1949threepence

He certainly doesn't like full stops, does he.

Just as a matter of interest, the 1881H I ordered from Colin Cooke, arrived yesterday while I was down town. £5.50 special delivery item, just chucked in the porch and the "signed for" delivery strips all intact !!!

You might need to put in a late snipe. The auction finishes on Sunday night, and it's already at £101.00. I wouldn't be surprised to see it finish at well over £200, despite its rather worn state. But that's rarity for you !!!

You might want to take a punt at this one

Definitely an open "3", and as Peck says, one of the better examples. A really nice specimen would fetch well into 4 figures, I'd imagine. But it's finding one in the first place. Anybody ever seen one above VF ?

Whilst I would agree with Rob in most cases, I'd also say that if you are looking at pre 1920 halfcrowns, some are prohibitively expensive ~ the 1905 halfcrown, for example. As a general rule I go for at least EF, but settle for VF in the case of the rarer coins. Even some of these are woth a lot of money. For example a 1903 halfcrown is worth about £450 in VF. It's even worth about £150 in fine. Just as a final note, with this series, do beware of fakes. If it looks too good to be true, then it may well be just that

I seem to remember them being offered at a low price via adverts in the papers around 1997 to 1999. Forget who was selling them, but the ads were full page size. You could get more or less any date you wanted. It'll be interesting to see how it all pans out in the end.

When the price of gold crashes, as it inevitably will in time and with significant economic recovery, forming a collection of sovereigns is high on my list of priorities. It's a waiting game.

Have been doing as you advise and looking out for threepenny pieces, and saw this on fleabay. He's offering dates from 1952 - 1971. Were any produced in 1971 just a few months before they ceased to be legal tender? If so, that's a tad short sighted I would have thought. As the others have said, Phil, the Elizabeth II threepences, run from 1953, continuously, up to and including 1967, with a 1970 proof version. None were minted in 1968, 1969 or 1971. Personally, I wouldn't touch the particular set offered in your link. They're unlikely to be in especially good nick, and aren't shown. You're better off buying single pieces where you can inspect the individual item offered, in greater detail. Some of those 1950's date can be surprisingly tricky to locate in uncirculated condition, especially the 1957 & 1958 in my view.

Thanks for that link 1949 - though the webpage is very poorly written! Interestingly, they don't mention the Edward VIII 3d bits, nor the 1952 halfcrown or 1954 penny, which are famously rare too. It is poorly written. I thought that as well.

Whatever speculative theories are propounded in an attempt to address this question, the truth is, we will never ever really know the answer. Maybe the question should be approached from the angle of why the monarch of the day opened buildings before 1933 and subsequently, without (necessarily)a full set of coins, or indeed any coins, being buried under the foundation stone. Whose idea was it in 1933 ? ~ the King himself, his advisors, or the Royal Mint ? According to this link it was the King himself ~ although how they presume to know that is anybody's guess.

Maybe, like so many things, it was just a fad which arose in that year, never to be repeated. A sort of Royal Mint "one hit wonder".

It is fishy, I agree. The fact they have exactly the same text, definitely implies some connection between the two. Precisely what that is, has yet to be determined. Weirdly, the only item "dsrasiah" currently has for sale, is that sovereign. Maybe, as John indicates, the account has been compromised in some way. The feedback shown indicates that he normally sells computer parts. Yep, very pleased with it as well. Nice item. Have you posted an in hand pic Mike? No Dave, I haven't ~ unfortunately, not being a seller, I don't have the wherewithal to take coin pics.

It certainly makes them look greedy. On "Countryfile" recently, they featured a piece about "night hawkers". These are detectorists who roam private land in the dead of night, without the permission of the landowner, in the hope that they will find something valuable enough to take away and not have to share with the landowner. Something else that's giving them a bad name.

Another point ~ when you do sign for them, either at the door or Post Office, I don't much like those hand held devices in which you sign on the screen. It's never a proper signature, and just comes out like an illegible squiggle. There isn't even enough room to fit a reasonably sized signature into. Even the use of the hand held device is inconsistent, as some of the time, they still produce a paper pad to sign on, at the side of the sticker.

I actually posted a thread about this self same topic a year or so back. My service has been mixed. Some recorded and special delivery items are just shoved through the door, even with the delivery strips intact. Others are treated properly and taken back to the Post Office for me to collect. I did have a word with one of the more reliable postmen a few months back, and he told me that if posties were happy with the security of the item ~ ie: posted through a locked and secure door ~ they will sometimes sign for it themselves and post the item through the door. Notwithstanding that, there is no way that the "signed for" strips should all be left intact. If they are all still there, then the unscrupulous buyer has an open goal in claiming they have not received the item.

