Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook

   Rotographic    

The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.

Nick

Accomplished Collector
  • Content Count

    2,051
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    27

Everything posted by Nick

  1. No, but definitely fewer than the 685,000 figure that is stated in ESC and Davies. It is by far the rarest date of the Victorian shillings. Anyone like to make an educated guess how many are left? 2 or 3 dozen perhaps with the number in high grade in low single digits? Unfortunately the phrase "educated guess" begs more questions than it answers. There are just too many imponderables : - First, the stated mintage figure which as we all know is misleading and probably includes very many dated 1849 (approximately the same mintage but not rare at all) - second, the number that might have been swallowed up after 1920 or 1947 when the banks withdrew silver - third, the distorting effect of commoner dates being now less common in relation to 1850 as a result of collectors absorbing 99.9% of all remaining 1850s since the 1950s, but at the same time absorbing a much lower % of common dates, e.g. from 1966-71, 1980, etc - fourth, the lack of any Freeman-like survey AFAIK to base any educated guesswork on It's probably true to say "we'll never know". Do you know whether they also minted in advance eg minted 1851 coins in 1850? I'm guessing they probably would in the situation where the last die of a particular year broke/wore out near the end of the year.
  2. From the Philippines too! No way I would risk that one ... Pardon my ignorance (again) but does anyone know why the 1850 is so rare/valuable, the mintage wasn't particularly low? The mintage figures back then were for total minted IN that year, not OF that year. Many's the time the Mint used up a previous year's dies but they were still recorded in the figure for the year they were struck in. Is there any information out there, for example Royal Mint Annual Reports, that would allow more accurate mintage figures to be compiled? Unfortunately not, not official figures. The Mint would refer to their own records which would show the wrong figure. You'd have to rely on a Freeman doing a large survey, but those become less and less reliable over time. I am partially enlightened, thanks ... does anyone know how many 1850 shillings were minted then? (roughly?) No, but definitely fewer than the 685,000 figure that is stated in ESC and Davies. It is by far the rarest date of the Victorian shillings.
  3. What's an NLR then, Garry? I assume it's: no longer a registered user.
  4. I suspect that ebay would wonder how the buyer found out that the item had been reported; given that such things are confidential. And if the buyer complained that they had only subsequently found out, without knowing the ebay had been told the coin was dodgy, ebay would probably just tell them to claim their money back from the seller. ebay after all, always have the recourse of saying that they are not experts on coins (or any other item), merely provide a platform for sellers and buyers. Probably they would argue that they didn't misrepresent the item, the seller did. And therefore any complaints the buyer has should firstly be presented to the seller (who from experience will probably just refund the buyer immediately to avoid problems and negative reporting). Afterwards ebay might choose to take action, but as usual, are unlikely to agree to tell anyone what form that action will take. Rob might choose to chip in at this point as he has a little experience in this area .. If it is fraud on ebay, they will do nothing because they refuse to deal with members of the public, only the Police - that was from the horse's mouth as I managed to get a phone link to someone at eBay. And in reality the Police will only get involved if someone has had been hurt or suffered loss through a criminal act. Basically you are on a hiding to nothing. In the case of a well known fraud about 5 or 6 years ago, I got a friend in the local force to do a bit of digging, but there were no open cases against the individuals involved and so nothing to pursue. Presumably because embarrassment ruled where the losers were concerned and nobody reported it as a crime despite the whole world knowing what happened. Simply put, crime pays. In the case of dodgy items on eBay, so many have been reported by so many people and so little done to remove them, that we all know where we stand on that one. Trading standards don't want to know, so again it would need to be a case of criminal loss to get the ball rolling despite everyone knowing the perpetrators. Where are the investigative journalists when you need them. Sadly, they seem more interested in who shagged who.
  5. I suspect that ebay would wonder how the buyer found out that the item had been reported; given that such things are confidential. And if the buyer complained that they had only subsequently found out, without knowing the ebay had been told the coin was dodgy, ebay would probably just tell them to claim their money back from the seller. ebay after all, always have the recourse of saying that they are not experts on coins (or any other item), merely provide a platform for sellers and buyers. Probably they would argue that they didn't misrepresent the item, the seller did. And therefore any complaints the buyer has should firstly be presented to the seller (who from experience will probably just refund the buyer immediately to avoid problems and negative reporting). Afterwards ebay might choose to take action, but as usual, are unlikely to agree to tell anyone what form that action will take. Rob might choose to chip in at this point as he has a little experience in this area .. Ignorance has never been a valid defence. I believe that auction houses/sites are legally acting as agents for the seller and as such are liable.
  6. Nick

