1949threepence

682,103 is correct. Royal Mint mintage figures ETA: In fact I remember in the pre 1997 days, it was a slight turn up for the books if you got a 1985 50p in your change. I think I only ever got two in 12 years.

Richard, the constant use of initials/abbreviations really gets on my pip. It's not just the RM, but everywhere. I wouldn't mind so much if they used them, but the top one was asterixed (sp) to the words explaining what the abbreviations stood for. Recently I got an e mail at work that was full of them - I just returned to the sender listing all of them and saying "sorry, don't have a scooby doo what you are on about". Probably a bit offhand in all fairness, but I'd just lost patience.

You weren't that far off, Chris.

Did a live chat thing with the Royal Mint, using your question - this is a copy and paste of the transcript:-

Like all huge organisations they are high on meaningless, generic crap, and totally absent on technical knowledge and commonsense.

A clearer bigger pic would mean certainty.

But just very occasionally a fully struck up 1915, with good hair detail, that isn't a recessed ear, will show up:-

Seriously - yes, that's a very good point.

Here's the obverse:-

I would assume it's the seller's way of drawing attention to what he sees as discrepancies on the coin's surface. Slightly overstated though.

It is still possible to find good stuff on there. You just have to hunt further and for longer, which can involve a time and patience issue. Also, as Blake alludes to, even using the advanced search facility, diamonds can slip through the net because of an odd description.

Beautiful - lucky him.

New purchases Pete?

Personally, for what it's worth, I think a realistic alternative to e bay would be a well policed auction/buy it now site, run along similar lines - but for coins only. Run by experts for beginners, more experienced enthusiasts and other experts. If staff knowledgeable about coins were running the site, it would discourage the fakers/piss takers, as they'd be caught out immediately. Listings could be for higher end coins, with the tat excluded, ie: anything below a certain standard will not be allowed*. Although exactly how the mechanics of that would work, I'm not sure. Like e bay, there isn't any reason why it couldn't be international. * unless a rarity

Item now withdrawn - result. ETA: apologies for repeating, Sword. Saw your post after this one.

Blatant fake being passed as the real thing

I did wonder about those thin rims. But was there ever any evidence of excess wear on reverse A as compared to reverse B?

Yes that's true. Fewer ghosting issues to boot. I wonder why they didn't just revert back to reverse A, rather than start the experiment with the recessed ear. I mean, surely they kept the die.

Just going back to this and relating to something I heard on the World Service a week or two back, when I woke up and couldn't get back off to sleep. I suddenly remembered it today, and thought I would investigate. Absolute sod to find, and copyright law is fiendishly complicated, but fortunately I did find a small paragraph in a wikipedia article which related back to the bit that I heard - the article is here It relates to the possibility of digitising written works being exempt from copyright law. Apologies if you already know and have discounted it. This is the extract:-

Cor blimey, guv. Stone the bleedin' crows. Where'd you spot that beauty?

Indeed. Going back to this question, I'm wondering to what extent Court's estimates on several early 20th century scarcities, are accurate. For those who are unaware, V.R.Court ran a short series of incredibly useful (and to this day still referred to) articles under the heading, "Major varieties of UK pennies 1902 to 1967", notably in the August and September 1972 editions of Coin Monthly. Court's opinion on the mintages for these varieties (pre melt), are as follows:- 1902 low tide = 1,212,600 (sounds about right) 1903 open 3 = 37,300 (possibly slight underestimate?) 1905 F160 = 3,231,350 (sounds about right) 1908 F164 = 1,166,550 (sounds about right) 1908 F164A = 55,550 (yes, but see F176) 1908 F165 = 3,370,000 (sounds about right) 1909 F169 = 23,200 (sounds about right) 1913 F175 = 1,733,500 (given current availability, maybe an over estimate, or just not collected) 1913 F176 = 948,750 (as above) 1915 rec ear = 5,404,200 (maybe over estimate) 1916 rec ear = 16,129,850 (sounds about right) 1918H = 2,465,658 (probably about correct, but reported degree of scarcity in the immediate pre -withdrawal period may have been due to collector uptake) 1918KN = 1,195,142 (as above) 1919H = 4,787,556 (probably about correct) 1919KN = 422,044 (as above) Mostly correct I'd say, but with a major discrepancy (in my view) between open 3 & 164A on the one hand, with F175 & F176, on the other. If Court's figures on the 175 & 176 are correct, then it would suggest the vast majority met their fate in the melt, having not been specifically collected, except by default. Actually, that could well be the case given that there are a fair number of the extant population of 175's and 176's that are in high grade, whereas conversely that is manifestly not the case for the open 3 and the 164A. Post melt, probably all four types are of roughly comparable rarity.

I didn't know that, but it doesn't surprise me in the least. Paypal may be convenient but they're a lousy outfit who effectively abuse their decent customers with extremely poor customer service and now this. The conclusion has to be that you can't trust them to back you up in the event of a problem not of your making. If there were some way round never using them, I'd take it.

Well you say that, but with regard specifically to 1913, the Britannia strike seems to be variable. My 174 is fully struck up, whereas my 177 has a poor breastplate. Both have good hair detail.

I thought it was pronounced "feng shway".

You often see evidence of a die clash at the front of the Queen's neck. Common area for it.