jelida

While interesting, the uniface halfpenny would only have value if it could be shown to have left the mint in that state, ie not been flattened later. You would need a micrometer thickness measurement and weight to fractions of a gram to determine the liklihood of a strike on a full blank. It is more likely to have been flattened later. None of the dates you list are given a value in less than very fine condition in the Spink catalogue, so I suggest that you familiarise yourself with UK coin grading parameters on the net, and post a group photo of better ones pre 1935. But good luck, 600 is a lot of coins! Jerry

Hello Tony and welcome. The crucial issue here is the condition of these coins, only those with no apparent wear and ideally some remaining mint lustre will have any real value, and then only a few pounds, with earlier ones faring better than later. Any that are polished, damaged or worn from circulation are worth only a few pence each. For those, selling as a bulk lot on Ebay would be the best bet. Post pics of any higher condition coins you might have, for a better opinion. Jerry

Dave, up until post 11 this was a bit of disagreement coupled with a bit of misunderstanding, and perhaps a bit of hope over reality on Flukes part, though from Colins post the grading isnt necessatily that far out, even if the terminology of presentation needed ironing out. But was your dummy/ pram statement really necessary, bearing in mind he knows nothing of you? He doesnt know about the broad Scottish accent and cheeky smile? And we dont know about his sensitivities, and perhaps as a group we should be more tolerant to newcomers. Either way we have lost potential contributer before we even got to know him. On the other hand it is clear that others think the approach was right; It is right that we all make our views felt, and I hope others do. PS Dave, dont be surprised at my contrary view, I too am a Scot by birth (Lerwick) and therefore naturally argumentative, though 45 years in the Land of Song has had a moderating effect. Jerry

That is good news, I was waiting for an update! Jerry

The 'fuss' is hardly about the coin, it is about the way members of this forum demonstrated singular lack of tact and encouragement towards a self professed novice coin collector who was asking for our assistance, and it is not edifying to see the main protagonists' attempts at self justification after the event. Truths can be told in such a way as to avoid being challenging or demeaning, if the desire is there. As a relative newbie myself, over the last few months I have come to know the various characters on this forum, and their likely approach to a topic, from whom a rant is likely and from whom a more considered opinion, and I wouldnt argue that one is less acceptable or necessarily less instructive than the other, but I do know which approach would get me more engaged in the hobby and the forum and give me the opportunity to learn. Is the forum to be merely a battleground between established personalities, verbally and numismatically, or is there a place for encouraging beginners? I am sure members who have thick skin and have grown a pair will not be offended by this suggestion. Jerry

I dont think it is as straightforward as die wear, other than necessitsting die repair/modification of the master. Gouby seems quite clear that this is a different reverse to Gouby "j" , and the alterations to the shape of the back of the helmet at the very least could not occur through wear alone. The difference in the shape of the back of the helmet is well illustrated in Gouby 2009, and pretty conclusive. However I concur with his view that die wear may account for some of the more minor variability seen with this die (as, of course, other dies). Jerry

You wont want to be paying postage on that lot! Where are you based? Jerry

All small date 1875 are ja, so quite easy to find an example to compare with a small date 1874. Jerry

I tend to look at the back of the helmet which is concave on earlier reverses but very slightly convex on the ja, the body of the helmet below the plume is also more bulbous. Best compared side by side. Jerry

Gosh! But sorry, not for sale. Will keep my eyes open. Jerry

I was pleased to find this for £35 at the recent Midland Coin Fair, it appears to be a Freeman 72 with the Gouby ja reverse, and it fills a gap within my budget. Gouby values it more than the standard F72, but as a newly described variety appears hesitant in ascribing a rarity: in the opinion of the penny experts on this forum, what level of Freeman rarity would be likely? Is it still scarcer than the norm? As you can see from the scans, it is probably GVF or therabouts. Jerry

