1949threepence

I've received 3 in my change, so I wish only 25,000 had been minted !!! Actually the true figure is 3,903,000 ~ see Royal Mint mintage figures here I'm obviously looking at the wrong websites Easily done, Phil. I've been there myself !!! If you want a really scarce modern coin, look out for the Kew Gardens 2009 50p. Only 10,000 minted for circulation. Now that's rare

Well done Mat It pays to be persistent and to present a hard to argue against, logical case.

I've received 3 in my change, so I wish only 25,000 had been minted !!! Actually the true figure is 3,903,000 ~ see Royal Mint mintage figures here

It's because the £1 is the only coin that's useful. To buy a 75p can of coke,for example, you have a few choices: Ridiculous numbers of 1 and 2ps which are now worth pretty much zilch, while when it was new it was worth closer to 20p now. A handful of silver coins or just the plain old pound. Personally I prefer to carry around a few pounds in case I need anything and fling the change in the penny jar to go to the bank in 5 years time. One of the flourishing shops in Aber is poundland - and you can bet there's a lot of pound coins being battered in there. The pound coin is just handy. It's easy to buy things, saves carrying around awkward and useless change everywhere and I admit it's the only coin I carry around with me. Nowadays, notes and plastic are the only real money - coins aren't as useful to people these days as they were in 1971. Using a worth calculator, I can see that if I took a 50p coin back to 1971 and wanted to know how how much spending power I had, it would be something between £5 and £10. We only have coins with the spending power of <£2 and now anything £1 or over is pretty much worthless making the only coins useful 50p, £1 and £2. I'd just about add the 20p to that list. It's small enough to be not a nuisance, but large enough to handle without the difficulty of the 5p, and of sufficient spending power to still mean something in relatively small multiples. 100% agree with the rest of your post.

Sorry to bump this old thread, but I noticed it whilst looking for something else, and had to say something. I think we've long reached the stage in this country where the £1.00 coin is probably the most heavily circulated of all the coins. Conversely, the 1p, 2p & to some extent the 5p, are spending protracted periods sitting in jars being saved up to pay in bulk to a bank, or otherwise not being used. This is why it's still relatively easy to find a lustred circulation 1990 1p, but virtually impossible to find the same in a 1990 £1.00, for example.

It was the difference between the coin types displayed between the two options in your earlier link, that I was referring to. Using "search by criteria" under "United Kingdom", the only denomination options displayed are euros. Conversely, using "Great Britain" gives you the expected options, including pre-decimal.

Absolutely excellent with every type/variety listed. Mind, I had to take the little video course, as navigation wasn't obvious at first. Also big difference between "United Kingdom" and "Great Britain".

Had to be a PLymouth lighthouse, and a little research confirms this. See here

Very, very interesting. An absolute bargain for £85.00, I'd say. Can't see it being on sale for long. It does look like a narrow date, yes. It also looks genuine. It's about as right as a WWII bomber on the moon! Without even trying to look at dies it is apparent that the second 1 is a totally different style. I had the very fortunate miss on an 1860 penny on ebay at £1200 a couple of years ago (I think it made over £2k). It appeared to be an unrecorded J + g. It now appears on page 100 of Michael Goubys book as an altered date forgery. At least this seller states he thinks it is a wrong un. Ebay is an absolute minefield and should be negotiated in a bomb suit (preferably 2) with a very good sniffer dog and detector in front of you! I was being sarcastic. If there had been any chance of it being genuine, 1) It would already have gone, 2) There would have been a lot more fanfare, higher price plus attempt at verification and 3) If it hadn't gone after that, I'd have bought it myself in a heartbeat That said, of course, somebody will buy it "as is", and probably re-sell it for more !!! Yes, the obverse is the giveaway, not appearing on pennies before 1874. The question is, what's it been altered from? That doesn't look obvious. ....and when was it altered....?

Very, very interesting. An absolute bargain for £85.00, I'd say. Can't see it being on sale for long. It does look like a narrow date, yes. It also looks genuine. It's about as right as a WWII bomber on the moon! Without even trying to look at dies it is apparent that the second 1 is a totally different style. I had the very fortunate miss on an 1860 penny on ebay at £1200 a couple of years ago (I think it made over £2k). It appeared to be an unrecorded J + g. It now appears on page 100 of Michael Goubys book as an altered date forgery. At least this seller states he thinks it is a wrong un. Ebay is an absolute minefield and should be negotiated in a bomb suit (preferably 2) with a very good sniffer dog and detector in front of you! I was being sarcastic. If there had been any chance of it being genuine, 1) It would already have gone, 2) There would have been a lot more fanfare, higher price plus attempt at verification and 3) If it hadn't gone after that, I'd have bought it myself in a heartbeat That said, of course, somebody will buy it "as is", and probably re-sell it for more !!!

They're both totally integral to penny selling and collecting habits. No doubt about it. As you say though, Peck, not as rare as many of the slightly less well known buns. Well played you ~ what condition are they in ?

I knew Barca would win. Far too much class for Man U. They'll be celebrating on the streets of Barcelona and Liverpool tonight !!!

Very, very interesting. An absolute bargain for £85.00, I'd say. Can't see it being on sale for long. It does look like a narrow date, yes. It also looks genuine.

