Nick

Proven? Do you have any examples of this? It would be interesting to see the proof as this is a commonly asked question, but is seldom answered satisfactorily.

It's the shallow portrait, 4023A.

I suspect Paulus is referring to the perception that a US MS62/63 equates to a UK gEF, and therefore cannot be called mint state. Whether it's accurate or not, I don't know, I've not seen enough MS62/63 coins to be able to judge.

The numbers work out at approximately £305,000 and £20,700 respectively.

The best way to spot the specimen is from its semi-prooflike appearance. It also has a better strike than most currency pieces.

Even better!

If you got it for the price of a specimen, then it is an excellent find.

The specimen has incuse lettering. As far as I'm aware, the only type with raised lettering is the sterling silver proof.

Surely they tone nicely because they normally sit in a felt lined box for years. That's mutually exclusive to circulating. Indeed, but there is no way to know how long the Maundy coins were stored before they were put into circulation.

The Maundy threepences are much more likely to tone colourfully than the currency threepences, but whether the toning would persist after having circulated for a while I don't know. I've always found it surprising that the Mint didn't use different dies for currency vs Maundy, but mostly it seems that they didn't.

I know, you might scratch them - the tweezers that is.

What? Are you saying they wouldn't even eat humble pie over a date error? Unbelievable! I've guess I've just been lucky?I'm sure that all TPG's small print absolves them of any responsibility for what they might call a labelling issue.

Fortunately, the Chinese fakers can't seem to crack the edge lettering. Sadly, I suspect it's only a matter of time.

Yes, I have. I prefer to store my coins together within capsules in trays so the slabs are no use. Added to which, I don't really care whether CGS thinks it is an 82, an 85 or whatever - I bought the coin because I liked it.

During the five years that I used eBay, I must have reported getting on for 50 fake coins and not a single one was removed from sale. The only reported item that was removed was when another seller used my photo without permission, which is a fairly trifling offence in the grand scheme of things.

Wouldn't it be great if eBay pages had a facility such that rogue items could be reported? Oh wait... Yeah, the problem is, if they were to take direct and immediate action the place would be flooded with malicious reports. It needs a more measured approach. Indeed, but the consequence is that no action is taken and hence the reason why eBay is awash with fake goods.

Wouldn't it be great if eBay pages had a facility such that rogue items could be reported? Oh wait...

Not a chance. Profit is the only thing eBay cares about, regardless of ethics.

I have tried to collate the sources of information for Victorian mintage numbers, ie annual reports, trial of the pyx records, parliamentary returns and other documentary mentions to see if it might be possible to derive any plausible estimates. After many hours of crunching the numbers, I concluded that it would not be possible without having access to the Royal Mint day books. Which you should be able to get under the freedom of information act? Mark You wouldn't need a FoI request, but you would need to go to the National Archives at Kew and spend many many hours delving through the records.

I have tried to collate the sources of information for Victorian mintage numbers, ie annual reports, trial of the pyx records, parliamentary returns and other documentary mentions to see if it might be possible to derive any plausible estimates. After many hours of crunching the numbers, I concluded that it would not be possible without having access to the Royal Mint day books.

Whilst I think the obverse looks ok, the wear on the reverse doesn't look right. Wear should occur evenly across equivalent points of the design, but the thistles look to have differing levels of wear. The thistles also look more worn than they should given the general appearance of the rest of the coin. All in all, where's that bargepole.

Looks to me like each of your pictures is one grade too high.

I also note that even the best example 1965 crown the RM could find for the photograph has a number of heavy contact marks on both sides. I wonder if there are any out there without bagmarks.

I suspect a set like that would go for £75k or more these days.

The set was sold by CC, so Neil may have a picture of the reverses.