Peckris

If anybody wants to understand the concept of subject drift, they should just listen to a Jon Anderson lyric

David Groom has left and right pointing feathers for the 1975 2p! One wonders whether in 50 years time these will all be enthusiastically sought varieties, much as we now cherish the vagaries of bun pennies I totally ignored Elizabeth halfpennies whilst they were in circulation, modern rubbish I thought, and so I dont have examples of some of the scarcer varieties I had to buy my example of the (commonest) 1956 variety from a forum member. But it's still very scarce so I was happy to pay. Lord only knows how many of them passed through my hands when I was searching through bank bags in 1969.

Peckris is over 100 and he's up to date on Computers True. I was only saying to Alan Turing the other day that IBM really should move out of calculators into the new Sperry-Rand valve machines - can't let ENIAC take all the credit

Hi Peckris, in more recent times we have all the coins pictured and have the number of bids and what the current bid is. Yes just drop us an email and you can either receive the lists by post or we now do a PDF that is in full colour that we can simply email you. We do a general list every month and Farthing list 4 or 5 times a year. You are most welcome to receive either or both lists! Cool! Yes, the email PDF sounds a better option - I can always print off a page that looks interesting for my wants. Will be in touch via your website.

Bring back John McEnroe, I say! "You cannot be serious. That ball was on the line. Chalk flew up"

1986 is the earliest I have found type 2 portcullis with incuse rivets. There are quite a few varieties in the reverses and obverses over the years if you compare the circulation issues, the BU set issues and the proof issues. Even though the pictures above show type 1 portcullis as having 110 beads and type 2 having 113 beads, it is not always the case, you can get the type 2 portcullis with the 110 bead reverse too. Here are the Portcullis types I have in my collection (1971 to 1981 I collected circulation and proof, 1982 and 1983 I collected BU set and proof issues and 1984 >2008 I collected circulation and BU set issues) 1971 to 1985 circulation, BU sets and Proof have type 1 1986 circulation has type 1, BU set issue has type 2 1987 circulation and BU set has type 1 1988, 1989 and 1990 circulation has type 1, BU set has type 2 1991 both circulation and BU set are type 1 1992 circulation has type 2 and BU set has type 1 1993 circulation has type 1 and BU set has type 2 1994 both circulation and BU set have types 2 1995 to 2006 circulation and BU set have type 2 2007 and 2008 circulation has type 1, BU set has type 2 Gollly! any similar discrepencies in the 2p series? What, you mean someone has to count the individual strands in each feather???

Having bought quite a few coins from Colin Cooke in the 90s, I did like the postal auctions he ran, for which you simply sent in your maximum bid, and the highest bidder won the item for the "next highest bid + 1 increment". I see the online auctions functioning in a similar way except that you can actually watch the current highest bid which is a plus if you're chasing a particular coin. I must resume getting the CC list - do I simply register for them on the website Neil?

Bring back John McEnroe, I say!

Yes - that's a better picture. I'd say it was GF from that obverse, but interestingly there's no cross stroke on the 'f' of 'f.d.' - I don't know if it's a variety or just wear? If just wear then it's worth around £25, possibly a shade more.

I can't get the thumbnail to enlarge, so I can't say for certain. If it is, the 'gothic' date will read mdccclii. Nor me

Thanks for the Ripples link - that's a definite MacTube download! (Oops, I never said that* ). Always been one of my favourite tracks. 'Trick Of The Tail' comes pretty close to 'Selling England By The Pound' in my personal Genesis pantheon. We prided ourselves on 'discovering' Genesis when at Uni, when they were virtually unknown before 'Foxtrot'. I saw them 3 or 4 times back then. One of them you wouldn't believe - it was AFTER Foxtrot was released but they obviously had to fulfil a booking made before then : they were second on the bill to Medicine Head (no, really!) in a University hall of residence 'bop' where there was no proper stage, just a temporary structure of wooden blocks. Yet professional to the end, they did the full show - Gabriel with his flower head, then the long red dress with fox head. All I can say is 'Wow, just to be there. Did it really happen?' http://donignacio.com/art/genesispic.jpg *sadly, he seems to have protected it from download happily, someone else has the same version on YouTube If you use FireFox and install the extension "DownloadHelper" you can download and "save to file" any YouTube video (or other sites for that matter, Vimeo for example) that appears to be protected against download. Thanks for that - but I usually find there's more than one version up there.

