secret santa

Something many of us relate to.............

BP1870Ae - Gouby says rare.

I have one of these and noted that it wasn't recorded by Michael but never sent him the pictures. I can now classify it as Ad.

There's one on Ebay right now https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/186290037921?hash=item2b5fc064a1:g:TbEAAOSw91Blw5DF&amdata=enc%3AAQAIAAAA0NA%2BGFRJmh2erTTEBYs%2BgDLYnACv2ObqiaVyHs0tWh%2Fz7%2FkLGizq8lvZLd2xZYQtPuEkA7FY%2BcteAQXIDN4Fy7Iaro0lfjHrydJ3OPSxekY2fL408VxSpi82H2nlW4bXdQ8uzAYLQah%2BHBi7DLqZCS5AqMS44iStXic%2BgA7ybGQrj7wUN2s5hd5RUkzGp2fA7XE5AT7og2p1JfuYSLw%2BHw60NohGN%2FHff8AiH4Wt8Bh%2BU6rbTnungCIIu4GfXBbZFYrvanDjoRtsIxjTJSLQYG8%3D|tkp%3ABk9SR7KQh6CxYw

I've started this now and would welcome any comments/suggestions

Please do, Pete. We need to stop this. I'm going to put a new page on my varieties website to illustrate these fakes.

I'm furious as I've been messaging the seller telling him that many of his coins are fakes but he's just telling me to stop harassing him. I hope the buyers can tell the difference but I suspect that they're not experts.

Yes, I agree but that 1849 fake just sold for £232 !!!

It's carried over from the "uncirculated" ones. And absent on a genuine coin

The fake/replica coins have quite a deep "scar" in the queen's hair that still shows in worn coins and is not present in genuine coins:

And this guy is making a lot of money selling them: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/196217830331?hash=item2daf7e7bbb:g:pKMAAOSw~0xluNZ4&amdata=enc%3AAQAIAAAA0EmSRXm4oigGHs2VZdI8DrArm11xpKYjXu%2FYzGhQyoD%2FcqA54GbMUK7kXeAC1wewqAWkyMxasw9K4rQiWyxLcTK7uRyW8bebzI%2F8ERyrL9y9ZyDx%2FgX0mJf7jVRwvemuvgrufTmT%2BF%2BRoW8mVt2OTs5TJEMY5kCbSfk18K89jQ7ppYJcDb2XUKKZd8VBwPji3zEP1R06H6ttSSeAL0XV8x1Becgl8cDuC9O1bmk%2FXqVp8%2F5gTPFpFpPs4NrjWiGSO8v97UwK766aNDo2tfDm52s%3D|tkp%3ABk9SR4b8wsmrYw

Further to my previous post, they are now making replica coins in an "aged" condition and they are appearing on Ebay in increasing numbers. The fake obverses all have 180 border beads/teeth whereas the genuine coins have 175.

I bought this one for £30 3 years ago for novelty value.

I reported this listing to Ebay today - it's an obvious replica: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/325985059920?hash=item4be6394450:g:EHcAAOSwp91ltkcq&amdata=enc%3AAQAIAAAA0AaRk5xddPBH27qigZUEyIop%2F5aKdToWXukNQwqQ0lLkgbH4OTBEYJHeXHERTqxPpmlcWUb%2F%2FcuOe1KATXNU5H5CNFBMrLHzryB8hUk8QaYAvhSiKKJmdWdlrIXa3ec5ihlO3Te3EquK8ZkkZmpKq4npCftNxc6s01sSHuHKqGBqPgAc5JTy4vVwkAogn0yNRGL6mvklppjN%2Firp0GOnn%2F%2B4KTwzFe3B4KbGSXVm9jghyuzQ5lZYnK4%2Fe9%2F5%2B8L1JigBasGKsM%2B1EZPrrgHh0jg%3D|tkp%3ABk9SR6SBpJWqYw And here's their reply: What happened: We looked into your report and didn’t find the listing to be in violation of our policy. This determination was made using automation or artificial intelligence. So that's alright then.

Her prehensile big toe is also rather creepy.

Yes, the teeth are too long, her right thumb is too short, the left hand waves cover the teeth plus a few other minor details but generally the best attempt at a bronze penny that I've seen to date.

That reverse is scarily good - I had to count the teeth to make sure but the fake has 180 teeth whereas the genuine article has 187.

Given the large 5 was only used from 1856-59, could the last numeral be a combination of 7, 8 and 9 ?

And here's another example - listed as 1858 over 3 on Ebay but it doesn't have the characteristic die flaw through the base of the numerals, although it does have the "classic" large 5.

They're getting better at this. It's much better than the Victorian bronze pennies.

I'm sure that people on here would be prepared to buy in the UK and post to the US.

When one talks about the possible 1858 overdates, there is an assumption that previous dies from an earlier year were reused with the final digit being altered or over-punched, i.e the 1858 over 3 is an altered die from 1853 (or, as Gouby theorises, 1852). One assumes that the Bramah 25c above also results from these dies or 1854 or even other. The problem is that the 1858 large date, 1858 over 3 and the Bramah 25c are clearly struck with the classic large date 5 with the distinctively shaped pointed top as seen below: (sorry about the different size of images) But 1853 and 1854 (and 1851) pennies, however, were struck with very differently shaped 5s, suggesting that dies from those years were NOT re-used. Unless I'm missing something ?

It remains a mystery.

Seems logical - they get rid of all the shrapnel with out having to lug them to the bank themselves.