1949threepence

No doubt in my mind that it would fetch in excess of any catalogued amount. 5,000 quid or more, perhaps? Quite possibly would, actually. At any rate, at least £3k. I'm not even sure one exists at that standard ? The Coin Year Book has it at significantly lower in value than a 1919KN in the top 2 grades. I feel that is nonsense - I've never even seen one and I believe Colin Cooke once said (about 10 years ago) that if someone found a roll of 100 BU 1926ME pennies, he would still pay £2000 a piece for all 100. It would be a very sound investment, as well. What a find that would be

No doubt in my mind that it would fetch in excess of any catalogued amount. 5,000 quid or more, perhaps? Quite possibly would, actually. At any rate, at least £3k. I'm not even sure one exists at that standard ?

I think that assessment may well be right. Obviously to a UK collector, such an error is sacrilege. The intrinsic value and uniqueness of a 1926ME is so ingrained on our consciousness. It's probably one of the first things we learned about when we started collecting as young kids (was me, anyway). But as you say, to them, mostly dealing in US coins, and for very high stakes, it probably doesn't mean a great deal. Hence the reason our e mails have been ignored. Still pretty bad, nonetheless. If they can make a mistake like this, they can make others. Doesn't inspire confidence. That's a blessing

I don't know. It beggars belief when you think about it. Highly unprofessional......no, it's just basic incompetence actually. For an apparently reputable auction house, that is unforgiveable. Especially as RLC35 has advised them, hopefully pointing out the technical differences.

FWIW, I pretty much agree with most of what has already been said. I'm very lukewarm to the idea of trying to grade coins to an exact numbering system, as I don't believe the grading of coins is that exact a science. One man's 80, might be another man's 82. Surely it is too subjective to lend itself to such precision. I do agree that the use of plus and minus in describing the grades such as EF are a useful addition for description purposes. But when buying, the greatest gift of all is to actually be able to see the coin, either on the screen, or even better, in the metal (as opposed to in the flesh )

Yeah well, I bid, but failed The winning bid was £40.00. Nice capture for the winner.

You're right ~ it's definitely not ME. I've checked against my (fair to fine -) 1926ME, and the details you mention check out (apart from the BM initials which I can't read on mine). But certainly the colon after the GRA does almost touch the A, which it doesn't in a non ME specimen. There's also that difference with the hair, which makes a ME hit you in the eye as soon as you see it. An unmistakeable look, which that coin hasn't got. Looks like some unsuspecting punter is going to get ripped off big time

Well it's not so far-fetched - when you consider that the total value of coins in circulation represent, year-on-year, an ever-shrinking portion of the money supply, then it really is a matter of decreasing priority. Today's £10 note probably equates to a 1930s halfcrown in real terms. As for commemoratives, I recently bought (via eBay) a 'fantasy' proof penny of 1798, which featured the Kuchler George III obverse, and a Britannia reverse closely based on the pattern pieces of the Boulton era, minted on a heavy dark bronze flan. I don't usually go for those fantasy pieces, but I fell in love with this as soon as I saw it. They can do some things right, it seems. Just checked on a historic inflation calculator. In 1930, 2/6d, equated to £5.83 today. So a halfcrown then was worth considerably more than twice a £2.00 coin is today. How long before the first £5.00 coin ? You certainly can't seem to get a new £5.00 note for love nor money these days (no pun intended)

Not as late as 1935, I've not either.

I believe its something to do with the salts in the sweat. I tried an experiment on a 2p piece from a specimen set, and planted a nice big thumbprint on it, it took about 6 months for it to remove the lustre, so the bad thing is if the dealer handles your nice BU coin incorrectly, it could be 6 months before you find out!! Thanks, Colin.

It is noticeable in the early to mid 1920's ones, but as others have said, does occur outside these dates. Presumably due to the mixture of alloys used, and the subsequent effect of the environment on individual coins. I think some call it "marbling", don't they. While we're on this suibject, does anybody know how an individual fingerprint gets embedded as a permanent feature on a coin ? I've seen it often, and wondered why.

I received a 2009 1p the other day, and it was already in a crap state with a stain on both sides.

I hope not, and I'm going to take a chance on it. If I win I'll let you know whether it lived up to its photo. Yes, as Peckris says, the seller of the better 1912H is mog461, not d-uk-e. Those coins are heavily overgraded. Barely VF, IMO.

