Nick
-
Posts
2,063 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
31
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Downloads
Store
Gallery
Articles
Everything posted by Nick
-
A great number of 1887 sixpences have amendments to the Rs in particular. The A over higher misplaced A is known about, but not listed in any of the usual references. When I first saw one, I thought it interesting enough to find one for myself. I would imagine a similar value to the R/I variety. Having looked at my example again, it could easily be an inverted V as there is no obvious sign of a crossbar.
-
Here's the fake trial piece: and the link to The Fake Pound Coin Database.
-
That's a laughably bad fake 1820 halfcrown.
-
Trainwreck of a Threepence
Nick replied to Unwilling Numismatist's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
I agree too. I have an A1, 1+A 1861 3d also. Mine has the same obverse die, but different reverse. -
Peter Rabbit 50p with number 1 on it
Nick replied to Jinky's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
It's just a picture hosting site. Nothing to worry about. Here is Jinky's picture: -
The Chinese fakers have just about managed to make convincing replicas. However, they still can't manage to do the edge lettering properly. Voila, stick in a fake slab that obscures the edge. Job done. Not sure picking a PR67+ slab to copy was wise though. This is what it should look like:
-
Can you identify this please ?
Nick replied to secret santa's topic in Confirmed unlisted Varieties.
You'll be needing the Endoscopy department for that. -
Newbie in need of valuation info....
Nick replied to DonQuixote's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
It's a standard issue silver threepence. From 1937 to 1944, both silver and nickel-brass threepences were issued. -
Yep. Another replica. You can see a little of the milled edge on the first photo. The 1847 crown doesn't have a milled edge.
-
Not so bad. Only £132 more than it's worth.
-
I think that one is ok. There are fake 1818 halfcrowns, but this one doesn't have any of the usual tells.
-
I see that you've now done some digging, but it was simply that no two coins can end up with the same incuse marks and scratches unless they are copies. If the marks were on the dies, many coins would have the same marks, but they would be raised (not incuse) on any coins struck.
-
Here is an example (there are many others): Search the forum for 1864 florin and you will find all the previous threads mentioning the reasons why they are fake. I believe the original coin that all of the fakes were copied from is in the Heritage Archive.
-
I still have pictures of the fake 1864 florin die number 64 if you want them?
-
A battle between red and purple stars. You'd have thought that people that have bought that many items would have half a clue. Obviously not.
-
My saturday near misses
Nick replied to zookeeperz's topic in Nothing whatsoever to do with coins area!
I do a similar thing, and surprise surprise get more or less the same result. However, I'm still in profit for the last two seasons because with large accumulated odds you only need to win occasionally. -
If you exit the topic, then go back in, it should allow you to post more pictures.
-
Report it via Action Fraud making sure to mention that eBay was notified and did nothing.
-
It's Rob's site and therefore is the definition of pucker.
-
Where did I mention that halfcrowns were not used in Australia? I simply stated that the coin in question could not be a halfcrown.
-
Did it? I gave no reason at all. Any impression taken was all your own work.
-
It still can't be a halfcrown though. The halfcrown has different lettering, which is why I excluded it.
-
It could be any of the silver denominations except the halfcrown. Size and/or colour needed.
-
You are comparing shillings and sixpences. The dots are more random on the sixpences and in lines on the shillings. I agree with Rob, that shilling looks like it was struck yesterday.
-
I wonder if his Grandad was the forger...