    Not a sale but a swap

    I, for one, collect decimal as well as all the other English milled, so I would be happy to go in for swaps. I actually only have 13 of the 2011 olympic 50ps, so I'd be looking for any of the missing ones. I don't have any spare olympics at the moment, but I can offer up a Girl Guides of 2010 and a 2008 Britannia. And before anybody groans about the britannia, be aware that it was quite a low mintage, prior to the new design and is, therefore, more difficult to find. Yes please Is that legal?
  7. The next time a fake appears on eBay, one of us should put in a large bid to secure the item and a few others should report the item as fake. eBay will take no action and allow the buyer to become the proud owner of a worthless item. We could then sue eBay having incontrovertible proof that eBay allowed a fake to be sold. It seems that litigation and bad publicity are the only things eBay listen to. Whoever it was would have to have VERY deep pockets in case it went pete tong and got ruled against. When you have a cast iron case, they would settle out of court.
  8. Nick

    webhosting

    O, just checked my email account and the hosts sell domains plus hosting for 0,99c a month, so i've secured www.classicbritishcoins.com after my good old mate Dave, I'm liking the irony of your choice.
  9. The next time a fake appears on eBay, one of us should put in a large bid to secure the item and a few others should report the item as fake. eBay will take no action and allow the buyer to become the proud owner of a worthless item. We could then sue eBay having incontrovertible proof that eBay allowed a fake to be sold. It seems that litigation and bad publicity are the only things eBay listen to.
  10. From the Philippines too! No way I would risk that one ... Pardon my ignorance (again) but does anyone know why the 1850 is so rare/valuable, the mintage wasn't particularly low? The mintage figures back then were for total minted IN that year, not OF that year. Many's the time the Mint used up a previous year's dies but they were still recorded in the figure for the year they were struck in. Is there any information out there, for example Royal Mint Annual Reports, that would allow more accurate mintage figures to be compiled?
  11. That will just be copy and paste from the 1934 listing which wasn't too long ago. Relist an item and change the particulars, I think a lot of people do that and only worry about the category when it is completely at odds. Cuddly toy an 1850 shilling is, not. Most people will search in the general category, even as diverse as country to see what's going off in the near future, and as long as shillings appear under coins, probably any sub-category will do. For me the bigger question is still the short list of items sold. I agree - I wouldn't touch this one with a stack of barge poles end on end. Looks like I may have to change my stored eBay searches as I didn't see this one. I wonder how many others I have missed by only searching the correct categories.
  12. I am always a little suspicious of coins that don't appear in the correct eBay category. Nobody looking for an 1850 shilling would think to look in the George V crown category.
  13. Nick

    It's Verdigris or is it

    As an example, here is a cropped picture of an 1888/7 shilling taken at 1:1 distance (30cm for my lens) with a prime macro lens. No additional magnification has been applied, just cropping. In the full picture, the shilling diameter is just over 2700 pixels. As you can see there is sufficient detail to see the 8 over 7 without the need for a digital microscope.
  14. Nick

    It's Verdigris or is it

    No, the Traveller USB camera is just used as a digital microscope for large magnifications of small areas of a coin ie examining overdates. As far as a digital camera setup goes, you'll probably want either: a digital compact with a macro mode; or a DSLR and a prime (fixed focal length) macro lens. In general, the more megapixels the better - it's easy to crop away those you haven't used. Obviously, the DSLR route is a lot more expensive, but prime macro lenses usually contain high quality optics and also allow you to position the camera further away from the coin - which makes lighting the coin easier. If you do go for a prime macro lens, one that will do 1:1 reproduction will be the dog's doodahs. This means that at 1:1 the object will be the same size on the sensor as it is in reality ie a shilling would only just fit into the frame. Thanks, Nick, very much appreciated, a great starting place. I think DSLR will be the way forward then. As you've obviously got your head around these things, would you mind if I came back to you for a little more advice on the matter when I've narrowed down a couple of set-up's? Sure. No problem.
  15. Nick

    It's Verdigris or is it

    No, the Traveller USB camera is just used as a digital microscope for large magnifications of small areas of a coin ie examining overdates. As far as a digital camera setup goes, you'll probably want either: a digital compact with a macro mode; or a DSLR and a prime (fixed focal length) macro lens. In general, the more megapixels the better - it's easy to crop away those you haven't used. Obviously, the DSLR route is a lot more expensive, but prime macro lenses usually contain high quality optics and also allow you to position the camera further away from the coin - which makes lighting the coin easier. If you do go for a prime macro lens, one that will do 1:1 reproduction will be the dog's doodahs. This means that at 1:1 the object will be the same size on the sensor as it is in reality ie a shilling would only just fit into the frame.
  16. Nick

