Peckris

Just an error Chris, a scarce error though. ahh an error, just looking, i made an error as well George I not II also the ssc is actually css No, that IS SSC - the initials stand for South Sea Company.

Yeah, it's like A and A* at exams. The As are getting so common everyone GETS an A* now. Sorry Tom, I had to correct you... I think Tom was talking about employers, university admissions, etc....

If anyone of us could answer that question, we'd be millionaires tomorrow. For my part, I'm in the pessimist school on this one. Remember the 'never-ending bull market' and 'the end of boom and bust' we heard about at the Millennium? Look what happened in just 7 years. Philately - once ever more popular than coins - is now a shadow of itself. Economics dictates that demand simply cannot continue forever. The only reason for optimism (unless you're building a collection now) is that the supply of predecimals is not only finite but ever-shrinking; that doesn't guarantee that a demand will always be there (just look at stamps). Also, it would take forever for late 60s UK coins to find a demand to outstrip supply.

Why all the talk about pies? Is this anything to do with the much reported pastie scandal?

I had one of those 'veg pot' things today which had the nerve to call itself an 'Indian daal' [sic]. No! It was certainly a bit spicy and contained lentils / split peas. But it was more a kind of "what you might get in a vegetarian restaurant in Bognor Regis" sort of affair. I dunno about you, but to me a dhal should have oil seeping around its edges and have a strong taste of garlic! Both features sadly lacking I'm afraid.

I'm a newbie collector, so still trying to decide where to specialise. Doesn't help with the BOSS (wife) collecting with me, she goes for one's she like the look of. So far collection ranges from Roman through to the Silver 50p Proof. Personally I prefer Hammered (Post Roman) and early milled. Have had some luck so far and managed to pick up some bargains along the way. Picture of the 1845 5/3 posted but I haven't worked out how to get the detail, it doesn't show where you can see the remnants of the 3 under the 5, and I only paid less than the value of and straight 1845 HC "Hammered" really refers to medieval coins even though striking methods hadn't changed for centuries. Post-Roman - i.e. Saxon and Viking - isn't generally referred to that way. And the series are very different - I very much like the post-Roman coinage (though I can't afford it), unlike hammered, which I don't really. The designs and styles and proportions are quite separate.

Yes, but how does that stack up against the actual value of the metal content? Remembering that copper is now so high that people steal phone cables to get it.

oner = 100 notes = £100 That's a "ton" - where I come from, "oner" is "one".

"Restrike" and "original" are not the right terms for a coin that was never out of production for over 200 years.

really means.....we couldnt sell em so we melted em all down i wouldnt part with my unc or ef d/florins, however ive emailed the mint and offered them my entire vf collection of d/florins for a oner each, pointing out that they are worth much less than this, no reply yet Jeez, even the silver is worth MUCH more than £1.

Ok, so, basically Proof is Proof, so no curve balls in there...............Spelling.................weekly stuck? Weakly struck............strat, should read start?. Sorry, just making srue People who live in iPhones shouldn't throw scones

I'd say that its metal content is now worth more than 5p!

I would take these figures with a pinch of salt. If they were arrived at after a survey of coins in circulation, the accuracy would depend on the date at which the survey was done. The reason? Our fathers and grandfathers removing them from circulation as they 'may be valuable one day'. You only have to look at e-bay to see how many are still out there waiting for collectors to buy them - hundreds of thousands maybe. I was inspecting every penny I could get my hands on from 1969 to 1971 and didn't see any, not one! Clearly a survey conducted in 1920 would be more accurate than one in done in 1970, so if this was performed closer to the latter date than the former, you will need a great deal of help from your condiment set. Interesting! I was checking assiduously from 1968 to 1970 and I found : 0 x 1919KN 2 x 1918KN (rubbish condition) 0 x 1918H several 1919H but most were sub-Fair, perhaps two were somewhere between Fair and Fine

Hence the reason you got it for 6 quid. Strong coin but fooked at the end of the day Not at all. It's no worse than any coin with an overall patina. The colouration may be unusual but there would be collectors who would be glad to own it. Which is, after all, what this particular discussion is all about. I'm not in the market for selling it, but I'm prepared to bet I could get a decent price for it on eBay.

I have NO idea what's happened to this one, but I rather like it. I got it from Stephen Lockett's £6 tray some years ago; it was discoloured in a multi-hued kind of way, but only after it got silver dipped did it acquire this rather nice uniform hue!

Fully struck is probably one of the hardest of all to locate. The obverses (for reasons well documented already) are always very weak. My own is VF to the eye whilst the reverse is a well struck UNC. Mine is also a fully struck reverse with virtually no detectable wear. The obverse legend has absolutely no flattening whatever, but the hair is almost completely lacking. How you'd grade it? Nightmare!

