Peckris

My first reaction is to wonder why the first type of 1953 coins so absolutely & overwhlemingly outnumber the 2nd type. The answer must be the breakup of the plastic sets, which are exclusively the first type. Makes you wonder just how many of the sets remain (especially when you factor in the number of 1953 penny - only from sets - singletons that are/have been for sale). Mind you, the plastic sets are still commonly available so even with a large scale breakup ratio, there are still plenty left.

"the writing on the back is writen backwards. " Gary said that the back was the wrong way around... so this means it doesn't rule out the brockage - or confirms it? Your square 5p is interesting, my theory is that as they fed the srip of metal into cutting machine and cut it to the right size, then fed it into the stamping machine, it for some reason failed to stamp out the blank and it was struck in it's odd square state. It's a miracle it got through quality control (or maybe it did and a sneaky mint worker took a bag of dodgy ones home instead of to the melting pot ) You guys can be really slow sometimes...The other side is seen in a mirror, mirrors alway show things in reverse hence the writing is reversed. Where's that shaking head sadly emoticon when you need it. I didn't see the picture... and I was quoting you on the "written backwards" bit. If you're referring to "a brockage should have the reverse facing the right way in the mirror image" he was referring to the terminology for the tails side of the coin. Or am I being slow again? No, you're not. What's the evidence for that even BEING a mirror? The front image (right way around) is casting a shadow on the surface of the "mirror" which it certainly couldn't if it was an actual mirror. It looks more like a lightbox to me, than a mirror, showing the coin design struck reversed. It really is a mirror and it really is a threepence with two 'heads' or obverses, both the correct way round. Honestly! But... it's been carefully created from two coins welded together. Oh right! If it's yours, I can't argue with the horse's mouth, try as I might

Hi - this isn't the best way for us to view coins, for one thing there is no pause button on that viewer. However, the first is a very low grade George III shilling (1816?), possibly a base metal counterfeit. The last one is what it says on the tin! viz., a Co-op token probably from the late 19th or 20th Century. The middle one, which with a pause button I would have stopped and studied more closely, looks like a European early milled coin, but more than that I cannot say. Oh, now I've seen a pause - it's on the top and only shows if you mouse over. The middle item is of a European Charles II by the look of the legend, but there are confusing elements - IND IMP only applies to British coins, HISP refers to Spain, while DVX BVRG .. FLAN is probably 'Duke of Burgundy (and Flanders?)'. Probably a fantasy piece used for gaming, possibly 19th Century?

"the writing on the back is writen backwards. " Gary said that the back was the wrong way around... so this means it doesn't rule out the brockage - or confirms it? Your square 5p is interesting, my theory is that as they fed the srip of metal into cutting machine and cut it to the right size, then fed it into the stamping machine, it for some reason failed to stamp out the blank and it was struck in it's odd square state. It's a miracle it got through quality control (or maybe it did and a sneaky mint worker took a bag of dodgy ones home instead of to the melting pot ) You guys can be really slow sometimes...The other side is seen in a mirror, mirrors alway show things in reverse hence the writing is reversed. Where's that shaking head sadly emoticon when you need it. I didn't see the picture... and I was quoting you on the "written backwards" bit. If you're referring to "a brockage should have the reverse facing the right way in the mirror image" he was referring to the terminology for the tails side of the coin. Or am I being slow again? No, you're not. What's the evidence for that even BEING a mirror? The front image (right way around) is casting a shadow on the surface of the "mirror" which it certainly couldn't if it was an actual mirror. It looks more like a lightbox to me, than a mirror, showing the coin design struck reversed.

Not that scarce I don't think - it's another one most people don't notice, so you could probably find one for peanuts being sold as a 1967. I knock 'em out for £8 each but for gods sake don't pay that! £8 is an extraordinary price! I knocked 'em out at 50p from my list in the late 1990s, and the regular one for 20p. That probably gives an idea of the comparative scarcity - it's really not rare at all, and probably accounts for at least one fifth, maybe up to a third?, of all 1967 halfpennies. By the same token, maybe more got melted down as people had probably put aside large stockpiles of 1967s already; mind you, collectors were made aware of the variety long before the halfpenny was finally demonetised.