    GB TEN PENCE VARITIES

    Thanks Peck. An interesting read.
  17. Yes it's a nice coin and from one who has quite a few of these you are off to a good start, but which one is it? Now there are several 1887 crowns and it is difficult to tell from your photos but you can see on the coin itself; 1) is the plume to the St. George head double struck or double engraved? 2) is the bottom right serif missing on the 1 of the date? 3) what is the distance between the R of VICTORIA and the T of BRITT? The range is from 34.65mm down to 33.59 for the proof. 4) is the top of the first 8 missing? Now that has whetted your interest there are at least ten or more different sizes in the 1887 Crown as the dies were made using a pantograph to reduce from the master plaster mould. As a guess by eye I would say yours if quite close to 34.00 or less. You will need a vernier calliper to measure it and also need to take at least 10 readings to get any meaningful average. All a bit anoraky for most but that's what we are here for isn't it? Sorry at number 3 it should read T of VICTORIA to R in REG Where exactly should it be measured from? Top of the T to top of R, bottom of T to bottom of R? Looks like it should be top of T to top of R.
  18. I'm not aware of any difference in pointings on the crown. AFAIK they are all from the same die pairing (Davies 1+A). However, 1887s original post hinted that there are distances that can be measured to identify individual dies. Perhaps, he will elaborate.
  19. You will need a vernier calliper to measure it and also need to take at least 10 readings to get any meaningful average. All a bit anoraky for most but that's what we are here for isn't it? Unless you're an engineer and use a micrometer you can get the exact dia with those without having to measure 10x Ah yes but remember your experiments at school, it is always important to take the readings several times and take an average in order to reduce errors. I have found that even using vernier callipers the readings vary by plus or minus.09mm but if you average 10 readings an accuracy of + or - .01 is achievable. I have toyed with using a USB microscope but I think there would be a loss of accuracy. Any information on these from someone who has one would be helpful The reading will vary accoring to how much pressure your applying to the vernier, you can get 10 different readings if the same pressure is not applied. With a micrometer it has a small ratchet on the end and the same pressure can only be applied until the ratchet and digital reading stops. I now have my own question for you 1887 jubilee, how do you tell proof issue 1887 Crown from a normal currency issue, is it the I's in Victoria pointing to beads? You can ususally distinguish proofs by the rim. They have broad uniform rims with very sharp edge milling.
  20. Nick

    GB TEN PENCE VARITIES

    I could, but the issue is the sheer amount of work involved. The publication started in 1967 in November, and ran monthly at least until Feb 1992, with a period of 6 months when they issued twice per month. When you put that together its around 25 years of monthly issues. In the early days and in the later years, the page count was around 80, but when at its best, it ran to around 140 pages or so, maybe overall an average of 100 pages. Conservatively that means 25x12x100 = 30,000 scans, although I guess it might be half of that if pages were scanned in twos. Then there is all the cropping and aligning, plus design of the 'package' for the whole thing. My best guess is that its around 6 months work if performed on a continuous basis. To then have somebody come along and say 'you can't do that, take it down from a web site' would make all that work a complete waste, so for this reason, I'm not interested unless I can be reasured that there will be no comebacks. 1966. I've offered to scan the Ron Stafford article from 1979 (the big florin survey) but there haven't been any takers so far. It would only be around 8 scans but I'm not going to do it unless there is some interest. I'm interested. All of the articles I've seen so far have been great references, even if they aren't directly relevant to my collecting.
  21. Nick

    Ebay's Worst Offerings

    Thanks Peck. That does make sense - I hadn't considered year only collectors. The shilling also fits the pattern you suggest.
  22. Nick

    Ebay's Worst Offerings

    The scratch is very light and not visible to the naked eye and only just visible using a magnifier. The camera however picks it up easily. £90 for yours is dead cheap.
  23. Nick

    Ebay's Worst Offerings

    In that case, my 1927 proof florin (aFDC) was a bargain. I bought it last year for under £110. I have noticed that the Spink prices for the 1927 proof coins are bizarre: £375 for the crown, £90 for the halfcrown, £120 for the florin, £60 for the shilling, £45 for the sixpence and £120 for the threepence. Why would the florin be worth more than the halfcrown, and why would the threepence be nearly three times the value of the sixpence? Its all to do with demand i suppose, i watched a Thrrepence about 4 weeks ag on on ebay, the acorns were worn but it was proof issue, it went for 124 quid. I would hate to think what a real proof without wear would do, perhaps 150: In fact go onto ebay look for aspencoins, he's in the USA and a Threepence Proof is finishing tonight, watch and see what it goes for. I also bought about 2 weeks ago a Proof 1911 Halfcrown for $167, a week later another was up for sale, it went for $285, so someone was pissed off lol I know that the prices are based on supply and demand. It still seems odd to me because there were originally equal numbers of each denomination, so supply is equally limited and are there really 3 times as many threepence collectors as there are sixpence collectors?
  24. Nick

    Ebay's Worst Offerings

    In that case, my 1927 proof florin (aFDC) was a bargain. I bought it last year for under £110. I have noticed that the Spink prices for the 1927 proof coins are bizarre: £375 for the crown, £90 for the halfcrown, £120 for the florin, £60 for the shilling, £45 for the sixpence and £120 for the threepence. Why would the florin be worth more than the halfcrown, and why would the threepence be nearly three times the value of the sixpence? AFDC is not quite proof Nick. FDC would be proof. 27 Proof sets are around 1100 Quid in the cases Peck, take a look on ebay just now and you'll see a few there. We need to get our mindset off what Spink says and take a look at what auctions are selling for. Spink also says that the 2 Pence cartwheel is worth 200 quid in VF, would you pay that for a VF cartwheel? Proof is a method of striking not a measure of quality. Here are the pictures for you to decide on the condition.
  25. Nick

    Ebay's Worst Offerings

    Uh? So what's that doing for the value of a 1927 proof set? Over £500 now? Spink quote £650 in FDC.
×