That's a rather nice EF example - good luck with it. But I just had a look though morgan9red's listings, and I don't see either 1912H there. Weird. No, you're right. It was my error. The actual coin is here. The seller is d-uk-e. Don't know why I thought it was morgan9red. I did see his name, but it must have been another coin. I don't like that Unc example, not at that price. There's slight rubbing on both sides (A.Unc) and the lustre is patchy and uneven. For £299 I would be wanting a BU Gem. To be honest, in your position I would rather bid on other penny, which has a much more even and pleasing appearance (in my opinion.) It looks GEF to my eye. Those were my thoughts exactly, Peckris. Book price (Coin Yearbook 2009) suggests £150 for an uncirculated example. Even allowing for increased prices, £299 seems breathtakingly overpriced for an item that clearly isn't anywhere near BU, and whose obverse looks slightly stained and pitted, admittedly under magnification. The first example is just shy of UNC, and is pleasing to look at.

That's a rather nice EF example - good luck with it. But I just had a look though morgan9red's listings, and I don't see either 1912H there. Weird. No, you're right. It was my error. The actual coin is here. The seller is d-uk-e. Don't know why I thought it was morgan9red. I did see his name, but it must have been another coin.

Just been looking through all the pennies on ebay, and after scrolling through quite a bit of dross, as well as some decent condition coins, I noticed that "H" pennies outnumber "KN" pennies in any condition, by about 5:1. It has to be said that the vast majority are well worn, but I did come across this nice example which I might bid on myself. There's another almost UNC one further on, as a buy it now for £299. The seller: Morgan9red. Mentioned before on here, I believe.

I didn't know there were any

In fully agreeing with the points made by Peckris & Vicky Silver, I would also point out that such differences in thickness also occur in other denominations. For example, if you take a number of 1992 10p pieces, and look at their respective widths, you will almost certainly see some manifestly thinner than others. Width disparity doesn't necessarily imply a fake coin.

Will try and post a few images in here when I get time, but I have: 1918KN GVF with some remnants of mint lustre. Toning is heading towards mid-dark brown and not at all KN like. Quite well-struck but a bit 'fluffy'. Good portrait. Heavily ghosted. 1918H GVF+. No lustre, but a mid-brown colour (without the KN red). Extremely well struck, no ghosting. It may be that it takes some years of circulation for the fully toned colour to appear. Against this however, I also have: 1919H fairly dismal condition - if anybody has my book, you can see it on p20 (plug over!). This can best be described as a kind of dull brown, the colour of well matured cow muck. In my recollection, this was a fairly common tone for 19Hs but not 18Hs which were almost invariably a very dark brown, almost black. The same applied to 12Hs. I think that what we will find is that, apart perhaps from KNs, there is no consistency across the board. I also think that on the evidence produced so far in this thread (thanks guys!), Heaton's used the same blanks as the RM, whilst King's Norton supplied their own and perhaps topped up the Royal Mint's supplies when these became low. Would be very interesting if Dave could dig out the Coin Monthly article. Seen it ~ typical of a coin of that age with about 50 years heavy circulation behind it. Excellent book, by the way. If there is any justice, it will become a definitive work. A bible for coin grading.

That would be superb, and much appreciated. Magnificent, and at £725, a mere snip here is the page it's on Needless to say, I can't afford it !!

All interesting stuff. I think dies were used to death virtually everywhere in the period 1915-20 and the quality of the end product can be dreadful, and you may be right that the two private mints tried to eke every bit of use out of their dies, just to make that tiny bit of extra profit. I also have a theory though that the alloys scarcely differed throughout the entire period of production (apart from those notified by the mint), and it is the source of the copper and possibly where it was smelted that creates the different colour - i.e. the level and chemical composition of impurities and the proportion of these removed during smelting. It's all a bit complicated but I might post a thread about it one day. King's Norton clearly used a very consistent source of supply, possibly with some ferrous contamination in the copper. "Not a lot of people know this" ... but, have you noticed there are sometimes ordinary pennies from 1912 to 1919 with the same reddish/brown colour as the KN pennies? Apparently, Kings Norton supplied blanks to the Mint throughout that period. So I treasure my 1912KN penny ! My 1912 penny is GVF and reddish. I had noticed the different colouring, and often wondered what the precise chemical composition of the metals were. It would be a tantalising bit of research to find out what went were, and who used what. Although I suspect well nigh impossible to get meaningful information after nearly a century.

Some absolutely fascinating posts in this thread, guys, giving a real insight into the pennies of the George V era, and their state at the close of the 1960's. I wonder if there are in fact any 1918/1919 H or KN in uncirculated state anywhere. Has anybody ever seen one ?

I started collecting coins when I was 12, and I'm now 31. I'm not sure age is a relevant factor. Collecting anything is a product of a certain mindset, which may well linger for life. The age range is from very young to very old, and any generational effect for a given type of collection, is at best extremely marginal.

Oops, it would help to have the link! http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vie...bayphotohosting (I got interrupted, and so missed the absurdly short time we are allowed to edit our posts ) Very much a coin for the specialist collector, it eventually went for £1200.

Book price for UNC is £40. Whilst that may be a little low, a value of £200, even for a BU example sounds overpriced. Could you upload a pic ?