Paulus

Really? Blimey, I look forward to that!

Didn't they? That's interesting. So 9 would be VIIII then ? I didn't know that either, when did it come in, anyone know? William IV is IIII on his coins ....

This one was bought along with a few others (pics attached, missing one side of shilling as I'm limited to 150kb) from a local collector. Total was about $400 Cdn if I remember correctly. Thought it was a good deal, these types of coins are hard to come across locally over here. If genuine, a real bargain! Welcome to the forum!

I must admit, if I collected those, didn't have one, and had the budget, I would have been bidding! My 'blimey' was more about what a superb example it was than the price!

Blimey! Anyone bidding? http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/221225134561?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2648

Welcome to the Forum Pennywise!

Can't be done - decent stuff sells, but the crap gets continually recycled via "free listing" weekends Rob, Peter - you both miss my point, I'm not complaining about the relisting BUT recycled listings make any attempt at statistics impossible. Court's suevey is valid because his samples were on the way to the melting pot - ie no coin was counted twice Totally get you David, can you think of a statistically more valid survey?

It's utterly astonishing how cheap Roman silver can be. For example you can pick up EF silver of the commoner types for less than £100, which for 2,000-year-old coins is pretty amazing. As a general rule of thumb, the earlier emperors, and the last few, are usually worth more than those of 2nd-3rd Centuries. If it's not a rare type (and PROVIDENTIA reverses usually aren't) then it would fetch anywhere between £30-£75 as a guesstimate. Better to hang onto as a historical piece. I couldn't agree more Peck, I know it's all supply and demand but what a piece of history at an affordable price! And the condition of them can easily rival coins that were 'minted' 1500 years more recently!

Have you a reference to the catalogue - there's nothing on the web site? No, it's rubbish isn't it, guess they might get round to putting something up there before the 4th!

Off to my first Croydon auction 4th June, perhaps it's a good thing that my coin fund is at an all time low!

I agree with Azda's (Dave's) grading of about very fine, certainly a very bold fine, so if you paid that sort of money then you did okay. If you are anything like me, and keep the collecting bug, you will soon want an example without so much wear - especially as it is one of your favourites! Shill bidding (I am not sure where the term comes from) is a problem on on-line auction sites like eBay. EBay themselves have a guide: http://www.ebay.co.uk/gds/how-to-spot-shill-bidding-on-ebay/10000000004031741/g.html If you know how to spot it, and/or are strict about the most you will pay based only on the description and photos/scans, you should not end up paying more than you should. But it can be easy as a beginner to think that what others are apparently prepared to pay is an indication of a coin's value, so learning how to grade and which sellers and dealers to trust would be sound advice - there is plenty of invaluable advice on previous posts on this excellent Forum. Enjoy the hobby, George IIII silver is one of my favourite series too!

Boy, that david4027 (No.2) sounds hacked off, wonder how much he was stung for ... at least they are all listed as forgeries/fakes/replicas

Thanks Dave, I see it now. Page 40 of the 5th edition.

I was the lucky winner at £1,950!! Free postage too!!! Particularly delighted as I can't find this coin in any of my reference manuals! I think it's Davies 470 which is a plain bodice, 1846 plain edge proof. The value given by Davies for FDC is £6750 and that's 1982 prices. Wow! (I didn't really win it!)

I was the lucky winner at £1,950!! Free postage too!!! Particularly delighted as I can't find this coin in any of my reference manuals!

I'm not sure that there are many, this is the most well known catalogue for that era but I expect you already know of it! http://www.amazon.co.uk/Stanley-Gibbons-Britain-Specialised-Catalogues/dp/0852598165/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1366580592&sr=1-1-fkmr0&keywords=Collectors%27+Stamps%3A+Queen+Victoria+and+Edward+VII+1837-1910+by+R.J.+Marles

And if you ask him nicely you might get a signed copy!

Not without a link, thank you. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/A-QUALITY-GEORGE-III-CARTWHEEL-1797-TWOPENCE-2d-HUGE-2-oz-COIN-/290892253787?_trksid=p2047675.l2557&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEWAX%3AIT&nma=true&si=Amvy0IS812cJT3KC5UUZcvu%252Bz68%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc Was it you who won it? It's a nice mid-grade example - some wear, not too much, good rim. Worth the price it went for, I'd say. Only blemish is that 9 but that's not really bad. Yes I won it! Cheers I've always wanted a nice example, one of my favorite coins! Mine too (It's not that blotchy in-hand, but you know how scans are. And it's been enlarged double size in Photoshop which doesn't do it any favours either.) They are great coins, though I like the penny even better! Ironically, in view of the CGS debate, the nicest one I've ever had I got slabbed, and then felt somehow detached from it, so ultimately let it go! I don't currently have a nice example myself, more is the shame! That is a very good point Stuart, and one of the factors in my CGS Trial ... I hardly ever look at my few slabbed coins because they are not with the others, and I am starting to lose touch with them ... increasingly I won't care if I sell them, which I never would have believed pre-slabbing!!

Would certainly up their SEO if they haven't copied and pasted it from an Encyclopedia, that is! I might list a 1966 penny with a description like that, just for the email responses from bemused collectors worldwide! "This 1967 penny is the finest we've ever seen - and we've seen many! Almost full iridescent lustre, this coin is virtually in the state it left the Mint in 1969. (Yes, note the historical drama - despite carrying the date 1967, this penny was actually minted in 1969 due to the quirky law passed by Great Britain's Chancellor, Jim Callaghan. This minting of a coin bearing the incorrect date was unprecedented since.. the year before). The generous size of these old pennies puts today's hastily struck minor coins into perspective. Remember - a 1967 penny is the last of its kind, redolent of that lost era between February and August 1971 when - already doomed - it and its peers could be seen gasping out the last weeks of their existence. This particular specimen is 100% guaranteed genuine, having been taken from a receipted Mint Sealed Bag which lay forgotten in the cellar of a 1960s coin dealer who went out of business in 1972. All the other specimens in the bag were damaged by environmental factors, but this miracle specimen emerged virtually unscathed and we offer it - slabbed and annotated - as an artefact of a lost age of coin collecting." I think I will list one Peck with your exact wording, just for the craic! (with your permission!)

Even rejected coins have UIN I think. All coins were initially allocated UIN prior to grading and the UIN of rejected coins can't really be recyled without causing problems. Is it possible that many of the staff at CGS might also be employed by London Coins? If so, some are simply earning a bit of extra money "on the side" when they have time. Since there is hardly any extra overhead as CGS is using same premises as London Coins, they can keep going even with a small turnover. I don't believe that they spend the same amount of time grading each coin. For example, they are graded over 1000 QE sovereigns. If the grading doesn't affect value, then why put in the effort? Yes Nick, you're right about rejected coins having a UIN, I have just checked mine. I don't know whether any of the graders also work for London Coins, but if they do it could explain how the finances could be made to work, but also introduces more potential for conflict of interest! I think it would be appalling if they don't spend the same care/time grading QE sovereigns (for example) - someone has paid £20 quid a pop and should expect the same service IMO.

Duplicate Post

VS - I will take a stab at just VF50 despite the weak strike, grading should be no different for a rare year, just the value will be a lot higher - could be way out though!