Peckris

You have a razor shears?

What the Italians would call locale, diretto, and fellatio

ARGENTUMANDCOINS I tell you why (IMO!) but you won't like it: 1, if the dealers send their coins for CGS grading, most (not all but most) of their UNC coins will be returned as EF, some as AUNC but some also as VF55. The same applies to EF, VF coins etc. Just ask Bill who already submitted around 2000 coins, or Divemaster. I have exactly the same experience. As NUMISMATIST said : quote "In fact I would say MOST Large Auctioneers and MOST large dealers, many being BNTA members seriously overgrade these days". I can confirm this from my own experience. Now when I am more familiar with CGS grading it takes me just few seconds on the coin show to see that the offered UNC coin would never ever make even a basic UNC80 grade... So instead of making vast profits they would suffer vast losses. 2, lot (not all) of coin dealers are not interested in a transparent coin market. With slabbed coin you can’t buy the coin as about EF and sell it as almost UNC and make large profit. As one of many examples – just recently I have noticed Victorian YH Halfcrown , sold in recent DNW auction (where described as GEF and sold for around 800,- pounds) on Coin Dealer website - described as choice mint state with price tag of 1500,- pounds. So either the vendor or new buyer was ripped off. DNW is happy with their profit, dealer is very happy with his profit and the buyer??? This is happening all the time and you have to realise that not all coin collectors are as experienced as lot of members on this forum and that it takes years to learn. In the meantime you rely on coin dealers and if you are not experienced enough you buy choice mint state halfcrown for 1500,- …. I wish CGS was around when I started collecting 20 years ago. 3, I do not understand your comment about “auction prices realized by the sister company of the slabbing firmâ€. Are you suggesting that London Coins is bidding against London Coins just to spend 500,- pounds on a coin worth 50, - pounds to show the public how good it is to have coin slabbed??? Yes they offer lot of slabbed coins in their auctions but if I want to sell slabbed coin I would certainly ask London Coins because I am sure that collectors who are interested in slabs are keeping eye on their auctions. I think your points 1. and 2. have a lot of merit Mike. There have always been apples in the dealer barrel that range from the rotten to the "over-enthusiastic", but a lot too - as you say - who are straight. But your point 3 could use some research on your part if you don't mind me saying. A company that slabs very ordinary coins and then (possibly) gets an employee to put them up on eBay with a lot of hype and vastly inflated prices (or bidding), to show the effect of slabbing on prices... well, I don't wish to be libellous, but it goes on.

Tabbing quickly (as one does) from here to Facebook and back, I keep looking for the "Like" button here and then saying sternly to myself, "This isn't FB or Twitter!". Then, all of a sudden, I noticed a tiny green + sign and red - sign just above the reply button. I must have seen it literally 000's of times, but it appears we can after all Like a post by clicking + (or not liking it by clicking -). So, emboldened by this discovery, and NEVER HAVING USED IT BEFORE, NEVER NEVER NEVER, I clicked the + sign above this post, and got the following message : "Action failed: You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day" Oh, the quota of "Like" votes is precisely 0, then?

...

It's actually not a coin, but a commemorative medallion, of a type which have been produced for such occasions since the 19th Century. I don't imagine very many were produced (or at least 'reverse engraved' with that particular inscription) so in that sense it is probably quite rare. However, by the same token, there wouldn't be many collectors for it either, so its value is probably modest.

You can even wrap a number of posts in double quote tags, so they all appear together ~ as above. Useful if you are replying to a few posts all relating to the same point, within a larger post reply. You mean, put an extra [quoote] at the beginning and an extra [/quoote] at the end? (Misspellings necessary just here, of course )

Starters? I thought this was a thread about fake hors d'oeuvres for a minute! Surely it's manes not starters? ..and they're off!!! Brings new meaning to 70's tv chef, Graham Kerr? the "Galloping Gourmet".

Which button is the multiquote button then? I have always used the insert quotation icon and cut and pasted the bits that others have said that I wanted to appear between the two brackets. You know how there are two buttons under each post, bottom right? One says 'Reply', the other says 'Multiquote'. Either way, you get the original post(s) already placed in your reply, marked with a 'Quote / EndQuote'. I wouldn't even know where the "insert quotation icon" is if it jumped up and bit me

Starters? I thought this was a thread about fake hors d'oeuvres for a minute! Surely it's manes not starters? ..and they're off!!!

Yeah, and £25 seems to cheap for this error. CCGB gives the price as £450 but it doesn't say when or where it went for that. Why don't you email the forum owner as he's also the author of CCGB Yeah, but the post before yours says it was in CCGB "pre-Perkins'. Original post states its in CCGB 2011, so as i said, email the forum owner. What's the point? It was in CCGB pre-Perkins. There's every chance he doesn't know. Hmmmm my 2010 CCGB book was penned by Chris, which then gives the kikelyhood that 2011 was also done by C.H.Perkins because we know that 2013 was also penned by Chris. Please read properly Peck Jeez, do I have to spoonfeed you Dave? HERE IS THE RELEVANT QUOTE FROM THE POST ABOVE!!!! "I have a lot of old CCGB... it's in the 2005 (and later) edition at £450, also in the 2001 edition at £450 (pre Perkins) but it's not in a 1987 edition." Note that "..also in the 2001 edition at £450 (pre Perkins).." Do you get it now??

And if you want to reply to SEVERAL posts ... Click on the reply that you wish to reply to, then reply.. Seriously lol ...even ones that quote one or more of the posts that you've already picked out... ...then click the Multiquote button against each post you want to include, then finally click the Add Reply button, edit everything to your heart's content, and voilà !

