Peckris

What anyone is prepared to pay for it. (Sell it with the RM letter though.)

Aussie 1953 may be worth more than the equivalent UK coins. Oh, they're AUSSIE coins? That'll teach me to read it properly first.

Interesting. Graded one 1917 and rejected 5 ... makes you wonder what earns this particular one a kosher ticket?

And thats exactly where i need your help guys. I spend 2-3 hours a day looking for coins/checking forum etc. but my hand on experience is very little. I know what to buy back to KGIII but beyond that i know nothing. Ive never bought any hammered coins and i only have one early milled:) I am now - as a type collector - finding that prices for early milled in decent grades are spiralling out of my reach. HOWEVER.. I've discovered there is a major way to 'cheat'. Unlike from late George III onwards, there was a great uniformity of design : Britannia appears on all base metal coins from Charles II to George III (first series) and there are only really two designs - early and late. One of each might suit you. Likewise with silver - the reverses are very limited in number from crown down to sixpence, and it's all a question of 'roses and plumes' or plain by and large, with honourable exceptions for SSC shillings and one or two others. So if you limited your ambitions to reverse DESIGNS, only a relatively small number of coins would tick all boxes from 1662 to 1775.

1953 3d and 6d estimate $200 - am I missing something here??

Good question. "Genuine reproductions" of major rarities tend to have a market of their own, but fakes of - e.g. a 1933 penny where a genuine penny has had the date expertly altered - fetch 3 figures on eBay.

don't ya just love 'em!Edit: kids that is! Sir Jimmy certainly did..

Oh yes, it is. I wonder if he has been tested for MS? Probably has. His burning sensation sounds much like neuritis, which afflicted me in the early days, but not so much since.

Blimey, that was cheap Sure was! Mind you, a mid-morning end...

I think the whole philosophy of the grading:price ratio has changed, certainly since the 60s. Back then you had 3 top grades that were closer together : UNC: a state rather than a condition EF: today's AUNC, with a price to match, VF: today's GVF or even NEF and closer to EF in value than now. Then you had F, trailing a long way behind, the "minimum acceptable condition" for collectors Now, due to international pressures? collector influence? dealer practice? all these and more?, you have a situation where the 4 top grades are more evenly spaced, and so are the values. Which effectively means that UNC and F should be the same grades as they were (though in some lists F covers a multitude of sins..), but EF has dropped quite a lot, and VF dropped to a lesser extent. I'm not sure how typical this is, but these are the values (Seaby/Spink) for a 1904 halfcrown in 1966 and 2012 : F 2:50 VF 5:00 EF 12:00 (no UNC value listed, but one would guess that it would have been probably £15-£18) F 65:00 VF 300:00 EF 925:00 UNC 2500:00

I am not criticising Heritage in any way. I have bought from them before and agree with your comments. My comments are to do with this particular sixpence. My valuation was $60 with a willingness to go to $70. Even allowing for a premium for the grading and slabbing, I don't understand why someone would pay $155. That is why I was wondering if there was some esoteric detail that I might be missing in the coin. What nationalit(ies) are the main customers for Heritage? American I should imagine Enough said. That alone would account for the über-high-priced coin in a slab...

I think it may have been planned but never happened. Anyway I think the Nazis would have made a better job of it, I mean its under weight by about a third and has a milled edge. Only a fool would have been fooled by that one. The same fools who were taken in by an elaborate bluff that Calais would be the main focus of invasion on D Day? But I take your point. How would fake crowns destabilise the economy? 3/4 of a million 1935 crowns as against getting on for half a billion halfcrowns in circulation? No, the fake fiver was the real deal.

I am not criticising Heritage in any way. I have bought from them before and agree with your comments. My comments are to do with this particular sixpence. My valuation was $60 with a willingness to go to $70. Even allowing for a premium for the grading and slabbing, I don't understand why someone would pay $155. That is why I was wondering if there was some esoteric detail that I might be missing in the coin. What nationalit(ies) are the main customers for Heritage?

Yes, absolutely. (By the way - trivial point - I note that the Chinese Coins forum opens up a new tab when you click a link, unlike this one which takes you away from here, so you have to Go Back through however many levels it took you away, in order to return here. Chris, any chance we could have the same here : i.e., when you click an embedded link, it opens a new tab?) Why not just right click and choose 'open in new window'? Because I belong to so many forums, I'd just like to simply click on a link and it opens a new tab, which some do and some don't. All I'm asking for is some consistency, so I don't have to keep remembering "Does this forum do it? Or not?".

Upload the picture from your computer when you get home.

Ouch.

Scuse my ignorance, but who is Jgw3D?

Yes, absolutely. (By the way - trivial point - I note that the Chinese Coins forum opens up a new tab when you click a link, unlike this one which takes you away from here, so you have to Go Back through however many levels it took you away, in order to return here. Chris, any chance we could have the same here : i.e., when you click an embedded link, it opens a new tab?)

Yes, welcome! We're a friendly lot, and (mostly) don't bite.

No problem. Just to give you an idea of what the genuine article looks like (Charles II crown):

Agreed, but that's the absolute resolution. 600 dpi is a relative resolution. So yes, if you start with an image 4500 x 3000 pixels, you can crop it quite a bit, irrespective of the dpi.

There is a VERY clear ghost of a 2 behind the 1 !!!! Yes, I thought that too.

Those are crude replicas, age uncertain, of Charles II silver. The first picture looks copper, but it could just be bad photography if the background is the same as the second one. Either way, everything about them screams "wrong". Scrap value only I'm afraid.

Nothing wrong with the equipment there. I suspect it's your light source. If "natural", is the camera casting a shadow?

Who's this "our", Jock?