper proof, which goes all the way back to a Glendinning's auction/sale in 1940.

Yep, clearing my browsing history resolved the problem. Thanks guys

But that quality....wow