If the coin is noticeably worse than the encapsulated photo, then its owner has done themselves no favours (e.g. by incorrect handling or storage). Any buyer would see the coin is not the same condition (or even the same coin!) as its photo, and therefore either would not buy or - if having bought it already - would demand a refund. Such a system that I've proposed would actually encourage people to take proper care of their coins, as the greater the difference between coins and their photos, the more likely the value would not hold up. Oh, and one more thing - the encapsulated photo would include close up enlargements of noticeable 'unique identifying features' (toning, spots, any scratches, EKs, variety pointings, etc), which would prevent fraud by substituting a different coin on resale.

I don't think it can be a Maundy. I may be wrong, but I thought that the 1926 Maundy threepences were all the first type (I of BRITT to space). You mean not the M.E.? Which makes a certain sense I suppose, as the minting for Maundy would have to be done quite early in the year, to be ready for Easter. Indeed. According to Davies the M.E. wasn't used on the maundy coinage until 1928. Wow - that would make the 1927 Maundy set an interesting oddity in its own right, as the only 1927 coins to feature the pre M.E. portrait.

Bill, thank you for your input and your interest in this discussion. If you are a big fan of the CGS service, then you have no doubt followed the very many discussions in these forums on the pros and cons of slabbing. You will no doubt have seen that the vast majority of collectors here who have expressed an opinion, are either mostly against slabbing (but may own one or two slabbed pieces) or totally against them. You will also be aware, I'm sure, that there are some very serious collectors here, by which I mean NOT how seriously they take the hobby (we all do) but how much resource they put into tracking down very rare varieties and types, provenancing them, and then storing them. You are defending CGS against similar North American TPGs, specifically on the grading and slabbing of British coins. Even those of us who are against slabbing would agree that CGS are probably the best for British coins. Look at all the many complaints here about NGC - which you rightly pointed your finger at - and you will see that is true. Pro-slabbers will use CGS here in the UK because apart from their sluggish turnaround times, they seem to do a good job. Not all is sweetness and light, however. How else do you explain the appearance on eBay of very ordinary 1915 farthings, slabbed by CGS, and offered for sale at a vastly inflated price? "Ah", you might well respond, "that's not the fault of CGS, the pricing was set by the seller in the hope that a slabbed coin would command a high price". Fair enough. Yet the seller in question was traced back to London Coins. It therefore now looks like a clumsy attempt to promote the service by setting precedents for high prices on eBay for slabbed coins. Those who like slabbing defend the practice vigorously, and fair do's to them. Those of us who are against, and who prefer to remove our coins (with care) once in a while from their mahogany cabinet, and held up to be viewed and loved in the best light, look on askance at the growth of TPG services, and we wonder why a similar service could not be offered where the coin is graded and photographed, and the results sealed into a thin plastic capsule that could be stored separately from the coin, but included with it if it was sold? You are pro-slabs so you may not be open to the arguments against them, but I hope you will reflect on the fact that not everyone - and in these forums that means the vast majority - are in favour, or would willingly use the services of a TPG.

I don't think it can be a Maundy. I may be wrong, but I thought that the 1926 Maundy threepences were all the first type (I of BRITT to space). You mean not the M.E.? Which makes a certain sense I suppose, as the minting for Maundy would have to be done quite early in the year, to be ready for Easter.

It was the only fair I ever went to, but I always enjoyed it. You got to meet the Locketts, Daleys, Beaumonts, Craddocks, Nicholls, Dorsets, Windsors, Carltons et al, chew the fat, inspect goodies unhurriedly, rummage through trays of bargains, and leave with backache, a full bag and empty pockets Ah, those were the days!

It may be that NGC aren't familiar with the weak strikes that are normal for 1906 and 1907 pennies?

Yes, they all look like currency strikes (a proof for that date would be very rare). Unless you are thinking Maundy?

To me, it looks like a big gap between the 9 and the 6. I really don't see the 'skew'. The pennies often show this but you don't see it on crowns (well, I don't). Good observation.

1907 pennies are notorious for weak strikes. It's technically BU but the reverse is so weakly struck that to say "UNC Details" is just a joke! It's UNC with VF details on the reverse (No, it hasn't been cleaned - it's just a weak strike). Then it is a poor photo because it looks cleaned to me. (or my computer screen needs upgrading) it's probably because it was shot through a slab. The obverse is fully struck up with a lot of lustre, albeit streaky (also typical for the era). The reverse is very weak but has full lustre. It's not a coin I'd pay a great deal of money for tbh. A fully struck up example - even if only GEF or AUNC - with less lustre, would be a better bet IMO. His starting bid is actually more than I'd want to pay.

1907 pennies are notorious for weak strikes. It's technically BU but the reverse is so weakly struck that to say "UNC Details" is just a joke! It's UNC with VF details on the reverse (No, it hasn't been cleaned - it's just a weak strike).

Or an experimental die that wasn't used in the end?

You can post in any appropriate thread - but generally this forum is for new collectors who have an enquiry.

im not seeing in my browser a left or a right......just one above the other. if the top one is the business strike...........i got it completely wrong As I say, it's so hard to capture in a photo. Especially as I'm led to believe that the known 1964's aren't that great anyway. In hand, the 'bottom' coin (in your browser... try stretching the browser to make it wider) has a 'plastic' smoothness to the design and a mirror sheen to the fields. The complete absence of lustre on an otherwise UNC coin is just about the only clue. As for crispness of detail over the currency penny, there just isn't any. As you say, "not that great".