1949threepence

So what happened to the one that was, according to the article, nicked from Leeds? Has it turned up since or is it squirrelled away in a collection only to come to light when the owner dies? I'd bet, the latter. Nearly 40 years ago now. Even so, the "owner" may still be going strong. For all we know he might have only been 18 or so at the time They suggested £3000 in the article ~ does anybody know what it did for for at auction ?

The top bar of the "5" looks palpably shorter on the second (lighter coloured) one.

I wonder if it's kind of an ironic name, like calling a tall guy "Tiny" ?

Well done. Presumably only in fair to fine, though ? Otherwise it would surely have been noticed.

Most of us can only admire a thing of beauty like that, from a long distance.

Yes, but not on bronze. There is/was an odd light greenish tinge on the reverse, in artificial light, to a 1923 a/UNC shilling I bought in August 2009. Leastways it was visible for a time. When I just looked a few minutes ago it wasn't there ~ or didn't appear to be. Definitely not verd, but a overall slight hue. Lord knows what causes it.

Superb bit of luck. Hopefully, we'll get a pic (I think I know who it is as well)

OK, thanks Rob. Good points taken on board.

...and did you ? If so, at the risk of sounding impertinently nosey, what happened ?

Totally agree with Rob & Peck. If it was a rare coin in that condition, and a stamp on it, I'd probably go for it at the reduced price. But with a common date, there'd be absolutely no point, when you could get a perfect one quite easily. With increasing rarity, you can forgive a lot. With abundance, you really can't.

Sorry to be pedantic, but the King died in February 1952, so earlier that same year, as opposed to the previous year

Literally just discovered this thread. Not sure how I previously managed to overlook it, so sorry Rob, if I was one of your forum regular absentees. I've not got that many books as, like Tom, my numismatic interest is perhaps rather restricted. I do have Derek's grading book as well as Dave Groome's 20th century silver book. I also have Freeman's 1985 version, Spinks coins of England (which I hardly ever look at) and a number of coin yearbooks. I did accumulate a few second hand coin books in the early to mid 1990's but when I left home in 2000, my Mother accidentally threw them out. Fortunately I had already taken my collection the previous day !!! I'm definitely going to purchase a Gouby on the bronze penny and Dave Groome's 20th century bronze. I'd also like to get a Peck, although they are horrendously expensive and I'm not sure just how useful they are these days, considering their cost. I do use the internet, but for detailed study I prefer reading from an actual page, rather than a screen.

The box is quite nice, but I wouldn't pay £75.00 for it.

I saw a 1954 last year which had to be a changed date or something else iffy about it, but I have to confess I couldn't see anything wrong with it and nor could the person (a dealer) who showed it to me. It could easily have been genuine. How do we know that is taken from the known coin other than to accept the vendor's word? Can we be certain the 'only genuine' 1954 is actually so? Actually, when it comes to tin foil impressions of coins, Lindt do a very nice SFr5 amongst other things. Yummy. Not sure about that. Whilst there are apparently accurate mintage records available for every other year and denomination, we only ever read that as far as 1954 is concerned, there is "only one known". Not even sure why that was produced or where it is now ~ can somebody enlighten ? Same applies to the 1952, of course.

Surely this is always going to be a problem with untracked mail. If I was a seller, I'd just refund the full cost of untracked low value items going astray in the UK , and insist that UK items over £50, and ALL items shippped abroad, went via tracked mail. In this instance, John, I would't risk negative feedback over such a low cost item sent abroad. Just learn from it and move on. Any rate, right or wrong, that's the way I would personally look at it. I've also gotta say that, although I appreciate how you feel, I don't really think it's helpful to resort to name calling. If you were the buyer, you might be just as annoyed from their angle. How many times do you think a seller should pay up to avoid negative FB? 10 claims this year so far. Regular buyers I have refunded and asked to send the money on if the coin turned up (1 did in Russia yesterday after 3 months!!!). Buyers not known to me have to submit to due process as Ebay/Paypal claim to monitor how many times a buyer claims non-receipt. I will often make an offer to pay half back as a gesture of goodwill and that has been accepted on 2 higher priced lots to the States where the buyers have then gone on to spend quite a bit of money on my website because they appreciated my honesty and integrity (1 of those coins eventually turned up with the buyer who sent on the refund and the other is still MIA since December). The same offer of half was made to this buyer. As for tracked post out of the UK.... Airsure is the only true tracked mail and is only available to a handful of countries. International Signed For is the alternative and once it leaves the UK it doesn't exist. The actual cost for Signed For less than 100gms (almost all coins) is £6.26 in Europe or £6.77 to the rest of the world. Add on my postage costs of 12p for envelope, coin holder and sellotape (not including time to wrap or the diesel required for a 22 mile round trip to the post office) and you can see why I charge £6.50 to Europe or £7 anywhere else. Who among anybody on here would buy a coin for £7 or less and pay the same in postage? I think Peters xenophobic approach to selling is quite understandable. As for the name calling.... as a man of honour I usually meet threats with the offer of extreme violence in return, unfortunately the cyber world means that the 40 yard heroes (people that used to shout abuse from a crowd and then run when I slowed down the car) can now do it in a spineless, faceless and nameless way from thousands of miles away. If I was the buyer I would either have paid for insured mail, taken the offer of splitting the loss, taken the loss on the chin or bothered to see whether or not the seller has a track record of non-delivery and then decided whether or not to submit a claim. As I said though, I am an honourable man.... Hmmm, bit of an impasse then. I can understand your frustration, but inevitably, such problems will always arise, especially with internationally posted items. FWIW my only advice would be to not overreact in your reply to any negative feedback. From any other buyer's POV a conciliatory seller's reply to a buyer's aggressive feedback, always puts the seller on the moral high ground, whereas a eyeballing confrontational one, is very off putting (for me anyway). Buyers always hone in to read those few negative feebacks.

