1949threepence

The whole coin is quite stunning, Dave. I'm very envious.

In that case, it's a deliberate con attempt, as you say. Of course, e bay being e bay, are often very slow to react.

Looking at pic 4 again, I think you're right ~ 6 + G. The reason I went with obverse 5 for the first coin, is that Freeman describes obverse 6 as having the "B" of Britt almost touching the head. This is definitely the case with coins 2, 3 & 4, but not with coin 1, which seems to have a slightly greater clearance. However, there's many a slip twixt cup and lip, and I fully concede I may be wrong. Maybe suffering from optical illusions, or whatever

Maybe we should give him the benefit of the doubt. If you look at what he sells, he is not a coin dealer as such. It seems to be mostly toys. There are a few more crowns in his list of items, all of which he descibes as £5.00, as well as a couple of 50p's, accurately described. But the overwhelming bulk of his stock is toys. It is possible he doesn't know the difference himself, in which case it would be a genuine mistake.

It's not a smooth area around where the one should be, suggesting possible tooling by an individual at some point after it left the mint.

Well I decided to look it up, and found it very easily here I've never heard of the seller, who evidently is in Londonderry, NI. But maybe you should report him to e bay, cartwheel, as he is touting a Crown, face value 25p, as a £5.00 coin. There are some who might fall for that. Better yet, ask the vendor directly why he is so doing

What hits me in the eye there, is the apparent scarcity of the 1895 penny.

I'd go GVF on this one. It lacks the crispness needed for a straight EF in my view, and note the lack of hair detail in the moustache.

I've no idea with pic 4, as it is quite well worn I believe the others to be Pic 1: 5 + D Pic 2: 6 + G Pic 3: 6 + G By no means certain though. Pic 1 is clear enough, but pics 2 & 3 are inspired guesses as it is impossible to discern most of the main distinguishing features.

A link to the actual e bay page might be useful

I'd agree that the 1862 farthing, plus the 1862 & 1860 pennies alll shown above, are BU. The outstanding example being the farthing.

That's an interesting concept to think about. If 5,800,000 2011 50p's have been issued, and there are 29 designs, then if divided equally that makes about 200,000 of each, making each one scarce individually. But there is still a high chance of getting a 2011 50p of some description. The trick will be collecting all of them.

Both UNC, but neither is BU in my opinion, Dave. Very nice, nonetheless. I don't have anything of that age in BU. Nearest in absolute BU is a 1903 penny. I'm not sure that BU is an entirely useful term, either. Hopefully, Derek (Red Riley) won't mind me copying and pasting this very useful definition from his website:-

My observations ~ notable how scarce for sale, 1948, 1956 & 1957 threepencies are. Thanks for your hard work on this one, Declan. A very useful and revealing exercise. I'm not quite sure precisely what it tells us quantitatively, but I think it does show up otherwise hidden scarcities. I know when I was completing my threepenny bit collection 2 to 3 years ago, it took me a long time to drop on a decent grade 1948, which surprised me. They perhaps fall into a category of "forgotten" coins. Before the big withdrawal and meltdown, they were not really thought of as scarce ~ although mintage was not excessively high, and in 1948, positively low. Consequently, they were not hoarded. Maybe not even collected to any great extent. Hence they are now surprisingly scarce in the higher grades especially.

Well Done Boomstick. I have only seen one Burns £2 Coin to date. I think perhaps that they may end up being scacer in change than the Darwin £2 Coin? Well done to both of you. I haven't seen any Burns £2 coins yet.

Hi Huss, In addition to what Derek has said, I've noted a typo under "Buy from listings with clear pictures" ~ on the last line of that, I think you mean "hoped", rather than "hopped". I might also add about about watching for shill bids in auctions. Other than that, a very good & comprehensive guide.

For what it's worth, I'm not convinced that the highest grade coins are always the rarest, which means that pricewise what middle grade coins there are tend towards the unc rather than the fine price. I think however that this rule of thumb applies to coins in which the overall supply is strictly limited - the 1918KN penny and 1946/49 threepences being good examples. With the reasonably common Victorian pennies where mid-grade coins are abundant, the opposite applies. I certainly agree that a mid grade 1918KN, for example, is going to fetch a lot more, pro rata, than a mid grade 1893. The overall rarity of the coin comes sharply into focus when set against low grade price/demand vs mid grade price/demand. Mid grade being about VF, I think we'd all say.

That's going a bit far Peter! A genuine VF 18KN should fetch £25 or so - there must be MANY collectors who want "above average" but can't afford EF or higher, and would cheerfully pay that. And I'd say the VF 1893 should at least be a few quid too. I think you're being too pessimistic. If you're not, then I will happily pay 99p to buy a GVF 1918KN off you You'd get a lot more than that for a genuinely VF 1918KN.