It is fishy, I agree. The fact they have exactly the same text, definitely implies some connection between the two. Precisely what that is, has yet to be determined. Weirdly, the only item "dsrasiah" currently has for sale, is that sovereign. Maybe, as John indicates, the account has been compromised in some way. The feedback shown indicates that he normally sells computer parts. Yep, very pleased with it as well. Nice item.

They've changed it. Beyonce was there but has now disappeared.... the utterly delectable Snooki is there now. For a chunky girl, she's really got a hell of a lot of sex appeal.

totty? Scuse me, be back in a bit ... Oh VERY nice Mind you, I suspect Ena Sharples would look sexy compared to that "oil painting" Michael Darke (quite put me off my cuppa). Yeah, he certainly hasn't looked after his teeth, has he. I'm assuming the top totty was the gorgeous Beyonce....

It appears that Michael Darke and Keith Lewis have fallen out over how their six figure split of profits from a Iron age coin horde find, declared treasure trove shouls be split between them. Apparently Mr Darke made the initial discovery, and invited Mr Lewis along the following weekend, presumably to help him uncover more. At that point the main horde was uncovered with both in attendance, but Mr Darke is adamant that the bulk of the 50% share should go to him (the other 50% went to the landowner) link here Personally, I'd split the money equally between them. Michael asked for Keith's advice and assistance, and even though he found the first few coins, there's no certainty he would have discovered the rest if Keith had not been in attendance. Michael could have returned alone, and may not have found the rest of the horde. Moreover, with the two of them there, it's impossible to fairly allocate any varying proportion. So 50- 50 seems the most reasonable approach. Such a shame that this sort of thng invariably leads to bitter feuds. Thoughts ?

Not sure about the "GRA", but the missing "I" does look like an error. Haven't heard of any others, but it may be worth looking.

From Wikipedia Isle of Man During World War I the British government interned male citizens of the Central Powers, principally Germany, Austria-Hungary and Ottoman Turkey.[83] They were held mainly in internment camps at Knockaloe, close to Peel, and a smaller one near Douglas. During World War II, about 8,000 people were interned in Britain, many being held in the same camps at Knockaloe and Douglas on the Isle of Man. The internees included enemy aliens from the Axis Powers, principally Germany and Italy.[84] Initially, refugees who had fled from Germany were also included, as were suspected British Nazi sympathisers such as British Union of Fascists leader Oswald Mosley. The British government rounded up 74,000 German, Austrian and Italian aliens. Within 6 months the 112 alien tribunals had individually summoned and examined 64,000 aliens, and the vast majority were released, having been found to be "friendly aliens" (mostly Jews); examples include Hermann Bondi and Thomas Gold and later members of the Amadeus Quartet. British nationals were detained under Defence Regulation 18B. Eventually only 2,000 of the remainder were interned. Initially they were shipped overseas, but that was halted when a German U boat sank the SS Arandora Star in July 1940 with the loss of 800 internees, though this was not the first loss that had occurred. The last internees were released late in 1945, though many were released in 1942. In Britain, internees were housed in camps and prisons. Some camps had tents rather than buildings with internees sleeping directly on the ground. Men and women were separated and most contact with the outside world was denied. A number of prominent Britons including writer H. G. Wells campaigned against the internment of refugees. See also: Defence Regulation 18B The government couldn't afford to take the slightest chance in view of what this country was up against at the time. We were fighting alone until 1941 when both the Soviet Union and then USA joined the war. However convincing they were, "Friendly aliens" could have been spies or enemy saboteurs. They had to be sure before releasing them.

More likely I'd be totally ignored, Peck ~ or an acknowledging grunt at best lol (not that I'm at home anymore) If it was that healthy looking slim postwoman with the blonde hair, that would be a very acceptable option !!! Sadly it's that chubby bald bloke who sometimes "borrows" a few of the coins you get in the post. A bit disappointing, Sion, but par for the course !!!

More likely I'd be totally ignored, Peck ~ or an acknowledging grunt at best lol (not that I'm at home anymore) If it was that healthy looking slim postwoman with the blonde hair, that would be a very acceptable option !!!

Make that 1) Decent photos of both sides of the coin with zoom facility 2) Always have the option of delivery available when Mrs davidrj is out shopping David Indeed ~ I would never entertain a coin where only one side is shown, Almost incredibly, it's often the obverse !!!