Peckris

That's unnervingly like Nordle's buy! But still, a worthy tenner's worth (Anyone still reckon Spink's prices bear any relation to the real world?? )

The pictures aren't quite as crisp as they might be so I'm going to say GEF or AU. Book price would be around £20 - £25 so I'm guessing you paid less than that?

Wow, that's an amazing capture! You did really really well there. Just make sure the coin-in-the-picture is the coin-you-get!

Do you think that's so? I'd be surprised - the demonetisation of the farthing was trailed for quite some time, was a unique event at the time being years before decimalisation, and being such a near worthless denomination, people could well afford to put aside as many as they wanted. For example, the 1956 was quite a low mintage and listed as a 'key date' in the 60s, but it's not even scarce! There were copious amounts of farthings available for pence in the late 60s, which implies that a massive amount were saved from the melting pot. They weren't rounded up as part of the decimalisation melt either.

Yeah, my 1930 has patchy lustre which is in distinct contrast to all the others in that series including a BU 1932.

I got mine from Ian Murray at the Midland for 50p. I have the feeling he knew what it was too.

Very little remaining lustre, some rubbing to the cheekbone, average strike ... you'd be lucky to get £20 for that one IMO. I think a real gem COULD rate £65, but not your average BU. Definitely! Where's the lustre? I've had a nice 1929 for a while but it's clearly been cleaned in the past, I've kept an eye on the ones on eBay but can never find one cheaper than around £30-40.. £2.50 : (Mind you, that WAS quite some time ago. From R&L Coins in Blackpool, of blessed recent mention. Still have it. )

Find what you like I've always been attracted to pennies and halfcrowns (nice large size), and sixpences (not sure why - perhaps the romance of the 'tanner' pocket money, and also the way they avoided decimalisation obliteration and hung on for some years after.) Brass threepences are a nice unique type of coin that only had a 30-year run.

Your picture is seriously blurred. Not much use I'm afraid

Good point I didn't realise so many more were issued. The proportion is unknown to me. Maybe it is just a case of far fewer currency issues having survived in high grade then. Yes, that's probably the case.

R&L were a staple for novice collectors in the 60s, and were still around when I worked in Blackpool in 1979 when I bought some coins off them many of which I still have. I believe they still exist, but now under the Chard name not R&L, and only deal in gold? Yes ... http://www.chards.co.uk/

Very little remaining lustre, some rubbing to the cheekbone, average strike ... you'd be lucky to get £20 for that one IMO. I think a real gem COULD rate £65, but not your average BU.

Post-minting graffiti (machine punched probably)

Spink 2014 gives an UNC value of £65. Ah it wasn't far off then. Thanks Take Spink prices for modern with a large pinch of salt - they wouldn't sell one for that price. CCGB is more accurate from a 'real world' perspective.

CCGB 2014 has it £30 UNC. A BU price isn't listed, but it would be £40 (1930 is £30/£40, and 1930 is a bit more difficult.)

Many more plastic sets were minted than proof sets. One million versus 40,000? In either case, the proportion of 2+A is currently unknown? Interesting, that 2+A. On both its obverse and reverse the dots / teeth appear to be smaller than on the other 2's and A's pictured. Also, the reverse legend and wren's feet look thinner.

Great video. Not sure what it has to do with Poundland scissors? (Though I have a pretty awesome set of 3 scissors from there..)

...plus me

Wow, that's a dramatic turnaround! It must be because all the proofs are in high grade, where the currency strikes mostly won't be - I'll bet the 2+A currency in VF doesn't fetch so very much.

Oh ok - that's a good reason. I got my proof when someone offered me a 1953 set when I was a dealer. I paid a fair buying price for it, and you can imagine my face when I examined it later and found the farthing was a 2+A.

It's definitely earlier than 6, as there is a big gap between the top of the head and the linear circle.

WRL is in the heading Rob Yes, but that doesn't tell the average person it is a reproduction. It's a very sly way of trying to cover your own backside. It doesn't say 'THIS IS A REPLICA'. I know WRL is one, you know it is too, but an awful lot of people see wrl in images without knowing its significance. The description says wrl, but also says in very good condition for its age. Methinks deception is intended. I've "informed" the seller of what he probably already knows, i.e. what "wrl" (sic) stands for.

I don't have a spare!! But what I do have is the proof which is estimated to be at least 10 times as rare as the business strike, and which Colin Cooke didn't actually believe to exist, for a while. Not sure why you would want the currency example? Very scarce yes, but not compared to the proof.

Yes, Happy birthday

All UK silver pre-1947 is at least 50% silver, pre-1920 is sterling silver. All those worn shillings with a lion on a crown are at least 50% silver. I see an Edwardian example, which providing it's not dated 1905, is worth silver bullion value.