Thanks for the Ripples link - that's a definite MacTube download! (Oops, I never said that* ). Always been one of my favourite tracks. 'Trick Of The Tail' comes pretty close to 'Selling England By The Pound' in my personal Genesis pantheon. We prided ourselves on 'discovering' Genesis when at Uni, when they were virtually unknown before 'Foxtrot'. I saw them 3 or 4 times back then. One of them you wouldn't believe - it was AFTER Foxtrot was released but they obviously had to fulfil a booking made before then : they were second on the bill to Medicine Head (no, really!) in a University hall of residence 'bop' where there was no proper stage, just a temporary structure of wooden blocks. Yet professional to the end, they did the full show - Gabriel with his flower head, then the long red dress with fox head. All I can say is 'Wow, just to be there. Did it really happen?' http://donignacio.com/art/genesispic.jpg *sadly, he seems to have protected it from download happily, someone else has the same version on YouTube

Hello chky,I have been on this form for some time and English is my mother toungue.....I still have no idea how to put pictures up on this site...it seems you need to be a techie..... Not at all. This picture took me 5 clicks, all of them within this reply. Couldn't be easier.

...

It is certainly possible to post pictures directly here - go to the Beginners forum and there is a 'pinned' topic at the top explaining how to do it.

"This listing was ended by the seller because there was an error in the listing." Perhaps there was a stain in it somewhere Euwww!

"This listing was ended by the seller because there was an error in the listing." What, you mean the mankini WASN'T included after all?

I'll second that.

I know - I raised the same thing just after the new forum launched! I was most indignant that it was on my profile but no-one else's Turns out that we can each only see it on our own profile. Apparently we can be warned (by Chris? ) for minor transgressions.. Presumably they are like a yellow card - accumulate too many and you get sent off - which begs the question, why are Dave and I still here? lol !!! ~ this forum is actually very civilized compared to most. Ya think so? Just wait and see...

I know - I raised the same thing just after the new forum launched! I was most indignant that it was on my profile but no-one else's Turns out that we can each only see it on our own profile. Apparently we can be warned (by Chris? ) for minor transgressions.. Presumably they are like a yellow card - accumulate too many and you get sent off - which begs the question, why are Dave and I still here?

I think these two are a fair enough example of inconsistency 3711 and 12559. I don't mind the slabs,however I think I would be the same,if the slab costs more than the coin,it would probably be as nice in a shop bought holder,and the money could go on the next new addition. Very good example, to suggest that 3711 is a 78 is a little silly (from the photos) and it is clearly inferior to 12559 although both are graded the same by CGS. There may well be significant photographic differences that need to be taken into account, but here are the reverses for ease of comparison: 3711: 12559: It is almost as if in the early days they were learning to grade like a novice collector, and hadn't yet acquired a copy of 'The Standard Guide to Grading British Coins' ! [rant] Bloody Photobucket! The pictures are the same size as here and despite the presence of a magnifying glass with a + inside, there's no way to zoom in. That's why I hate it so much, it's SO counter-intuitive to use. [/rant] Anyway, I'm not so sure the first is "clearly inferior" to the second? The attractive toning serves to emphasize any slight rubbing that may be present, while the untoned example conceals it. But just looking at two places : St George's right pec, and the dragon's haunch, I can see what seems to be slight flattening on the second which isn't present on the first. So I'd conclude that grading those two isn't as easy a comparison as you might think. (And even though I can't zoom in on the pictures, they are already at least twice lifesize).

What are those worth nowadays compared to the kosher one?

You shouldn't joke, Peck...what will happen to us all when the Chinese buy a coin from the UK to cast the latest mould for a new fake!Edit: which of course was a fake to begin with! (Though you're quite right - I shouldn't joke...)

To be honest, the only one worth slabbing is the Viccy halfcrown (the 1952 sixpence at a pinch if it was perfect). The others are perfectly collectable but I'd avoid paying through the nose for slabbing them.

I remember that advert!!