Peckris

No, they are two separate sellers, the first one allegedly in Paris, the second in Ireland. It's the unexpected abundance on ebay of coins that book above £2K in VF that made me sit up and look harder. For a smaller denomination, that is a large number. Without following the thread back, just I case there's any link, the Paris groat was bought from an Irish seller? Is "Rob" any relation to our own esteemed Rob?

Not me! Just thinking if he had gone to the right of the Lighthouse, it would have been rarer still LOL.. I was just going to say the same thing.... Great minds and all that.... Only a handful known of those..... Only one, surely? There was one reported that made me aware of it, and I currently own one, and know of one other... so that would make at least 3.... I was thinking more in terms of the "apsolutely mint state" bun halfpenny. Yes, that's what I thought you meant too!!

Not me! Just thinking if he had gone to the right of the Lighthouse, it would have been rarer still 2 bids now - all the way up to £1.75! Not bad for an "apsolutely mint state" bun halfpenny

Baldwin77 thanks to Google Thanks! Can you trust the local dealer - sure he's not putting you off on his own account?

Very interesting. And Myth 6 is of great interest too, to anyone who's owned a decimal proof set - sealed into their plastic coffins, a lot of those coins tone, and tone badly (I call as witness, the 1973 set..).

Interestingly there are NO bids on those three items. And one is only 20 minutes from ending.

...and a taxi ride home, and still change from sixpence

Do you think we could have a link please guys?

I just had a close look under the loupe, Peck, and you are, to a certain extent, right. Though not as much right as the photos I have posted here might suggest, I can see what you mean. Perhaps the slabber was eating a particularly flaky pasty, or rolling a cigarette with particularly old tobacco, at the time it was sealed. Phew, my confidence in them is restored! Or drinking acorn coffee!

Oh well, look on the bright side - at least it's not an 1869 or 1871. The 1885 is quite easily upgraded.

Depends what's caused it. If it's oil / petrol it should be fairly easy, but if it's lacquer, not so sure.

Reserve judgement... If you look closely at that, it appears there may be some gunk trapped between the top acorn and the slab? It doesn't display typical wear, especially when you see the other acorns are ok. There's an 'edge' to that mark, and you can just make out the bobbles under it. Have another look Declan, you may find it's not worn as you think it is?

Cheers, Dave, I'll had a dig around in there and see how Chris has played it! This is the difference between a catalogue, a reference, and a price guide. Spink and Coincraft are catalogues, in that they identify each major type of a nation's coinage between certain dates, giving unique identifiers to each type that can be quoted as definitive. Both those mentioned are combined with price guides too, as values are given not only for major types (as Seaby started out to do) but for each year, and latterly for each major variety too. They sometimes began as genuine sale catalogues, e.g. Spink's 1925 forerunner of ESC offered each listed item for sale at the prices quoted. A reference covers one particular aspect of a coinage - e.g. Peck for British Museum base metal post-Tudor, Freeman for bronze, and ESC for milled silver. Again there are unique identifiers for each type, and they further subdivide into year, and include proofs and patterns to boot. You will find that references like this don't usually quote prices, though Freeman 2nd edition does in supplement form (which he quickly realised was a mistake, as a reference should last for years while prices are out of date as soon as they are published; Davies quotes prices, but these are now only of use as a guide to comparative rarity). A price guide is not a major reference, but will - like CCGB - quote existing references from Peck, Freeman, etc. Coins and Market Values, the Yearbook, are also simply guides. CCGB is actually one of the best for being comprehensive, but doesn't go back as far as early milled or earlier.

Can you show a picture?

It looks severely cleaned, though.

That's true. However, the advantage of a made-to-measure solution is that you start with all the fields you identify as what you need, and can add to it as you go along without difficulty. The initial effort will repay dividends in the long run.