The problem with collecting is that you start off thinking it's a finite art ~ that you will collect a given series and then leave it at that (for a time at least). But the reality is very different. Once you start it's exceedingly difficult to stop, especially for those of us whose interest becomes all encompassing, verging on the obsessional !!! Even in any given series or date run, it's knowing the best time to call it a day in respect of that specific collection. Do you limit yourself to just dates, and then the odd upgrade. Or do you go beyond in the hope of obtaining every different listed type ? Do you content yourself with a mid grade rarer type, or do you practically re-mortgage your house in a bid (no pun intended) to get one of the few outstanding examples ? It is these philosphical points I frequently ponder in my quieter moments When I was collecting pennies, I had every date and major variety from 1797. What constituted a major variety was saomething I usually made up my mind on early on and stuck to. For example, I would always regard the 1874-79 wide/narrow dates as 'major' even if Spinks didn't list them as such and the portrait changes of 1874 and 1881 (far more noticeable in my view than 1926) too were major. On the other hand 1903 open 3, 1897 high tide and coins with sundry dots on just didn't seem to have enough different about them to make collecting worthwhile. There came a point where I tended to upgrade rather than add new varieties and once this became prohibitively expensive, I gave up and became a dealer! I pretty much agree on all counts. Certainly, the wide and narrow dates differences from 1874 to 79 absolutely hit you square in the eye, and are a must for collection IMO ~ although 1877nd seems a tall order, as it is R18, 6 to 15 known, apparently, and I believe one went for £6k last year, in F only. 1879nd is also difficult, obviously. I had originally intended to just collect the wide and narrow dates + H and non H from 1874, but the different portraits are also now nagging me. Like you, however, the 1903 open 3 is not an essential, nor is the 1897 high tide. Also, if I'm honest, the 1902 low tide and 1895 2mm seem a tad overrated as well. Just to whet the appetite:-

The problem with collecting is that you start off thinking it's a finite art ~ that you will collect a given series and then leave it at that (for a time at least). But the reality is very different. Once you start it's exceedingly difficult to stop, especially for those of us whose interest becomes all encompassing, verging on the obsessional !!! Even in any given series or date run, it's knowing the best time to call it a day in respect of that specific collection. Do you limit yourself to just dates, and then the odd upgrade. Or do you go beyond in the hope of obtaining every different listed type ? Do you content yourself with a mid grade rarer type, or do you practically re-mortgage your house in a bid (no pun intended) to get one of the few outstanding examples ? It is these philosphical points I frequently ponder in my quieter moments

The trouble with worn coins is that very ikely, the H will simply have worn away. Could be a clogged die, although I'm inclined towards the worn away H. I don't personally believe there's any 1876(no H)pennies around.

Ah, all is revealed. It does look totally different in the earlier pics.

Indeed, that's true enough. Leastways, that's how it looks unless there's an optical illusion at work.

Agreed. I don't think it's a ding, nor, to be honest, a blocked die either. Looks very "anomalous". It's hard to tell from the photo as it gives no idea of relative relief. There's clearly a problem (I would guess damaged die) with the vertical stroke of the 'E' but as far as I can tell the horizontal strokes and serifs are unaffected. It's only the precise position of the damage that coincidentally creates the impression of something more. You're right, of course, about the relief. But although this may be random damage, the prominence looks like an almost perfect semi circle, in a "C" shape. Unusually precise for a damaged die.

Agreed. I don't think it's a ding, nor, to be honest, a blocked die either. Looks very "anomalous".

The reality is, of course, that employers do not want disabled people on their payroll. Not because they are any less committed or intelligent, but because adaptations have to be made quite frequently, and they are not as easy to move round different jobs, as the able bodied. In what is now, once again, a very competitive jobs market, it will be very difficult for the government to accommodate the disabled in meaningful paid employment ~ especially those who have been out of work for a number of years, and very especially in the private sector which is not as hot on diversity principles as the public. So one gets the feeling that this initiative is a complete waste of time anyway.

Very useful link, Sion. Thanks for your time and effort. Sorry to hear there's not a lot in your neck of the woods. Although there's supposedly one where I now live (Nuneaton), I suspect it may be defunct as I've never heard of it before, and the telephone code is the old pre 1999 one. There's a decent one where I used to live, in Chelmsford. I've got Chelmsford down already. I've removed the Corbitts that's no longer operating as well as the Edinburgh Club. I've added Coinote and Intercoin. I'll have a look into Nuneaton. Thanks Sion.

A link to the upcoming London Coins Auction ~ well actually, here's a copy and paste of the e mail I received:- Pert 1 of the auction contains the coins, and part 2 is mostly banknotes

Very useful link, Sion. Thanks for your time and effort. Sorry to hear there's not a lot in your neck of the woods. Although there's supposedly one where I now live (Nuneaton), I suspect it may be defunct as I've never heard of it before, and the telephone code is the old pre 1999 one. There's a decent one where I used to live, in Chelmsford.

Well, precisely. Not only have I experienced at first hand, e mail enquiries to the Royal Mint being totally ignored, but I think the difficulties others have also encountered in this regard, is already documented on here. I will use the Act to obtain the information I want, especially as there is no criteria laid down as to the type of enquiry considered valid, save for overly time consuming questions, and ones for which the answer is already available. That said, I wouldn't make a habit of pestering them every five minutes with trivia. I'd also add that I have sent a reply e mail to Mr Payne thanking him for his time and effort, which I genuinely appreciated. I sincerely hope my e mail enquiry didn't come across as rude, Sion. I'd be mortified if it did. At the end of the day, the facility is offered up for public use, with no draconian pre-conditions, and I legitimately took advantage. I honestly don't see that as in any way wrong. Sorry guys.