LCA March

[1949threepence]

Does anybody know what happened to the really choice 1862 date from halfpenny dies, penny, ex Freeman ex Bamford that was on offer in the original catalogue - from the Elstree/David Reissner collection?

I can't see any trace of it in the auction realised prices, and it also seems to have vanished from the original catalogue. Both of them have now merged the once separately listed collection, into the main body.  

 

[jacinbox]

15 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Does anybody know what happened to the really choice 1862 date from halfpenny dies, penny, ex Freeman ex Bamford that was on offer in the original catalogue - from the Elstree/David Reissner collection?

I can't see any trace of it in the auction realised prices, and it also seems to have vanished from the original catalogue. Both of them have now merged the once separately listed collection, into the main body.  

 

It sold and if I recall correctly the price was £1300. The coin was corroded on the obverse and had many a porous mark as though Vicky had endured a spectacular Smallpox spasm.

Edited March 12, 2016 by jacinbox

[PWA 1967]

On 3/7/2016 at 5:20 PM, secret santa said:

I hoped a forum member might get that lot and share the research info (please)

Nice Lot and happy for what i paid as hadnt seen it just put a bid in.

The six coin varieties were worth paying for without the folder.

I now need to study it all aswell as the photographs included which is a bonus.

Pete.

 

[1949threepence]

9 hours ago, jacinbox said:

It sold and if I recall correctly the price was £1300. The coin was corroded on the obverse and had many a porous mark as though Vicky had endured a spectacular Smallpox spasm.

I don't recall any corrosion on the coin, which looked a pretty much flawless VF to me. 

[RChris]

I got this 1926ME in the March auction. Compare the enhanced LCA images with mine taken in natural daylight. I find it disappointing that my photos are a much better representation of what it's really like in hand. Another reason to turn up on the day and not bid on web illustrations I suppose.

[Nordle11]

5 minutes ago, RChris said:

I got this 1926ME in the March auction. Compare the enhanced LCA images with mine taken in natural daylight. I find it disappointing that my photos are a much better representation of what it's really like in hand. Another reason to turn up on the day and not bid on web illustrations I suppose.

I find the same problem with them. I've yet to get mine but here is the LCA pictures vs. the DNW pictures where it first appeared. Looks like 2 different coins.

 

[Colin G.]

Really like the tone of the DNW photo, definitely adds to the appeal of the coin in my opinion 

[Nordle11]

Exactly, the purple hue in the legends is lovely, LCA have enhanced their picture so much the tone nearly disappears. It's just a problem of wondering what the coins actually look like when you receive them!

[secret santa]

Yes, I don't know what LCA is doing to their photos but they're managing to convey a very even tone & surface to many of their pennies which can look quite different in daylight or camera flashlight. It's interesting that several people commented that the coins sold in their previous auction looked much better in hand than in their photos, and now the opposite appears to be true.

[secret santa]

Maybe it's just clever lighting.

[jaggy]

The LCA & Heritage photos are generally very good. The DNW ones are okay but not more than that and the Spink ones are awful.

Of course, you can do a lot to a photo with the right lighting and with Photoshop. 

[RChris]

I can imagine Semras response they were returned for a refund due to misleading images! Some chance?

[jacinbox]

On 12/03/2016 at 11:54 PM, 1949threepence said:

I don't recall any corrosion on the coin, which looked a pretty much flawless VF to me. 

In hand it looked 65% porous on the obverse. You aren't judging the coin by the photos posted online surely? Anyone happen to inspect the coin during the sale?

[secret santa]

These are the pics from Laurie Bamford's sale.

[jacinbox]

Thanks Santa. According to that picture the porosity is confined to just Vicky's face and neck. In hand and under a glass it was a lot different.

 

[jelida]

Yes, I examined the coin and decided not to bid unless very cheap. Not a disasterous coin, but I would always have wanted to improve on it.  Multiple tiny pockmarks, as if it had had sand trodden into it. A little corrosion on the reverse too.

Jerry

[Rob]

1 hour ago, jelida said:

Yes, I examined the coin and decided not to bid unless very cheap. Not a disasterous coin, but I would always have wanted to improve on it.  Multiple tiny pockmarks, as if it had had sand trodden into it. A little corrosion on the reverse too.

Jerry

fire damage?

[1949threepence]

On 3/16/2016 at 1:38 PM, jacinbox said:

In hand it looked 65% porous on the obverse. You aren't judging the coin by the photos posted online surely? Anyone happen to inspect the coin during the sale?

I was probably thinking it's extremely difficult to find a decent small date 1862, and this was one of the very best I've seen. But having looked again, I do take your point about the obverse flaws. 

[secret santa]

The coin was actually unsold in the auction but I bought it afterwards. Despite its flaws it was the best that Laurie Bamford had managed to get hold of in all his years of collecting and it went for less than it sold for in his sale (in which most coins were reasonably priced in my view). I'd love a better one but I'm not likely to get one.

[1949threepence]

2 hours ago, secret santa said:

The coin was actually unsold in the auction but I bought it afterwards. Despite its flaws it was the best that Laurie Bamford had managed to get hold of in all his years of collecting and it went for less than it sold for in his sale (in which most coins were reasonably priced in my view). I'd love a better one but I'm not likely to get one.

I'm astounded it was unsold at the conclusion of the auction. I was toying with the idea of placing a £1750 bid on it, but decided on other coins instead on the grounds I'd be outbid !!!. Had I known it would not go in the auction, I'd definitely have bid. 

[secret santa]

I've compiled a gallery of most of the F41 pennies sold in the last 14 years and they're a pretty grim lot, apart from one or two nice ones. See website below,

rarepennies

[1949threepence]

8 hours ago, secret santa said:

I've compiled a gallery of most of the F41 pennies sold in the last 14 years and they're a pretty grim lot, apart from one or two nice ones. See website below,

rarepennies

Thanks for the list, Richard. Useful.

[jelida]

Yes, very helpful, Richard,  I trust it will continue to expand as your time allows.

Jerry

[secret santa]

Yes, it's the sort of thing I can add to whenever I get spare time. The concept has worked quite well with the F41 variety. I have received details of an example from a fellow collector (do you have one Jerry ?) and I am already up to 15 pictured examples which matches Gouby's known population, so that figure is beginning to look rather low. I am in 2 minds whether to quote the prices realised for each example - there are pros and cons (not the least being the reduction of the chances of getting a bargain if sellers can see the market !).

[jelida]

No, I don't have an F41, but I had so many gaps to fill at the LCA that I aimed for other things. I perhaps underestimated the rarity in anything over fine, but I have not been back into pennies for long enough to really get an idea of what's likely to appear on the market over a reasonable time-scale.

I don't think prices are really necessary, any interested party can usually research these on line, and they are so volatile for these great rarities that they are little more than a talking point. Leave it to Spink to be the guide for sellers of these rarities (most of those prices would be thought under-estimates by you or I ).

Jerry