The main things would be 1) Decent photos with zoom facility 2) Always have the option of special next day deivery available. Always have the option of special next day deivery available Is that where you come down for breakfast and your family bows down in worship?

Can I add the 1967 pennies with 1) Stalk in helmet 2) Tidal wave next to lighthouse Never seen a photo of either David The "tidal wave" penny is 1966 - I bought one for a tenner from Phoenix Fairs some years back. Do you still have a 1956 1/2d spare Gary? I only really want one of them, which is the one with the wider rim, I of DEI to a space. PM me if you have one.

Oh Lord - I remember those, and debated whether to buy one. Sadly I lost.

Much closer to real life.

John He is on loan on a pay for play basis....guess what he is injured. He actually scored when he had a broken leg before we popped him up to you for £6m. It was that Robson chap who also collared Titus. Those two only fired on 3 cylinders...shame really. Christ is he sill alive? Not Christ, but Kieron Dyer lol Was it him who had the standup fist fight with the Barton character when they both played (supposedly) for the same team? It wasn't so much a stand up fist fight, as a direct attck on his teammate Ousmane Dabo at Man City. It was basically GBH by any other name. Barton is a very aggressive character who has been involved in violence towards others on many occasions. Not a pleasant individual IMO. Joey Barton I think you will find he has matured somewhat over the last 2 years. The sending off in the Arsenal game when he was grabbed by the scruff of the neck by Diaby being a good example. 2 years ago Diaby would have got snotted, this time Barton just shrugged it off. He doesn't drink anymore either, which obviously negates the thug in him on nights out. It took him a while but I think he has finally grown up and joined the human race. One of very few individuals who has had the guts to take a look at himself, decide he didn't like what he saw and make some life changing decisions. Must have taken an extreme effort of will power on his part. Nonetheless, I imagine there are many who will still feel quite apprehensive in their dealings with him, wondering if he will suddenly snap again, if they say the wrong thing ...such as "OMG, you're nearly as ugly as Gary Neville!"

Why have so many coins from around that era, got bloody holes drilled through them ? There must be a reason Not only that, why are there so many with initials & such like stamped on them ? The ones with initials on are often love tokens. You can just imagine the Barry White of his day grunting "Of course I luuuuuurv ya girl - look I've inscribed a whole week's wages with our initials on."

One of those sixpence varieties is scarce, but I can never remember which one (consults 1970 listing ...) - yes, the 1965 with the earlier obverse / milling (rated RARE). Any 1956 halfpenny that is not the normal regular type is also RARE.

Well spotted Peck! I'm impressed. Aw shucks. Looks at the carpet pretending to be embarrassed.

If the first is genuine (I can't tell without a lot of Photoshopping), it's probably Diocletian or one of the many short-lived emperors of the mid-late 3rd century A.D. As far as value is concerned, even if it is genuine, probably not worth a fortune as this type of coin is turned up quite regularly by metal detectorists. The second is definitely a gaming token and I would tend to agree with John (argentumandcoins) re the third. The first is an antoninianus of Postumus (you can just make out his name on the obverse); even if not a copy- which it probably is - it is not very valuable, around £20 perhaps. The third has the replica initials stamped in - if you look on the reverse somewhere inwards of 5 o'clock, there's a definite CR, and the company is WCR, right? But thanks for showing them - hope you didn't get burned buying them?

