Red Riley

For my sins, I am a supporter of Wycombe Wanderers FC and last Saturday we played away at Stevenage. I am far too tight fisted to buy a programme, but my friend did. On about page 17 was a half page advert for KB Coins. Does seem strange that Keith Bayford (if I remember his name correctly) should advertise in such an odd place where the chances of it striking a chord with anyone (apart from me) must be close to zero. Unless of course he was elsewhere in the ground and the advert was merely a contribution to the cause. Don't expect many responses but just struck me as unusual. We won 2-0 by the way.

I think hammered coins are a nightmare to grade at the best of times. There was talk on here, a while back of producing some kind of informal guide to help collectors grade these coins, but it never got off the ground which is a shame.

Personally I go with the dandruff hypothesis.

My penny turned up this morning without my even having paid for it. So you may have something waiting for you when you get home... Did you get an invoice with it Derek? Yes. I guess that they trust me having bought the odd thing from them in the past.

My penny turned up this morning without my even having paid for it. So you may have something waiting for you when you get home...

I don't know whether this is a breach of protocol, but I thought I would say that I have a couple of Unc 1944s for sale and one GEF that avoided the toning process. How much lustre on the 44 escapee? And how much are you asking? (You can DM me if you'd rather not discuss it in open forum). I am quite happy to discuss the coin on open forum. I'm grading it in the Michael Gouby style as GEF35. Send me your e-mail address Peck, and I'll let you have photographs which at least removes the necessity to reduce them to an unmanageable size. And I'm asking £20 for it.

I don't know whether this is a breach of protocol, but I thought I would say that I have a couple of Unc 1944s for sale and one GEF that avoided the toning process. Is the site running Derek? If you check out www.pennycrowncoins.co.uk you will see that the site is still under construction. I do want to have some kind of launch but this will not be for some weeks yet (there are over 1000 photographs to be posted) and I don't want to go off half cock so can only suggest that if there is something you desperately want, just let me know and I'll see if I've got it. As I think I've said before champagne is nasty foreign muck and I'd much rather settle for a pint of Rebellion Mild Ale.

I don't know whether this is a breach of protocol, but I thought I would say that I have a couple of Unc 1944s for sale and one GEF that avoided the toning process.

Oh okay, no. 43 (1873 1d). I actually bid on 5 items but that was the only one I won. Did you get notification that you had won, or did you have to ask ? I didn't ask but as there was only one bid (worrying...) and it was the amount I bid, I assumed it was mine. They did tell me I had been outbid on the others.

Oh okay, no. 43 (1873 1d). I actually bid on 5 items but that was the only one I won.

I'm not sure to be honest, I haven't heard anything either way ? I e-mailed them yesterday. They've not got round to sending out the invoices yet but if you haven't been informed that you've been outbid, then you won. Or at least that's the theory.

It wouldn't be worth any more in cash terms as a variety for the same basic reasons as your half sovereign which is that there are insufficient collectors of the series with deep pockets. But a 6/5 would have a numismatic value as our knowledge base would be extended, i.e. the 1765 die was made but never used. I've got one in EF Rob. Message me your e-mail again and I'll put it as an attachment.

I just sold two of these, they didn't make big bucks but as soon as I'd posted them off I rather regretted it; actually rather nice 'big' coins and there's plenty of detail on the obverse.

... Tandoori

Yes and no.

Is it just me that half hopes the public regain their senses and they end up being stuck with it?

Unfortunately they are all deceased.

I was watching 'Take Your Pick'...

But it is way out of line, the foreman (or whoever) will have spotted it and insisted that it be re-cut. What Rob says is perfectly true, there has to be a substantial following for a type of variety to make it valuable and letters re-cut letters seldom fire the juices. There is one exception that springs to mind and that is the 1860 'N over sideways N' penny but that is 90 degrees out whereas this is maybe 5 or 6. If you wanted to try your arm, maybe advertise it as 'V over misaligned V - unrecorded variety' and see if you get any interest.

