Paddy

Yes - same problem. No error message, just a blank page. Seems they have a problem!

I agree with most of the above - my only concern is that the fakers will use such a site to improve the quality of the fakes until we can't tell the difference anymore!

I can see from the screenshot that they are on Easylive as well, and that provides a reasonable search facility. See; https://www.easyliveauction.com/catalogue/2caef58f63420be6cca65aadbec3663d/0af8d24542e81eb9357e7ef448a6646f/private-collection-of-gold-proof-sets-gold-sovereign-sets/?currentPage=1

A less well known Monty Python sketch and one of my favourites - if nothing else because the Ozzies tried to get it banned!

Thanks for that @Coinery that would be better for me as I need an improved Edward I penny! Anyone else with a different opinion?

I am never certain I have these right and I know there are people here who seem to be able to ID these at a glance! I believe this is Edward III Penny, Third Coinage Class 2 - S1544, but please tell me if I am right or wrong. Thanks,

I no likee. The English lions on the reverse look very worn for what should be a proof coin - and as the rest of the coin shows virtually no wear, where did that come from? If a weak strike then that does not fit with proof... All that combined with the seller's reputation means I would not be risking my hard-earned cash in that direction.

How about this one for offending modern sensitivities - "The English are Best" by Flanders and Swann:

It does read Maximinus, not Maximianus and I think this is therefore Maximinus II Daia, as Augustus 310 to 313 AD, not Maximian who was 286 to 310 AD with gaps. Reverse is Iovi Conservatori Augg NN. The excellent Roman Base Metal coins from the banner advert has it as CRB430 on page 58. Siscia mint - which is modern day Split in Croatia. Nice coin and well worth your £8. If you are going to collect the odd Roman coin cheaply then the two Rotographic books (one for Silver, one for Base metals) are a great starting place.

... and here is the second. 1874 Penny - after much peering at images both in the book and online I am still not certain if this is Obverse 7 or 8. The curve of the top lip looks 8 but the ribbons look 7. Reverse I think is G. Please put me right!

After a prolonged period of abstinence I have picked up a bunch of reasonably decent Victoria Pennies. Two I would appreciate opinions on. Here is the first - 1869 penny. Apart from the obvious damage, is there any problem with it? I know there are lots of forgeries of this date around, but I can't see any fault with this one - anyone spot anything I have missed?

I do a lot of trawling around local and small scale online auctions for coins - both bulk lots and individually. You get to spot the different sorts of bulk lots after a while - there are some that are genuine "Grannies old jewellery box" lots, and that is what you really want to find. There are some lots that have had a cursory, non expert, sort - these generally have any gold or silver removed or put into separate lots, but may still have a few interesting bits left. (The non-expert rarely looks closely at coppers or tokens and has poor knowledge on foreign pieces, so you can do well there.) Then there are the dealers' junk lots - accumulations of the coins they cannot sell, sometimes salted with a few slightly better things to tempt the bidding and persuade you they haven't been through it with a fine tooth comb. Telling the difference is not always easy as some dealers go to great lengths to make the lots look original! But they can be great fun and provided you know your stuff and view carefully before bidding, you can do very well.

The link doesn't work for me - pops into a request to download the webloc file...

I can't say I know for sure what this is, but it looks religious - possibly a baptismal token or keepsake. The Sigma letters hint at Greek, but the rest of the letters look more traditional/Roman alphabet. Metal looks to be the cheap pewter-like metal used during the 19th and 20th century for low-value medallions and tourist pieces. Just thoughts.

One of the misuses that gets me every time is "amount" instead of "number", as in "The amount of people collecting coins is on the increase". You use amount for commodities such as flour or sand. You use number for things you can count!

I can't help you with any of the proof strikes, but someone who visited the RM recently reported on here that there were just 200,000 of each letter in circulation strikes. 100,000 of each released in early 2018 and a further 100,000 of each at the end of the year. The RM employees said no more were being made - but of course they can always change their mind. If this is true it puts each coin on a par with Kew Gardens for rarity, though I doubt 10ps will ever be quite so avidly collected as 50ps.

... and yet they still haven't got the mintage figures page on their website sorted out. Been down since at least September.

Somebody ought to email her a link to this thread - might be amusing to see her reaction then!

Numista does the magic. Provided you have some describable feature you can put it into a search there, and it will bring up any coins on its database that match those words anywhere in their description. In this case I put in "Gold Crescent" and it came up with 220 odd possibles in 12 pages. Most were Hungarian but on about page 9 or 10, up popped your answer. Some Islamic/Indian coins have no describable feature, just unreadable script, and then it gets much more difficult.

Travancore 2 Fanams - see: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces48367.html

Time limits set by sellers have no meaning either - the rules are set by legislation and you cannot override that. I believe for coins it comes under the 30 day rule - it varies for different products. It also depends on whether the seller is a business or an individual - although regular individual sellers may be classed as a business whether they like it or not! This gives a lot more: https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/advice/ive-got-a-problem-with-something-i-bought-on-ebay

When a seller is listing any item he has the opportunity to tick a box marked "private listing" in which case all bids are completely anonymous. I can't see any legitimate reason to do this, but some sellers use it.

Regardless of what the seller may say, there is no such thing as a "no returns policy". Your statutory rights as an online buyer are not affected by any words he puts in his listing, and you will find that Ebay will support you in this.

Not really my area of expertise, but I believe there was discussion here before about the irregular terminal to the cross at 3 o'clock on the reverse being an indicator of some very good fakes that have shown up recently. I hope I am wrong because without that it would look to be a very nice example.

I would say "fake" is a little too strong. These things are often referred to as "jeweller's copies". They are not designed to deceive, just provide a means of producing a sovereign-style ring or other piece of jewellery at a much lower price. Usually they are in 9 Ct gold, sometimes not even that. No point unmounting it as it's only value above scrap is as a piece of jewellery.