Michael-Roo

I was beginning to feel it was a little unfair of me to have posted the 'glass houses' comment. I see now I am vindicated.

Glass houses...

Well said Larry.

There isn't a person on here who didn't make a mistake when starting out. Have a look at this link, you'll see a selection of accurately graded 1794 guineas. Having your coin in hand you'll be able to compare and determine grade better than we can from the photos. http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Pastresults&searchterm=Guinea+1794&category=9&searchtype=1

I'd grade at near fine for the obverse/fine for the reverse. Only having these photos to go by it is difficult to be certain but Pete's probably right, polished too. Why is it such an odd colour? In my opinion £420 is too expensive.

G over O 1821 Larry, not 22. I have an EF+ example myself. A recognised variety though, as to what is actually showing under the G, the jury is still out.

Got it. Ta Pete.

Not around in 1990 Pete?

You're quite right. I have three of these chunky little fellas. They feel really substantial in the hand, don't they.

Were you tuned to the right channel? We played a far superior game, AND Columbia behaved appallingly throughout. A well deserved win.

I have one too.

The Dunghill cartoon is Pitt, not George III.

Hear, hear. A mate, a gentleman, and an expert on all aspects of 20th century English coinage.

Zookeeperz, we don't want abusive comments here. Maybe you would be happier on another forum.

It would appear the seller knows exactly what he has and what he's doing. That 1694 elephant cent for example, if genuine would carry a price tag in the thousands. Amazing how many elderly people die leaving a collection of rarities, all of which were minted last Tuesday. Surely someone should investigate this recent phenomenon whereby people in their twilight years experience an overwhelming compulsion to collect reproductions which can then be passed down to, or left in the loft to be found by, a family member, and preferably one who knows nothing about coins.

If the seller made no reference to it being a modern copy cancel the transaction or have your money refunded through ebay.

Agreed, the reverse is quite nice, though looks more suited to a colonial issue. The obverse is all wrong. Far too busy in the border and again in the clothing/veil. The portrait, too small and not at all sculptural, much like something rendered from a photograph which, indeed, I think it was. The overall effect is that of a token or commemorative medalet. Kudos to Jaggy though, a nice one to own.

If with a die number below the date, or a slender 3 in the date, or with a 3 over 1 in the date, then, yes, quite possibly. A bog standard 1863, even in uncirculated condition, wouldn't be worth a tenth of that figure.

Great minds Pete, great minds. Another bit of info for newbie Chris. Total 1971 'new pence' 2p minted: 1,454,856,250 (almost one and a half billion). Total 1979 'new pence' 2p minted: 260,200,000 (more than 260 million).

Nothing to get excited about, unfortunately. Each is worth face value only (i.e 2p). They were all inscribed 'New Pence' until 1982 from when 'New' was replaced with the quantity of pence (one, two, five etc.)

The snake is quite successfully rendered, but the two men look as though they've been sourced from a primary school art project.

Love those. My dad was from Scotland Rd.

Hear, hear Pete. Finest people in/from the world. Long may it be so. Sorry to hear you've been unwell. I hope you're on the mend.

I concur. If the aEF grade was an attempt to mislead the coin wouldn't be offered at £1.50 with free P&P.