Welcome to the forums Cristatus I've given a reply to your coin collecting software question, in the software forum (the right place for it). Your collection sounds impressive! I'm trying to collect by type now, but with so many gaps in early milled (pre-1816) and prices being what they are now, most of them will remain gaps. I'm also really interested in the Soho output, but cannot run to patterns and proofs, which is a real shame. I don't even have a decent 1806 halfpenny! but I wouldn't settle for the average kind you see around. I did buy a fantasy proof penny dated 1798, but it was based on real original designs (e.g. Kuchler's portrait) and was only £10 on eBay. I assume you have all the varieties of farthing like "both Gs over" bun, all the 1953s, both 1915s, etc? Colin Cooke was a great source information in his lifetime, especially for farthings. Anyway, will be good to see your contributions.

Well well - and £99 with 5 days to go. Who says you have to have lustre for a penny to be saleable? I paid £33 Not bad! Though not quite as good as the £1 my 1862 cost me in the 1990s :D

Your link doesn't work. However, members here seem to prefer a spreadsheet solution, with Excel being the leading candidate. For those of us brought up on databases, Access or FileMaker Pro are more flexible than a spreadsheet, especially when it comes to designing layouts or linking files together in a relational way. Here's a link from Google that seems to work ok : http://exactchange.info/

POOR??? That's a CC 'Fine', and at least 'Fair' to everyone else!

Well well - and £99 with 5 days to go. Who says you have to have lustre for a penny to be saleable?

Well, the detail is crisp enough for a proof, but the rim is often the clincher, and it's hard to tell with yours. I have an 1862 that is similar - great detail, and the reverse is prooflike in certain lights, slight mirroring. The overall colour is dark, like yours. For me, the jury's out, but the likeliest verdict is that either they are early strikes, or struck from proof dies which often got used up for currency strikes. The dark colour? That's the weird part - without the great detail, you'd say that is what often happens to bronze over time. With the crispness... I really don't know. What I do know is, proofs are very rare, so the odds are against it. If I have neck-ache tomorrow, I'll know who to blame Pies! Doesn't your imaging software have a 'rotate' function? Certainly looks like an early strike from the level of detail and crispness of the reverse. It's harder to judge the obverse as the leaves aren't too clear in the photograph. As Peck says, proofs are rare and, in this condition, it would be hard to find anyone who would support a 'proof' verdict. For comparison I have taken close-ups of my two coins. Although the coin on the right is UNC with full lustre, it lacks the smoothness and true consistent depth of detail that the proof (on the left) displays. The overall effect is almost 'plastic' in its smoothness, compared to the rougher and slightly broken surface of the currency strike. Hope this helps. Yes, that really helps. Somehow though, I think the difference lies not in the detail but in the finish, which is why I guess most of the bun proofs are bronzed or similar.

Mmm worth £1600 so I'll sell it for a grand. Bargain. 99p would be closer to the mark for a 6 + G in this condition. I note he has tilted the camera so that the clincher between Obverses 2 and 6 - the gap between the top of the head and the linear circle - can't be seen clearly! Yes, funny that! Luckily he hasn't managed to hide different protrusion of leaves at the front of the wreath. Haha yes! A person of limited intelligence perhaps .. or else relying on the limited intelligence of buyers

Mmm worth £1600 so I'll sell it for a grand. Bargain. 99p would be closer to the mark for a 6 + G in this condition. I note he has tilted the camera so that the clincher between Obverses 2 and 6 - the gap between the top of the head and the linear circle - can't be seen clearly!

Well, the detail is crisp enough for a proof, but the rim is often the clincher, and it's hard to tell with yours. I have an 1862 that is similar - great detail, and the reverse is prooflike in certain lights, slight mirroring. The overall colour is dark, like yours. For me, the jury's out, but the likeliest verdict is that either they are early strikes, or struck from proof dies which often got used up for currency strikes. The dark colour? That's the weird part - without the great detail, you'd say that is what often happens to bronze over time. With the crispness... I really don't know. What I do know is, proofs are very rare, so the odds are against it.