azda

What makes my blood boil is this scenario........... I was selling a Queen Anne Guinea a while back, an obvious dealer asked me what i wanted for it, so i said how about Spink book which was quite a chunk, so he basically said to me i was being unrealistic (obviously as he was a dealer). He said he'd placed a bid at what he thought it was worth, needless to say he got outbid at 250 quid. I know dealers have to make a living and have overheads etc, but why do some think they SHOULD have that coin at 1/4 or even less of it's value, that sort of thing really gets on my nipples. I can't remember what date it exactly was now, but it was in GVF and booked at well over 1500 quid. That is what makes my blood boil

Looking at the both OBVs now, the tops of the GEORGIVS are missing in the same places, so is the topic starter coin picture

An enlargement of the 1st one, hopefully can see the details a bit better

2nd one found today

I never bought it Tom, was just posting the picture to show how it coincides with the topic starter, but would you believe i've just spotted another, this time without scratch as far as i can tell. Picture to follow, am oot shopping with the Frau :-/

Here's a Northumberland Shilling i've just found, same scratch at 3 O'clock running from the mouth to the rim The grade looks somewhat better though than this topic starter. Weight 6.01g

The H is not really there. It's because your mind is so used to seeing an H that you are automatically putting one there. If you look really close you can see that it is just a figment of your imagination. This guy (Ian Fall I believe) usually knows what he's doing, so I'm at a loss to understand why such a peculiar listing. I guess he must just have attached the wrong picture, but then surely he would just replace it. Dunno. The same guy is selling a high grade 1870 with quite a few bids on. The only weird thing about that description is the rarity rating - "SCARCE" (correct) "101 - 200 specimens" (oh come on!! get real, there's many more than that even of 1869s and 1871s!!!) He normally uses Goubys book for picture references, which Gouby states cannot be used, he also quotes Gooubys rarity and numbers, so i assume that figure has come from MGs book

Spam seems to have been all deleted, but i guess there isn't a 100% foolproof way to eradicate it all, especially in this digital world. Its probably something we'll have to live with, hopefully not to the same extent. Just thought i'd mention this one to http://www.predecimal.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=6176 All he ever seems to do is advertise his wares, never talks about a coin, could be construed as spam i suppose.

If you re-read my post, you will see that it could be a damaged 8 OR a damaged 3 die - if it was a damaged 3 that might explain the re-use with an overstamp. Or a damaged 8 might have been overstamped if the die broke when still young. I read what you said Peck, but i don't think its an 8 either, mainly due to the date cutout picture where there's a noticable protrusion inbetween the centre of both loops on the outside on the left hand side, why would an 8 have a line jutting out? a 3s centre line could though

Whats up with the right hand serif of the T in BRITANNIAR?

Whatever it is, its a nice coin. Now with the photo expansion with the iphone i can see obviously the top overstamped, also top inside right loop something in there and on the outside left, something there. Unfortunately dunno what, not sure if it can be a 3 either with whatever is under the outside middle overstamp. A nice coin though

Oh go on John, lets have his name

Maybe you should also inform DNW of your thoughts?

Drop me a link when it goes on Peter, might take a wee stab if you're willing to send to the Fatherland should i bid and should i win

Well there will always be exceptions here and there, and you were lucky, Dave. I also did say they existed in private collections. If you'd now like to point me in the right direction of where to look for an UNC 1864 crosslet 4, I'm listening I admit i was lucky, the only thing going against it was the Verd, but if you're patient enough (and with the internet at your fingertips) you will eventually find what you're looking for. I search world dealer sites, it does take a lot of your free time, but i have quite a few sites saved in my favourites and check back every month or so hoping they've refreshed their GB coins. I'm also considering looking for rarer coins now instead of a particular series, maybe slotting in the odd bunhead here and there if the right one comes along. I'm also collecting a few for the little guy, so now have double the costs. I have my eye on one just now, not a bunhead, but silver milled and quite rare in grades of VF and above, this one is AEF, i will get back to you IF or even if not i get it.

Ooooh ouch, how did the wife take that Geoff? Or did you trade her for the Tournai lol?

Obv of above coin

And here's another i know of in high grade from another private collector, mine is 13 teeth, this one is 12.5 teeth

£22 postage looks a little excessive!!! 100 pure silver? 22 quid postage? He's gonna do well there, especially when we don't even know the denomination either.Both coins in the picture are 1 and the same, same scratches under the kings bust.

Coin watch, there is a good thread here on the very subject http://www.predecimal.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=6140

I'd also say EF with minimal wear on the REV. As to its value, i have no idea, it's not something i collect. Looks as though the OBV design looks similar to gothic florins though and a good indicator to wear would be Viccies braid which does'nt look worn at all to me

Unfortunately not weighed or checked, its just something i came across when browsing and it just did'nt look right

As the topic says, i don't know why, but this coin looks odd for some reason. The 1st A in BRITANNIAR is lower than the rest of the legend and the REV looks as though it's a little off to, the 43 in date is higher than the 18 and the crown looks a little one sided

Or this