I agree with most of the other replies on the thread. I'd also point out something more or less alluded to, and that is the importance of grade. What emerges with rare dates like 1919KN pennies or 1946/49 threepenny bits, is that whilst it is relatively easy to pick up well worn examples very cheaply, the gradient in value between those cheap specimens, and their BU counterparts at the other end of the spectrum for the same year type, is incredibly steep. Obviously that suggests massive rarity at the higher and especially, highest grades In your case, that would be much more the case for the 1918KN, than for the much commoner 1893. Condition is definitely the key factor. To be honest, 1918KN pennies in anything more than NVF, are as rare as hens teeth. The overwhelming majority pulled from circulation in the 1960's were good to fine only.

And if you use any obscure WORD that' in a dictionary, a dictionary run against your password will crack it fairly quickly. Ok, I'm now going to GIVE AWAY my (non) patented system that is foolproof (I believe). 1. Think up a pass phrase or long name that contains roughly half the letters of the alphabet (e.g. THE QUICK BROWN FOX ... but don't use that!!!) Commit this to memory and don't ever tell a soul or write it down. 2. Come up with something easy to remember, such as your name (e.g. "John Thompson") 3. Use the pass phrase, whose letters turn into numbers starting with 0 (T=0 H=1 E=2 Q=3 U=4 I=5 C=6 K=7 B=8 R=9 O=10 W=11 N=12 F=13 X=14 in the example I gave), to encipher your chosen password. Under that system, "John Thompson" converts to "J10112@0110mps1012" (I've used @ to represent the space, but you can pick any character) It sounds unwieldy, and is, the first few times you use it. The more you use it, the more you come to learn what the numbers are in your pass phrase and the process becomes instinctive. The great thing about it is, you can write down a password hint, e.g. "full name" and even someone who knows your name won't be able to crack what it converts to. And even knowing the length of your name won't help them, as some letters convert to two-digit numbers, so the length of the password won't be the same as the name. So, for the cost of slightly time-consuming conversion, especially when you first start using it, you will be able to write down strong password hints, secure in the knowledge that someone who understands the hint still won't be able to crack your password. And yes, I use this system. And no, you can't know what my pass phrase is! I like it, Peck, and may well adopt it. Given that a combination system is obviously the most difficult to crack. Your system would have kept Bletchley Park busy during WW2 ~ sort of like the Enigma variations (except no Elgar in evidence) ~ if you see what I mean

Not at all a rant, rather a very interesting and thought provoking post.

In the eighties we were on a rugby tour based on the West Coast of Scotland...they locked us in There might be a few half English roses up there...we all did our bit I still get the xmas card and a big grin she is now probally a 20 stone munter ....I could and would of married her...then I met Mrs Irish Peter I know we are gradually drifting off topic but do you ever show your collection to other collectors or are we all a bunch of Billy no mates when it comes to coin collecting. Billy no mates here. For one thing, there's no local coin club in my area. Maybe even more pertinently, I don't know of anyone among either friends, family or colleagues who has the remotest interest in coin collecting. I have tried to talk to my girlfriend about it, but her eyes just glaze over. So it's just me, dealers, e bay and this forum As far as insurance is concerned, I haven't bothered with it. I have discovered a very effective hiding place for my coins. If burglars broke in, they'd have to be seriously bloody good and have a lot of time, to find it. Although if they broke in while I was in the house, then I could potentially be placed in the same horrible situation as the collector described by DaveG38, earlier. Sadly, the law dictates that householders are largely impotent when it comes to self defence measures against intruders ~ that really is off topic so I'll shut up and get back in my box

I agree. The designs are very shallow indeed! Some of the Designs are really quite good I think. I rather like the Archery Design. As for the majority of the rest of them, I could take them or leave them personally. Although I do think that the designs suffer being on the new smaller and lighter 50p coins and they may have been more fitting and better looking on the larger sized 50p coins. Totally agree with that sentiment. A more pronounced reverse design, on a larger surface area would have helped IMO. I don't run with this idea of releasing coins "out of year". Releasing circulation coins the year before they are dated is, I suppose, in line with the same principle as selling year books or annuals the year before the one they are intended for. Not keen though. On the same theme, I'm wondering why we are only just seeing the business strike 2009 technology £2 coins ~ December 2010. Not seen one before this month, but now three in the last week.

Thereby disrespecting both the coin and potential buyer. Not good.

Those finger prints can actually be over a century old, though. You can't necessarily attribute them directly to mistreatment by dealers and collectors over the years. Same applies to carbon spots etc.