I think the best way to tell whizzed copper/bronze is that the 'lustre' (or whatever you want to call it!) is just too even and looks false. If you don't return the coin it will rapidly tarnish in a most unattractive way. This is why I am always very suspicious of hundred year old coins with 'full mint lustre' and no toning. In real life it don't happen. What makes it worse is that frequently the whizzing is not done with wire but on a buffing wheel and the scratches can only be seen with careful scrutiny. Learn from one who has been caught!

Michael's equivalent of BU is PAS, although it is a grade he seldom allocates and I will agree this is far closer to the Spink definition of Unc than that used by virtually anybody else, although the nomenclature is different. He evangelised the system in his book 'The British Bronze Penny 1860-1970' but subsequently amended it slightly. It is a system I have always used for my own collection and will continue to use.

I suppose the question to be asked on the gold coin you mention above is, 'who got it right?'. Auction houses deal with 1000s of coins at a time and will therefore make mistakes. Gold is probably the most difficult metal to grade because of its relative lack of toning and I can accept EF instead of NEF but no two professionals should disagree to the extent of one calling a coin VF and the other EF. Your final paragraph re the 1902LT is a practical example of what concerns me with the type of pictures CCC use. As you have clearly demonstrated, a tiny spot of verdigris can be the difference between buying and leaving on the shelf. If they use that type of illustration it is incumbent upon them to mention any shortcomings in the blurb. Personally, I would have to say that although I haven't bought much from CCC, I have nonetheless been satisfied with what little I have bought. Despite my rather heated spat with VickyS, I have found the discussion on lustre an interesting one. I am not a luddite but am still of the opinion that buyers perceive lustre as original untoned surface and a dealer who describes a coin as 'full lustre, some toning' is in an untenable position. Perhaps as Peckris says there is a difference in perception between the UK and the US on this point but I would say that I feel other's comments on the subject have vindicated my view, from a UK perspective at least. A couple more not entirely unrelated points. I recently had to catalogue 72 uncirculated 20th century pennies, and excluding the 7 1934s and 1944-46s I only managed to grade 4 of them BU (or in my eyes 'fully lustrous coins'!), a 1938 and 3x 1961-67s. Curiously I often see 1938s in this condition, far more than any other date, presumably one of the reasons they are worth buttons. All the others were AU90(%) downwards. Some while back I conducted an experiment in toning polished coins (I would state that I didn't polish them!) with a toning fluid called 'Tourmaline'. The results were OK but what I actually got was coins with shiny toning which needed further work to make them look like circulated pennies (i.e. distressing them by carrying them in my pocket with the loose change). Looking at Huss's illustration I can only believe this effect was caused by both the valleys and the peaks being completely filled by a very smooth layer of toning whereas with natural toning the surface is much rougher with the odd peak breaking through.

I would call it EF5 - not quite 15 - and in this case the residual lustre is red. Actually quite an attractive coin I feel.

Yes sorry, this has all got carried away a bit, but I guess in Oscar Wilde's terms 'there is only one thing worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about'. One lot I will not be bidding on is number 37. When I saw it I had to do a double take as I have its absolute twin. Not only is it in the same condition (I think mine's a bit better but I would say that wouldn't I?) but I also have the same die cracks evident on the reverse at 12 o'clock and in the exergue, so the two coins would have been minted at almost exactly the same time from a reverse die that was not long for this world. Other than the die cracks, the coins are exceptionally well struck and it is curious that neither coin seems to have entered circulation. There is probably an interesting story to be told here, but we'll never know...

You can quote 'science' all you like but in the final analysis the issue is still very simple. If a coin has any toning at all it cannot be described as having full lustre. Just answer these two questions; 1) Why are coins frquently described as having 'lustre in legend'? I mentioned this in an earlier post but you did not reply to it; 2) Have a look at Michael Gouby's website (http://www.michael-coins.co.uk/). Why do you think he describes all his high grade bronze as AU50, AU70 etc.?