Ok, my first item is a 1967 penny that 'clacks' when you drop it. I COULD put a picture up but it looks just like any old boring 1967 penny! Nice grade, mind you, EF with traces of lustre, must be worth all of ... ooh, what shall we say, 99p plus postage? Could it be on a similar penny planchet but for another country? Is it a forgery made of another metal? (As if anyone would forge a 1967 penny ) Does it have anything wrong with the edge? It looks and feels exactly like any 1967 penny (definitely the right planchet, metal, etc). And you're quite right - who'd forge one of they? You'd only notice something wrong if you dropped it on a surface - instead of ringing, it clacks. The only I've not done is weigh it, but I don't have a set of they sensitive coin weigh thingies. Will look like this I think he'd have noticed that! I can definitely confirm I would have noticed that!

Ok, my first item is a 1967 penny that 'clacks' when you drop it. I COULD put a picture up but it looks just like any old boring 1967 penny! Nice grade, mind you, EF with traces of lustre, must be worth all of ... ooh, what shall we say, 99p plus postage? Could it be on a similar penny planchet but for another country? Is it a forgery made of another metal? (As if anyone would forge a 1967 penny ) Does it have anything wrong with the edge? It looks and feels exactly like any 1967 penny (definitely the right planchet, metal, etc). And you're quite right - who'd forge one of they? You'd only notice something wrong if you dropped it on a surface - instead of ringing, it clacks. The only I've not done is weigh it, but I don't have a set of they sensitive coin weigh thingies. Sounds top me as though the metal in the planchet is delaminating i.e. splitting internally along the flan. Wouldn't there be some external evidence for that? Or do you think it could be something as simple as an air bubble?

Ok, my first item is a 1967 penny that 'clacks' when you drop it. I COULD put a picture up but it looks just like any old boring 1967 penny! Nice grade, mind you, EF with traces of lustre, must be worth all of ... ooh, what shall we say, 99p plus postage? Could it be on a similar penny planchet but for another country? Is it a forgery made of another metal? (As if anyone would forge a 1967 penny ) Does it have anything wrong with the edge? It looks and feels exactly like any 1967 penny (definitely the right planchet, metal, etc). And you're quite right - who'd forge one of they? You'd only notice something wrong if you dropped it on a surface - instead of ringing, it clacks. The only I've not done is weigh it, but I don't have a set of they sensitive coin weigh thingies. I picked a little scales up off the net for £2 and a pound postage new, expecting nothing more than a rough estimate, but the beauty is accurate to 0.01 of a gram Ooh that DOES sound a good bargain!

Ok, my first item is a 1967 penny that 'clacks' when you drop it. I COULD put a picture up but it looks just like any old boring 1967 penny! Nice grade, mind you, EF with traces of lustre, must be worth all of ... ooh, what shall we say, 99p plus postage? Could it be on a similar penny planchet but for another country? Is it a forgery made of another metal? (As if anyone would forge a 1967 penny ) Does it have anything wrong with the edge? It looks and feels exactly like any 1967 penny (definitely the right planchet, metal, etc). And you're quite right - who'd forge one of they? You'd only notice something wrong if you dropped it on a surface - instead of ringing, it clacks. The only I've not done is weigh it, but I don't have a set of they sensitive coin weigh thingies.

Hi, I think this is an appropriate topic to ask: to which of six types of farthing 1862 in www.aboutfarthings.co.uk is this coin? Thanks... that looks like an overstrike as well, thin over fat 8 again. Thanks. Any idea about value in similar grade, 5-6 pounds maybe? If it's 8 over 8, CCGB lists it for around £50 in VF (About right for yours). But only to a varieties collector - it's a very common date otherwise.

Ok, my first item is a 1967 penny that 'clacks' when you drop it. I COULD put a picture up but it looks just like any old boring 1967 penny! Nice grade, mind you, EF with traces of lustre, must be worth all of ... ooh, what shall we say, 99p plus postage?

