Colin G.

The 50p looks quite nice

It is only £4.99 per coin to get them encased, I think he has been a bit crafty chopping off the top of the label in the picture, enticing people to think it is a certified item. No doubt some fool will soon part with their money

You just beat me to it!!!

Fell free to e-mail me photos and I will host the pictures for you

I would agree, it would be incuse on the die which would suggest the die had damage in the form of flaking which has progressively worsened as striking progressed.

I have to admit the audio/video feeds for the American auction houses are generally very good

I would agree with points 3&4 entirely, because they have happened to me, and it does seem a bizarre course of action. I know they may be extremely busy just before and just after an auction, but no response at all is not good practice. Have you told them about your concerns, it may be that they are just unaware of the issues. From my own experience, with a vast majority of auction houses, the after auction bit is always frustrating, we are eager to get our hands on our purchases and unless you are at a sale in person inevitably there will be delays...but some times the delays do seem a bit too loooong!! Trying to get payment after a sale is another common issue, I know they all like to earn a bit of interest but again some of the delays seem a bit too long....the gas and electric companies don't take the same view when I try to hold onto their money Anyway welcome to the forum and it looks like you will fit right in with us bunch of miserable gits I think Tom will be pleased to see a fellow hammered shilling collector on here

I stopped collecting sovereigns years ago because they were just too small, don't see farthings as an option. I've just about finished 1895 to 1936 in true BU, ok a few gaps, I just don't see the point of starting something I can't finish with the bun head series.... All East Anglian beer is muck, Derek, trust me and heaped upon that shame must be added the fact that they have no decent rugby teams. You must be going to the wrong pubs....IPA is in my veins.I also enjoy Abbot Ruddles County & Adnams offerings A few non E Anglian beers appeal like Taylors Landlord,Pedigree,Tanglefoot etc. Rugby at grass roots level also thrives We also don't like strangers. But you do have great detecting land!!

There were two; 294 '1825 farthing D/U in DEI about uncirculated' (est. £180) and 295 '1825 farthing uncirculated nearly full lustre' (est. £42) Cheers!!

Does anyone have a copy of the June 2011 Warwick & Warwick catalogue? If you do, can you have a look and see what lot number the 1825 farthing was (individual coin lots). Lost mine.... Thanks

I had to look for a while, but there appear to be no border teeth, but that still does not necessarily mean fake

Dave it looks incuse from the pictures which would rule it out as a die crack. It would have to be raised to be a die crack.

Just think of it as a big game of pairs!! Those poor farthings

Very, very interesting. An absolute bargain for £85.00, I'd say. Can't see it being on sale for long. It does look like a narrow date, yes. It also looks genuine. Don't think it is an 1871, possibly an 1874 with the one repunched in the wrong position (mint worker forgot he was working on a mirror image) Now bear in mind pennies are not my thing , but it looks like an altered 4 to me, the serifs on the last one are angled which are completely different to the other 1 in the date. I can also see some difference in shade where the 4 would have been, but I don't know how this would compare to genuine date spacing for this date? Overlays anyone?

top one hollow neck, bottom one flat/rounded? would you concur, chaps? I agree it looks like one of each variety

Must have missed this one, I would agree with the grades people have given, the artifical darkening on these is virtually never complete, the 1903 is quite a nice coin. Spinks is a bit ambitious with those prices, but the offer you have said seems fair

Frankly, it's a b****y good job we don't all collect the same things in the same grade. On the reasonable assumption that the acceptable coins would be those in the best condition, 99% of all coins would be melted as unfit for purpose, and every collector would be allowed one BU 1967 penny plus another coin of his/her choice and according to their wallet because that's all there would be to go around. the thought of having only a 1967 penny to covet

Neither. The coin is all wrong... Definitely a pattern, I understand there are a few about, I know of the Lavrillier ones, but I am sure one of the penny mob will identify who is responsible for this one The Lavrillier patterns sell quite well, one sold in Heritage in 2009 for nearly $30,000 dollars!!!

I agree

Agreed But I have a feeling the thread is now going to deteriorate into a gimp comment contest

I don't think you were too far out in terms of buying as a collector, maybe marginally over, but a coin with good eye appeal is always worth a bit more anyway and will always sell fairly easy

What a great choice of denomination!! Nice farthing, and these very often seem to have the wear shown to the rim that is evident on yours even in uncirculated condition, but I would agree with Peter's assessment on this one, nice eye appeal My sniping is not as succesful of late, so someone else must be beating us both or you have started to win a few Peter!!

I actually confess to being a self slabber, but only for my own purposes Please don't outlaw them I would never sell one of my coins in its housing, but they seem great for presentation, protection and storage.....no adverse issues yet

I agree that it is impossible to determine other than by logic. For an example of an earlier thing superimposed on a later character, refer to the 1807/6 proof halfpenny in the confirmed unlisted varieties section. There I was able to show that Taylor took the 1806 broken jewel die and changed the datal 6 to a 7. The 7 can be seen to have sections of the 6 superimposed on top of it where the position of the two digits coincides. This was written up fully in the 2007 BNJ. Another example was in the thread a few months ago that I posted on the spur rowel over saltire mark James I half groat. After discussions and rationalising the arguments for and against, it was reasonably concluded that the majority of the multiple spur rowel cuts were underlying despite being chronologically later than the saltire due to the hardness of the die. Eventually the mark was cut to a depth equal to that of the initial saltire mark. Both could lead you to conclude that the chronology was wrong. Conversely, some marks are cut ever deeper and conventionally in chronological terms. e.g. see the triangle over anchor over tun mark below. Tun was in use 1636-8, anchor 1638-9 and triangle 1639-40. At last my sanity is restored I had always pondered the fact that it was very often discussed depending on the depth of the cut, and this should not be a deciding factor. It could certainly be evidence but should not be definitive evidence. Thansk for the examples I will have a look!! I'm not sure I agree (though far from being expert in such things). I've seen the 1807/6 thread and that's clearly a 7, though there are residual traces of a 6 showing, that's quite certain. From a deeper cut 6, that's also the only reasonable explanation. But it doesn't correspond in any way to those E N diagrams above, as the remains of the 6 do not show beyond the boundaries of the 7. And Dave's penny doesn't show anything like that. It shows a clear E with a lump of something sitting on top of the central portion (it looks almost like a lump of solder). Even if it was the deep lying trace of something original and much deeper, you'd have to account for what it must have been, and the way it sits 'on' the E doesn't seem to bear that theory out anyway. The unerlying E looks kosher, just with a lump of something on it. In the illustrations above, the white letter is clearly the overcut one, but possibly the diagram was constructed in an exaggerated way to illustrate a point? I can't see any Mint official allowing such a lamentably unsuccessful overstrike out, nor any responsible technician keeping their job if that was best job their skill could do. Ahh you misunderstood, this was not in relation to Dave's coin or that particular flaw, it was just to illustrate that the most prominent digit/letter does not necessarily have to be the last one struck. In both examples the shaded letter could have been cut later than the unshaded one, if less pressure was used and tehrefore the letter was not cut as deep. The visual result would still be the same, it is just a topic that I have never agreed with and wanted clarity, but I hijacked Dave's thread

Yes but could they tell it wasn't EF? I agree there's very little that can be done about it overall, but the odd little victory is good for the soul... I am with Sion on this one, whilst what these sellers are doing is clearly wrong, it pales into insignificence when the site they are being sold through does nothing The world will never be the perfect place for a buyer, there has to be a certain level of people using their own common sense. Trial and error is how most people learn, you do something wrong, it hurts you don't do it again!! The exact same rules apply to sellers as well