This vendor has some nice shiny pennies with time on their hands http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1902-King-Edaward-VII-BRONZE-penny-Unc-Very-nice-tone-Loads-Of-Leisure-/301653011807?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item463bebad5f Jerry

I'll be at the Midland Coin Fair, it would be nice to put faces to names, what name do you trade under? (Looking at a list from earlier this year) Jerry

Sadly the £3 possible 'open 3' 1863 on Ebay turned out to be just another photo illusion, however here is one that I got for a fiver at the last midland coin fair. Just how common is this type ? Is it simply a case of them not previously being recognized, but being fairly plentiful in reality? Or are they truly as scarce as LCA prices might suggest? I have found two over the past 4 months, a 2 Euro one on Ebay and the one above, neither better than VG condition, but I hold out hopes of one in fine or better eventually. Have the other penny buffs on this forum come across them? Jerry

And I've been seething over this one for several days, but now its finished I can't spoil anybodies anticipation. THIS IS NOT AN OPEN 3 ! This is the same seller who has given us a selection of mis-identified rarities over the last couple of months,and made good money; we have already discussed his 1860 mule penny, for example. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/331533723405?_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT Any collector aware of the variety should really check in Gouby before wasting his money, the variety identifiers are clearly described, and not present in this coin. And I didn't wish to draw attention to the type until an auction had completed on one that I think might be (at less than £3, a reasonable gamble, will update if correct). Jerry

How on earth does someone think this is reasonable............? http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1866-Victoria-Penny-/221755018337?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item33a1a10c61 Jerry

NGC grades counter-stamped coins based on the counter-stamp, not the host coin. Bizarre though don't you think, as both are relevant to a collector and as to value?Not really bizarre , it is the counterstamp that gave monetary status as a 'British' coin, and to a collector of British coins the clock starts ticking when the counterstamp is applied. Of course there is some added value if the original coin is pleasing. Jerry

Hmmmmm....after first altering his description to state 'this is not a mule' he has revised it again , weasel words stating that it is in fact a mule, and imposing a BIN of £500. What planet.......? Jerry

Is this really worth more than face value? Cant see this 'error' having happened in the mint. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/one-penny-error-/221716957436?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item339f5c48fc Jerry

Perfect ..... more an ass I see that some-one has put him right, and he has changed his description. Still asking £200 though. Jerry

I remember being told many years ago that Georgian halfpennies were often forged (contemporaneously) using 'impossible' dates, the argument being that ' if a genuine one doesn't exist, how can this be a forgery'? I'm not sure how true that is, but perhaps that was the principle here. Don't suppose the argument held much weight in the courts, though. Jerry

Yes, certainly not a mule, more of an ass! How can the vendor, being aware of the variety, get it so wrong? I suppose on the positive side, anyone looking to spend £200 in this series would not be caught out...........? I did note the coin you posted, Prax, but at least yours was in good condition and therefore worthy of collecting as an example of impaired striking at the mint. I must admit that I take Freeman's comment re the weak striking at the teeth (and sometimes the L.C.Wyon below the bust) and the resulting occasional appearance of a section of 'beads' as a warning against the confusion demonstrated by the vendor, rather than a suggestion of varietal merits. Jerry

How about this one? Does it rattle your beads? http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/121587221215?_trksid=p2060778.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT Jerry

I guess its a question of reputation. No art gallery owner would want to fill his gallery with talentless tatt, even if there was money in it, his reputation would suffer. The antique dealer wants top quality as his showcase to draw people in. The slabs are the showcase of these companies, what is in them matters, and not just the accuracy of grading. I appreciate that a profit has to be made , but at what long-term cost? The reputation of slabbing companies seems low already on this forum. At least the ridiculous idea of a slabbed coin attracting a premium might take a knock. Jerry

It gets worse , I've just looked at his other items, he has seven coins all slabbed within ten serial numbers, none will come near to the cost. Somebody has wasted a lot of money. Shouldnt the grading company have taken pity and simply sent the batch back? It makes a mockery of the whole slabbing system. Jerry