Colin G.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, and yours is as valuable as anyone else's. I know I have purchased off Martin in the past and the service was great, I have personally had no problems.

That is the perfect phrase in my mind, there are Guernsey coins with mintages of 60,000 where you can obtain a top grade example with relative ease, try and do the same thing with certain date copper farthings where the mintages are substantially higher. This is what makes determining rarity nearly impossible, you would have to factor in availabilty/mintage/grade and many other aspects, and even then it would have to incorporate a fairly large factor of safety, and I guarantee plenty of other numismatists would disagree with some of the ratings!!

Detectorist.co.uk Link to a metal detcting forum, the best one by a mile in my opinion

Die cracks are quite common in this series, and generally do not add to the value of a coin, if anything they can actually detract from the value

I agree definitely a Jetton

I am also a detectorist, so would be willing to offer you any advice. I know a couple of guys on our detecting forum are from Germany, so they may be able to give you some pointers on the rules and regs over there

Thats soudns like a very familiar story...the same one in my household...apart from the shilling!!

John is right, if it were a penny it would become a variety, but it does look like some form of damage to the die. I do record these where possible just to get an idea of frequency and whether it is a progressive flaw. The recut linear circle is quite a common feature on 1860 coins and is really bad on some of them

I like the thrill of the bid, albeit I have forgot to bid on a couple of occasions

They used to be identified as small 8 and large 8. Colin Cooke redefined them as thin 8 and fat 8, which is a more accurate term because it is the width of the numeral that is obvious. The script is also different. There is a a visual explanation on my 1862 page http://www.aboutfarthings.co.uk/Farthing%20-%201862.html As for the overdate, I have always wondered what defines which digit is overstruck, take the example above, the fat 8 could have been the original digit, or the the thin 8 could have been depending on how hard the repunch was struck. If it was deeper than the original numeral it would appear to be on top, but if it was struck shallower it would appear to be below does that make sense? The change in design of the 8 makes it easier to determine that the thin 8 was the original numeral because it was used up until 1862/3 then reverted back in 1865.

I assume when you talk about the smell you are on about the foil test? Spit on a pice of foil and rub it on a silver coin, you get an sulphurous smell.

Kath, I would be happy enough to vouch for Derek (Red Riley) if it gives you any comfort.

I did a couple of years as a salesman, but I was not pushy enough I now work in Building Control on commercial projects (before you all start having a go at me about dodgy extensions)

Go to lunch early on wednesday 4th, Colin. Thanks for the heads up!! I find the level of regulation as frustrating as everyone else, I try to take a reasonable common sense approach

And when we've done that, can we move round to HR and Compliance ? I work in compliance

I think you would need to magnify to at least x60 to be definitive. It is surprising what die cracks can resemble, but once magnified we will have a better idea

I wouldn't worry the rate I am going, I will have retired before it gets published I must set aside some tim from every day life, I must set aside some time from everyday life, I must........

I have come across similar things on farthings, that have seriously resembled additional numerals, and allsorts, but when I sit back and think about it and get my level head on, I always find a plausible explanation. I am not discounting it as a 1, but I will reserve judgement until a magnified clear image is provided.

Spoilsport but there is more!!

Definitely not, it is a toothed border both sides. The way some of the teeth look isolated like beads is a common feature on toothed borders and the one that causes confusion, but I can guarantee that the coin in the photo is not a mule. I can identify them visually because I am examining them all the time, but I now have a definitive way of checking which will help collectors, but I am hesitant to release the information at the moment because I am working on putting a book together of varieties and it will be detailed in the book.

It looks a bit ropey to me I was thinking Chinese copy

That looks very similar to some of the 1895 Old Head farthings, the dies must have been polished which gives a "proof like" effect with some mirroring to the fields, and a very clear strike. I believe them to be very early strikes.

I might be able to do you a deal on some farthings If there is anything the shop that catches your eye, drop me an e-mail and we can sort something out. Thanks Colin

I never used to see the fascination with these, but since owning a few, they are fascinating little insights into previous owners, and the route the coin has taken. I would definitely purchase more farthings with these if I could find them

Okay devil's advocate time....I do agree with much of your sentiment, but Lustre can be subdued, so I can have two coins that are both uncirculated with full lustre, but one will look different to the other. I will always try and highlight this as subdued lustre, but it is still technically a BUNC coin in my opinion. I do however try and keep the classification BUNC for only those coins that I feel have true full lustre, otherwise I will indicate as UNC with 90% lustre or similar. This is the only product I can find in my stock which is described as ABU, and this is due to the fact that this coin is BUNC to the eye, but when scanned/photgraphed, a slight patch of lustre is missing to Victoria's hair, so I do not feel it should be classed as BUNC. Do I now describe this as UNC with 99.9% lustre? I can see the issue being raised but have never personally seen it as a major issue. If this annoys collectors, then I might be willing to change this to UNC with "almost full lustre" or similar. The last thing I want to do is rub you lot up the wrong way Do you honestly see this example as a major issue, I really do value your opinions guys? http://aboutfarthings.co.uk/shop/product_info.php?products_id=550 As I say, I do the best I can and also would gladly accept returns if buyers are unsatisfied, but it does not just seem that big an issue to me. I know there are those who take this a step too far, but we will never get concensus on this so I think it will always be a case of if you don't like the dealer's way of listing stock, and are not happy with their grading then do not use them, and let them know the reason why the coin is being returned (because mistakes do happen ). That is exactly what I do and would not expect anything less from anyone buying from me. Now I will hide behind my monitor and wait for the backlash