Surely this is always going to be a problem with untracked mail. If I was a seller, I'd just refund the full cost of untracked low value items going astray in the UK , and insist that UK items over £50, and ALL items shippped abroad, went via tracked mail. In this instance, John, I would't risk negative feedback over such a low cost item sent abroad. Just learn from it and move on. Any rate, right or wrong, that's the way I would personally look at it. I've also gotta say that, although I appreciate how you feel, I don't really think it's helpful to resort to name calling. If you were the buyer, you might be just as annoyed from their angle.

Very, very nice, Accumulator

I can't add to the excellent comments above about recognising a 1926, but I can supply some excellent pictures. If you scroll down the page on the link supplied here, which is Tony Clayton's site, you will see large pics of a virtually UNC 1926ME and the two 1926 obverses side by side, as well as illustrations of the other pointers already given above.

Old news! New seller though. Would be a "nice one, Tony", if some poor sap with more money than sense, fell for it.

My first thought was divided between GVF and NEF. Are you buying from a reputable dealer, Dave, and may we enquire how much you are paying/have paid for it. Personally, I'd say it was genuine. Looks like real time wear.

Some very interesting points, and I have to say, Rob, your logic is actually very compelling, dependent on when the ME pennies, were issued in relation to the rest. If they were all issued at roughly the same time ~ typically towards the end of the year ~ then what you say is undeniable. If, however, there was a significant gap between the two types, or a hybrid of say one batch at the end of 1926, and another batch of unmodified and modified issued together sometime in 1927, then your conclusions seem to hold water, Peck. Trouble is we will never know, and the position is further complicated by just how many collectors at that time, knew about the ME. Moreover, as was said earlier, wouldn't it be like us putting aside 2010 1p's in our collection cabinets ? Just who would have been interested in such coins, back then ?

All 1876 pennies were produced by the Heaton mint so all have an 'H' below the date. If you have an 1876 without the H, you might like to post a picture. Most likely it has simply worn off or been removed. Like you, I thought that the 1876 was H only, but according to Chris Perkins et al, there is an 1876 no H ~ link here I'd certainly never heard of one before, and it is a total surprise to me. I only discovered it whilst looking for the respective values of wide and narrow date 1876H's. The source is "Bamford" 2006. A picture of that coin is in Gouby's book, but he states that Bamford thought it to be filled H rather than a London mintage That makes sense. Thanks David.

All 1876 pennies were produced by the Heaton mint so all have an 'H' below the date. If you have an 1876 without the H, you might like to post a picture. Most likely it has simply worn off or been removed. Like you, I thought that the 1876 was H only, but according to Chris Perkins et al, there is an 1876 no H ~ link here I'd certainly never heard of one before, and it is a total surprise to me. I only discovered it whilst looking for the respective values of wide and narrow date 1876H's. The source is "Bamford" 2006.

Ha ha ~ I was thinking along the lines of "do you want to come home and see my etchings ?" (in the time honoureed way) ~ or in our cases, coins !!!

For me, that's the big one. Neither did we have internet forums where we could instantly post pictures to ask for peers opinions. Neither did we have forgers stalking us. Pre and post internet coin collecting, IMO, are two different sports. Totally agree with that one. Before the internet, apart from coin fairs, and/or if you were lucky enough to have a coin club locally, coin collectors were often quite isolated individuals. The internet has brought together almost the entire numismatic community. Moreover the advent of e bay, on line dealers and other on line auctions, not only enables us to survey a much greater range of coins than before, but has also no doubt re-kindled long dormant interest in many whose previously youthful interest was put aside by the demands of making a living, married life and raising a family. The problem I found as a young collector in the 90's (before the internet and when it was in its infancy), was that I hardly ever met anybody else who was even remotely interested in the hobby. It certainly wasn't the best chat up line with girls either, unfortunately