Test Jump to content
The British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

secret santa

Accomplished Collector
  • Posts

    2,835
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    209

Everything posted by secret santa

  1. I'm sure it's gone to a very good home............
  2. The Wordpress software that I've used to create my websites, including my collection, is straightforward and free. I maintain details of my collection on a Word document which is easy to maintain. See example page
  3. I've bought one (£60 cost) coin from this dealer and everything was fine.
  4. Surely not a proof or even a specimen - look at the state of those border teeth !
  5. drop an email to Neil Paisley at Colin Cooke - see website.
  6. Here, here - Neil's done a fine job with the pics.
  7. Does that beautiful but naughty Britannia coin have a Peck number ? And where can I get one ?
  8. Yes - Lot 84 photo is definitely rev H (Gouby j) small date.
  9. I've been talking out of my rear end again - the Max Brehm mule was sold by Spink as part of the Trevor Legge collection in December 2014, not the Andy Scott collection in September 2015. Are we talking about 2 different coins ?
  10. I'm sure that unsold coins will still have the buyer's premium added.
  11. Prax, I'm attaching the excerpt from the Numismatic Circular of 1986 (before anyone knew that it was a pattern obverse with 122 beads) regarding the Max Brehm/M Gouby/A Scott coin. The article doesn't refer to it as a proof - it was Michael that described it as a matt proof. Richard
  12. Does anyone know who bought that Andy Scott mule ? They might not realise that they now own the only other known 1953 penny with pattern C* obverse (I own and discovered the first)
  13. Sorry, they were catalogued as F129 Proofs - my mistake. BUT, Gouby erroneously describes F129 as obverse R +reverse r (Freeman 12+N) on page VP19 whereas Freeman describes F129 as S+r (13+N). The coins in the Roland Harris sale (lots 767 & 768) are both clearly obverse S (Freeman 13) so they could be F129 but that might be why Gouby thought that they were F128 (S+r).
  14. Right, I believe that Michael is saying on page RH3 that Lots 767 and 768 (both listed in the catalogue as F130 proofs) are, in his opinion, actually both F128 currency coins, defined on page VP19 as BP1889C. Lot 769 is catalogued as F127 (BP1889A) and Lot 770 is catalogued as F128 (BP1889C).
  15. Sorry, £920 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  16. That one sold for £327 at LCA in March 2009 - and now they want at least £690 for it !!!!
  17. From above "Gouby disagrees that two of his three 1889 proofs, were in fact proofs - not sure whether 129's or not, as Gouby has his own unique method of classification, and no Freeman equivalent is given on those pages. " Gouby always shows the Freeman number if appropriate in his books - page VP19 of his Victorian Penny book lists both BP1889P/F127A (specimen) and BP1889R/F129 (proof).
  18. Chris beat me to it - but it is a very useful book !
  19. Buy the excellent Collectors' Coins - Decimal Issues of the UK, available from this forum/website.
  20. Great pictures, Ian. Thanks for your hard work. Richard
  21. So, the top coins is a proof ? The second one a currency coin ? The third one the specimen. What is the 4th one (1879) ? I guess I'll need to see a specimen in hand next to a proof to fully understand the difference. Photos just don't do it.
  22. So, which is which, Rob ?
  23. I'm sure that some coins that I've seen claiming to be specimen strikes are no more than early sharp strikes. I'm comfortable recognising proofs but not specimens.
  24. I don't trust "specimen" strikes...........
×
×
  • Create New...
Test