jaggy

My primary source of reference for prices are auction archives and mainly LCA, Heritage and DNW. That works very well for fairly common coins. Rarer coins are trickier as they come up at auction less frequently and so there is less of a track record. Then you have to factor in how badly you want the coin and how much of a premium you are willing to pay for it.

1914:

1915:

1916:

And this is the 1917:

This is my best sixpence of the period:

Sorry, I misunderstood your post (because you mentioned 1911 proofs). I do have a couple of good examples from the war years but need to redo the photos because they are a bit blurred.

I use the ESC rarity scale as a rough guide but personal experience of following auctions over a period of time is a much better guide in my opinion. Thus, for example, 1863 sixpences show up at auction more frequently than 1882 or 1862 which are, themselves, more frequent than 1854 while 1848 rarely show up at all.

Yes, rather pleased about that. Who says that Heritage is always more expensive?

US$ 1,200

It sold for £1,300.

I bought a coin at DNW (1679 sixpence) which was described as the property of a Cambridge scholar. Would anyone know the identity of this person so that I can record provenance?

The LCA & Heritage photos are generally very good. The DNW ones are okay but not more than that and the Spink ones are awful. Of course, you can do a lot to a photo with the right lighting and with Photoshop.

I will just make a few comments here. First, the grade given by the TPG is what it is and the coin will sell at that grade in the USA. Second, it is up to each collector/buyer to look at the coin and decide what they are willing to pay based on how the coin looks as well as all the other usual factors. If they are wiling to blindly follow the TPG grade then that is up to them. Third, Heritage - and a slabbed coin - is not necessarily more expensive than an equivalent raw coin in a European auction. My 1561 slabbed sixpence cost less than half what a very similar coin cost at DNW just a little bit earlier. I regularly buy slabbed coins at Heritage at very good prices. If the bidding gets silly then I don't take part. Same for bidding at DNW or Spink. Fourth, in Europe, grading is very subjective and differs from one auction house to another. In my experience, 'assigned' grades are not necessarily stricter in Europe than in the USA. That is why it is so important for the collector to form his/her own opinion.

Sounds like the perfect day!

Whichever side of this debate you are on, there are going to be pros and cons. The problem is that there is a lack of hard evidence upon which to base a decision. The key factor is likely to be the economy but nobody can quantify the cost/benefit of being in the EU compared to the cost/benefit of being out of it. Numbers get thrown around but everyone has a different number and one which usually fits their agenda.The problem in the UK is that most people only want the EU for the economic benefits. They don't want the Euro or Schengen (hence the opt-outs), they don't want 'ever closer union', they are ambivalent on free movement of people, they are concerned about the democratic deficit associated with the EC and the ECJ and they don't really want to give up any more sovereignty. So it is really a question of whether the economic benefits outweigh the other stuff.Whichever way the UK votes, the EU needs some serious reform if it is going to be fit for purpose over the next 50 years. It is essentially a 1950s and 1960s solution to a 1930s and 1940s problem. It has grown too fast, has become too intrusive and all this without introducing any real democracy. It largely run by appointed officials who lack any democratic oversight or accountability. Right now this suits Germany, France and Benelux because, to a large extent, the EU is run for their benefit. That is unsustainable in the longer term. However, it is going to take an existential threat to force the EU to change. And the imminence of a Brexit might just be the threat it needs.

Here are the two that I own: [

I'm not an expert on Charles I sixpences by any means but your coin looks genuine from the photo. The mintmark is an anchor which probably dates it around 1639 and minted at the Tower Mint. Rob knows a lot more about this period than me so hopefully he can confirm if I have got it right or wrong.

I should imagine it is limited to conundrum collectors.

I would probably go for the VF.

Clearly it would depend on just how rare the coin is. In my experience there are very few coins in my area of interest that are so rare that I would have to snap one up no matter what the grade, condition or price. I play a 'long game' with my collecting which means that if I have to wait a few years for the right example of a specific coin/date then I will. In the meantime, there are plenty of other coins to keep me happy.

First, I would not buy a coin that had significant problems. For me, the buying decision would then depend on how much 'lesser' the grade was. I might buy the lesser grade if it was at least a VF but still with the intention of upgrading when a better one came along. Less than VF then I probably would not buy either.

Yep, banks are being hammered .... which is why I bought Citibank at $38 .... banks will not be hammered forever and especially when they are valued in the market at 60% of book. The guys who manage my retirement money did extremely well for me between 2010 and 2015. So I am still well ahead of the game. Right now they are moving me into high quality bonds and stocks which (like the banks) are looking cheap right now. Corrections never last forever and this one will run its course. One step back and three steps forward is the way it works.