Nick

Legal tender has a pretty narrow defintion. It basically means what can be used to settle a debt, in the absence of contracted payment terms. Here is a snippet from the Bank of England website: "So, what counts as legal tender? It varies throughout the UK. In England and Wales, it is Royal Mint coins and Bank of England notes. In Scotland and Northern Ireland, it is only Royal Mint coins and not banknotes. There are also some restrictions when using small coins. For example, 1p and 2p coins only count as legal tender for any amount up to 20p. And 5p and 10p coins only count for any amount up to £5. But £1 and £2 coins count as legal tender for any amount."

Nothing that looks obviously suspicious. Although the positioning of the orb is unusual and is certainly further to the right than the example I used to own.

Assuming that the camera is in a fixed position between shots, you can replace the coin with something easy to autofocus on (eg printed text) to establish the focus, then turn off autofocus. That should fix any blurring due to difficulty of autofocus. A dull and lifeless appearance is going to be due to lighting. Try a brighter light further away from the subject, but you may have to experiment.

As a cynic, I believe that his twitter comments and the HMRC court case are not unconnected. By demonstrating that he is able to tweet freely, he is seeking to show that he is different from a 'normal' BBC employee and that he is entitled to have his salary paid to his personal service company, thus saving large amounts of tax. I also believe that the BBC will not take any action against him, as they also benefit from him being classed as a non-employee by not having to pay employer NI contributions.

Every other BBC employee manages to navigate this 'minefield' successfully (mostly), so it can't be that difficult.

Because it is the national broadcaster that we are forced to pay for, on the basis that it stays impartial.

I've never seen an 1887 Gothic florin that wasn't 46 arcs, but that doesn't mean that there aren't any. It's always a possibility when an obverse or reverse changes design for a mule to exist.

... and the cabin boy was called Tom, not Roger!!

No. Looks to be just 5 coins with Charles III obverse. https://www.royalmint.com/annual-sets/2023/

Another interesting video from the US about the July 2022 weather statistics produced by NOAA. The most interesting bit starts about 7 minutes in.

Stumbled across an interesting article on the subject.

Very telling.

The slab is definitely fake. Can't have two different slabbed coins with the same PCGS number.

One of my favorite memes.

1892, 2D.

1891, 2+D.

1890, 2+E.

1889, 2+D.

1889, 2+C.

1889, 2+A, not in Davies.

1889, 1+C, Davies 1164.

1888, 1+A, 1 over 1, not in Davies.

1888, 1+B, Davies 1162.

1888, 1+A, Davies 1161.

1887, 1+A, Davies 1160.