I only have one quibble - if I am selling a coin worth more than the GPO compensation rate (£32 ?) I would INSIST on the buyer paying Special Delivery. Untracked mail isn't worth it, it seems, judging from all the horror stories relayed in these very pages. I want evidence someone has received the item before I even respond to a (probably fraudulent) "I haven't received the coin" whinge. very good advice. My pet hates on any site selling coins is poor pictures and only one side of the coin showing. Always show both sides of the coin you are selling. perfect your coin photography and look into external picture hosting, ebays picture size is poor! Have a look at these listings, a good example of showing the coin you are selling Argentum , a bit of free advertising for one of our members

As far as I can judge, you are quite correct. That sad and sorry specimen is indeed the Gouby X or hollow neck type. In that condition for wear, worth £30 -£40 based on recent sales. As it is, well £0.99 looks about right if you can live with it. The hollow neck is no longer the infallible predictor we worked out (see long thread in the Varieties sub-forum) : i.e. ALL Gouby X's have a hollow neck, but not all hollow necks are GX's. The I in BRITT is the only cast-iron guarantee.

Declan, I'm very flattered by the discussions about my two books and you all comparing them in the same space as Freeman and Davies!! My personal view is that any newcomer or general date collector would be well advised to go for Davies and/or Freeman as they cover a wider field than mine. For anybody particularly interested in varieties and the 20th C specifically then clearly my books would be very helpful. I wrote them primarily because I was confused about all the different identifiers that seemed to be used in different sources, so I brought them all together in one place, as well as establishing some new ones. However, the aim was always to cover 20th C as this was where all my confusion came in. When it comes to 19th C the impression I get is that the identifiers are mostly singletons for a particular date/denomination e.g. the RRITANNIA sixpence of 1878 and these are quite well defined in the standard works. Also, of course Michael Gouby has covered the penny series pretty comprehensively in his book. However, I have toyed with the idea of 'doing' the earlier centuries. I'm just not sure that I have the patience to do it all over again, as well as tracking down all the types - there's a hell of a lot of them!! Then there's listing and photographing all the differences, not just the well known one and I find it a daunting prospect - god knows how Peck kept going!!! This was quite a task for the 20thC but at least the supply of coins was no problem. When it comes to the earlier ones, the number of specimens to either purchase or ask owners to allow me to photograph could become prohibitive. Several possibilities have occurred to me as options, but I haven't done anything with either of them. I have toyed with idea of a short book on Victorian die numbers and also with a book to cover overdates for all denominations of milled coinage, with photos of all the types. Again the problem is gaining access to the various specimens as I really can't afford to buy them all. I did consider and then discount a third book in my series to cover gold varieties of the 20th C. Two or three reasons. Firstly there aren't that many different types, so the book would be rather thin. Secondly, not many people collect gold anyway. Thirdly, I doubt that even fewer people collect varieties of gold. Having said this, I was staggered to find that there are three or four types of 1937 Gold £5 piece - I would like to own one of them, but I doubt if many people would collect each of the varieties. Finally, I did wonder about doing something on all the material not covered in my two books, particulartly looking at die cracks, and other faults, mainly for the bronze series. Any thoughts from the forum on what might be worthwhile? My opinion on the Victorian silver book is this. Why don't you gather the pictures first, then perhaps the book might not be so daunting, it might take a year or whatever to locate specimens that you require, but then at least you have what you require then set about the task of actually writing. I'm sure people of the forum who collect silver can help with good scans and you can always ask for help if needs be for a specific coin or die number here and hopefully someone might have it if you are struggling. It probably seems more daunting having to set about both tasks together (pics plus writing) but if you take it at your lesuire and set about gathering the pictures first then the book will probably be the easier part of the whole process I can let you have pictures of the '8 over 8, distant 7' rare 1887 wreath reverse sixpence, whenever you need it Dave.

That explains the rumours about Dalglish's interest then! I have to admit my first thought was "Nooooooooooo", but if he is as you say ... oops, I'd best not be starting more rumours.

You mean he uses hs where he should be using ns. You mean you don't understand simple Englisn, Rob?