The absence of any of these coins in my collection is not so much deafening, as blinding

If I had that cash to spare, I would. That's one of the best obverses I've seen for it. Nevermind that the 18KN is very much commoner than the 19KN, it's still a beaut. I'd give it houseroom!! Now you're making me wish I'd gone higher. I've missed out on several coins that I'd really hoped to acquire in the last week and have that frustrating serial underbidder feeling! You could always go for this one only £700 Gorgeous! Those highlights being reflected back off the ... off the ... wait, I can't see, it's blinding me!!

Hi, I've never seen the flaw to the date area before. To my knowledge it's not a known variety and would probably only prove of interest to collectors if other similar coins are found. It's certainly worth holding onto though. The ONE' flaw is, however, a well known variety and considered collectible. Typically these sell for £40-£60. In high grade! (I'm certainly in the market for a minimum EF, but would prefer GEF - UNC). However, in the grade illustrated it would be no higher than around £10. BTW Gouby rates them one order of rarity higher than the 1926ME. I actually meant £40-60 at the grade shown, based on recent eBay sale prices. I've not seen a GEF-UNC example but would expect such to achieve £200-£300! Bronze prices are crazy. I was watching a 1918kN in GEF-UNC that sold on eBay last night for £1340. They're not that rare! That's crazy! I've got about three which I got from change in the late 60s. Perhaps I can yet swap them for a high grade, with a cash adjustment (he said, murmuring his pipedreams out loud..) Has anyone ever done a study as to how rare the 18KN is in relation to the 19KN? My own guesstimate is that it's at least 3 times commoner, maybe 4 or 5. In fact, I'd say the 18H and KN weren't so very far apart from each other. Unlike the 19H and KN which must be at least an order of ten apart, if not more.

I hope NEVER more desirable, but I wouldn't rule out "accepted", especially among buyers who began in the internet era. Don't ask me why. Perhaps it's the loss of education about coins that used to be provided by dealers , books and periodicals. I remember offloading the remainder of a lot I'd picked up at W&W in the 90s - the majority of the coins (high grade Geo V) had been noticeably polished. I was astonsihed how much it went for when I put it into Greenslades about 10 years ago or so. Not far off what you'd expect from uncleaned coins.

If I had that cash to spare, I would. That's one of the best obverses I've seen for it. Nevermind that the 18KN is very much commoner than the 19KN, it's still a beaut. I'd give it houseroom!!

It's nose to VS that is the rarer one. I was simply using a mixture of Davies and Spink terminology. Given that in both varieties the nose points to S, it's a pretty useless discriminator. OI! Spink's terminology is actually MY terminology as I was the one who got the two types of pre-ME obverses into Spink in the first place, specifically so that the rare 1921 shilling got recognised. How was I to know that (1) of the four or five identifiers I gave them Spink would pick only that one to use in the Catalogue, and (2) they would actually use them the wrong way round. The nose does NOT point to S in both cases (see attached), but really the way to tell them apart is quite straightforward. The Type 1 obverse is the deep-cut high-relief obverse used for most large silver between 1911 and 1920 - and for rare 1921 shilings and 1923 florins; the Type 2 is the shallow obverse from 1920 to 1926. Another good way to tell them apart is the distance from the legend to the teeth - it's twice as much on the Type 2 obverse. (Why has this forum suddenly stopped allowing Adobe Photoshop JPEGs from being uploaded?) No offence intended. However, I still maintain that both noses point to S albeit not quite the same part of the S. See the picture below which has Davies obverses 3 & 4 merged together such that the portraits align as closely as the slightly different sizes allow. I agree that they are pretty easy to tell apart, especially when you see the two side by side. I think you've made my point for me! On that overlay, the legend GEORGIVS is probably the biggest displacement between the two obverses. If you take the nose as an arrow head, with the bridge forming one side and the underside of the nostril forming the other, then quite clearly - on your photo - the arrow is pointing between the V and the (upper of the two) S. But pointing almost directly at the lower S. There is only one way that a nose can point to anything - and that's along a line parallel to either axis. The two axes here are 1) straight down the slope of the nose (from bridge to tip) and 2) the lower edge of the nose (parallel to the line formed by the top of the nostril opening). As can clearly be seen in the attached pictures, both axes of both noses point to the same letters. If there are several interpretations of what the words "nose points to" means then clearly it's a poor descriptor. It may well be, but it's MY poor descriptor! I don't agree with your verdict on what noses point to - to me it was as "obvious" as it was "poor" to you, that the nose is forming an arrow head and that's what I intended by it when I used it. Spink must have understood me, even though they got the description part the wrong way round. If you try to see it as I saw it - the nose as an arrow - I'm sure you will see the truth of my description.

It's nose to VS that is the rarer one. I was simply using a mixture of Davies and Spink terminology. Given that in both varieties the nose points to S, it's a pretty useless discriminator. OI! Spink's terminology is actually MY terminology as I was the one who got the two types of pre-ME obverses into Spink in the first place, specifically so that the rare 1921 shilling got recognised. How was I to know that (1) of the four or five identifiers I gave them Spink would pick only that one to use in the Catalogue, and (2) they would actually use them the wrong way round. The nose does NOT point to S in both cases (see attached), but really the way to tell them apart is quite straightforward. The Type 1 obverse is the deep-cut high-relief obverse used for most large silver between 1911 and 1920 - and for rare 1921 shilings and 1923 florins; the Type 2 is the shallow obverse from 1920 to 1926. Another good way to tell them apart is the distance from the legend to the teeth - it's twice as much on the Type 2 obverse. (Why has this forum suddenly stopped allowing Adobe Photoshop JPEGs from being uploaded?) No offence intended. However, I still maintain that both noses point to S albeit not quite the same part of the S. See the picture below which has Davies obverses 3 & 4 merged together such that the portraits align as closely as the slightly different sizes allow. I agree that they are pretty easy to tell apart, especially when you see the two side by side. I think you've made my point for me! On that overlay, the legend GEORGIVS is probably the biggest displacement between the two obverses. If you take the nose as an arrow head, with the bridge forming one side and the underside of the nostril forming the other, then quite clearly - on your photo - the arrow is pointing between the V and the (upper of the two) S. But pointing almost directly at the lower S. There is only one way that a nose can point to anything - and that's along a line parallel to either axis. The two axes here are 1) straight down the slope of the nose (from bridge to tip) and 2) the lower edge of the nose (parallel to the line formed by the top of the nostril opening). As can clearly be seen in the attached pictures, both axes of both noses point to the same letters. If there are several interpretations of what the words "nose points to" means then clearly it's a poor descriptor. It may well be, but it's MY poor descriptor! I don't agree with your verdict on what noses point to - to me it was as "obvious" as it was "poor" to you, that the nose is forming an arrow head and that's what I intended by it when I used it. Spink must have understood me, even though they got the description part the wrong way round. If you try to see it as I saw it - the nose as an arrow - I'm sure you will see the truth of my description.

Hi, I've never seen the flaw to the date area before. To my knowledge it's not a known variety and would probably only prove of interest to collectors if other similar coins are found. It's certainly worth holding onto though. The ONE' flaw is, however, a well known variety and considered collectible. Typically these sell for £40-£60. In high grade! (I'm certainly in the market for a minimum EF, but would prefer GEF - UNC). However, in the grade illustrated it would be no higher than around £10. BTW Gouby rates them one order of rarity higher than the 1926ME.

Don't think you're missing anything - it looks like a bog-standard, perfectly ordinary, average, cleaned example of the Withdrawn Type 6d. Ah good. It's not just me then. I also notice he is trying to sell a much more common 4+D 1921 shilling as the scarce 3+D "nose to S". It's nose to VS that is the rarer one. I was simply using a mixture of Davies and Spink terminology. Given that in both varieties the nose points to S, it's a pretty useless discriminator. OI! Spink's terminology is actually MY terminology as I was the one who got the two types of pre-ME obverses into Spink in the first place, specifically so that the rare 1921 shilling got recognised. How was I to know that (1) of the four or five identifiers I gave them Spink would pick only that one to use in the Catalogue, and (2) they would actually use them the wrong way round. The nose does NOT point to S in both cases (see attached), but really the way to tell them apart is quite straightforward. The Type 1 obverse is the deep-cut high-relief obverse used for most large silver between 1911 and 1920 - and for rare 1921 shilings and 1923 florins; the Type 2 is the shallow obverse from 1920 to 1926. Another good way to tell them apart is the distance from the legend to the teeth - it's twice as much on the Type 2 obverse. (Why has this forum suddenly stopped allowing Adobe Photoshop JPEGs from being uploaded?) No offence intended. However, I still maintain that both noses point to S albeit not quite the same part of the S. See the picture below which has Davies obverses 3 & 4 merged together such that the portraits align as closely as the slightly different sizes allow. I agree that they are pretty easy to tell apart, especially when you see the two side by side. I think you've made my point for me! On that overlay, the legend GEORGIVS is probably the biggest displacement between the two obverses. If you take the nose as an arrow head, with the bridge forming one side and the underside of the nostril forming the other, then quite clearly - on your photo - the arrow is pointing between the V and the (upper of the two) S. But pointing almost directly at the lower S.