RLC35 Posted November 11, 2018 Posted November 11, 2018 5 hours ago, secret santa said: Interestingly, Gouby records R over B on an obverse F (Freeman 4) + rev g, but LCA describes their example as 5 + D. Santa Between those two choices...Gouby / LCA...put me down for Gouby! LOL... 2 Quote
Bronze & Copper Collector Posted November 12, 2018 Posted November 12, 2018 4 hours ago, RLC35 said: Santa Between those two choices...Gouby / LCA...put me down for Gouby! LOL... A wise decision.... Quote
jelida Posted November 12, 2018 Posted November 12, 2018 17 hours ago, secret santa said: Interestingly, Gouby records R over B on an obverse F (Freeman 4) + rev g, but LCA describes their example as 5 + D. I wish I’d paid more attention to the obverse type. From the pics the LCA specimen does look other than Freeman 4, the problem being the low grade of the coin. Although there is the small blobby protrusion under the leg of the R on both this coin and Gouby’s, it doesn’t seem to me under high magnification to be a definitive overstrike, though of course possible; all I can say is that the appearance of the R matches Gouby’s. Until a high grade coin turns up I will be a little doubtful that this overstrike actually exists, and possibly even then. Jerry Quote
terrysoldpennies Posted November 12, 2018 Posted November 12, 2018 It certainly difficult to be sure as to whether its a 4 or 5 , but I would favour a 5 as the outer ribbon just below the bow narrows sharply on a 5 ,and they have an in cut groove forming a fold , not to be found on the 4. The narrowing is still clear, but the fold has worn away on this example . As to the over letter, i'm not convinced, its quite common for a die crack to appear around the legend at the bottom or the top of the lettering , and if it were a crack , with the extreme ware present on this example it would not now show as that part of the coin has worn away ?? Quote
secret santa Posted November 12, 2018 Posted November 12, 2018 I'm also unconvinced of the variety. The photo in Michael's book is of a worn coin although I know Michael would not record it if he didn't believe it (or hadn't seen it in hand). Hopefully a BU example will appear sometime, unrecognised by the vendor ! Quote
azda Posted November 12, 2018 Posted November 12, 2018 On 11/11/2018 at 1:14 PM, Nick said: Because I believe that I've seen the original, which had all the same bag marks, but not the cud on the n of tenth. Here's the link. Anyone informed LC about this 1864? I thought they were THEEEEE experts in fake detecting Quote
Nick Posted November 12, 2018 Posted November 12, 2018 1 hour ago, azda said: Anyone informed LC about this 1864? I thought they were THEEEEE experts in fake detecting They certainly have a perfect opportunity to examine it. Quote
Mr T Posted November 16, 2018 Posted November 16, 2018 On 11/11/2018 at 9:06 PM, Paddy said: About the only way would be isotope analysis of the metal content to identify if the composition is consistent with the metals used at the time. They're probably wily enough to use bullion-grade florins as their source metal. 1 Quote
Mr T Posted November 16, 2018 Posted November 16, 2018 On 11/11/2018 at 9:06 PM, Paddy said: About the only way would be isotope analysis of the metal content to identify if the composition is consistent with the metals used at the time. They're probably wily enough to use bullion-grade florins as their source metal. Quote
secret santa Posted December 2, 2018 Posted December 2, 2018 The die 2 penny went for £5148 which I thought was reasonable. The E over P went for £514.80 but will probably go back as it's no more than a die crack. The R over B went for £397.80 and looks pretty authentic in hand. The 1827 was a real steal at £1287. 1 Quote
oldcopper Posted December 3, 2018 Posted December 3, 2018 The 1827 was even more of a bargain in the Spink Pywell-Phillips sale when it went for £850 hammer. Someone looking to make a quick profit, perhaps they'll be slightly disappointed. Quote
secret santa Posted December 3, 2018 Posted December 3, 2018 7 hours ago, oldcopper said: The 1827 was even more of a bargain in the Spink Pywell-Phillips sale when it went for £850 hammer. Yes, I'd noticed that it was the same coin and wasn't surprised that they were selling it on because it's so nice - much better than the description in my opinion. Having seen it in hand, I thought it would go for much more. I think they will be disappointed in yesterday's price which I put down entirely to the lousy quality of the LCA photos on their website. The quality has really gone downhill over the last year or so. They are doing themselves no favours either by their poor picture quality or their failure to allow online bidding. Quote
mhcoins Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 anyone know what the 1826 proof crown went for ? Quote
secret santa Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 On 12/2/2018 at 4:48 PM, secret santa said: The die 2 penny went for £5148 which I thought was reasonable. The E over P went for £514.80 but will probably go back as it's no more than a die crack. The R over B went for £397.80 and looks pretty authentic in hand. The 1827 was a real steal at £1287. The results are now up and differ a little from what I observed in the room. The R over B was unsold as was the 1827. For every lot, Steven Lockett announces that "£x is bid" and then if there are no further bids the hammer drops (actually he taps a drinking glass with a biro) and one might assume that it's been sold for £x. But no, either he's just flying a kite or someone has bid below the reserve (although this happens so often that it can't be a coincidence). It would be more honest to say "I'm looking for £X" in my opinion. Quote
Paddy Posted December 4, 2018 Posted December 4, 2018 1 hour ago, secret santa said: The results are now up and differ a little from what I observed in the room. The R over B was unsold as was the 1827. For every lot, Steven Lockett announces that "£x is bid" and then if there are no further bids the hammer drops (actually he taps a drinking glass with a biro) and one might assume that it's been sold for £x. But no, either he's just flying a kite or someone has bid below the reserve (although this happens so often that it can't be a coincidence). It would be more honest to say "I'm looking for £X" in my opinion. It is fairly standard practice for auctioneers to start as if they have a bid one below the reserve if they have no bids at or above the reserve on the books. It is the quickest way to get things moving and saves them having to declare lots "unsold" all the time, which is bad for business. It may not be entirely honest but most buyers know and accept this. More concerning is when they take non-existent bids "off the wall" to bump up a commission bid to the maximum. That is criminal and more should be done to catch and prosecute auctioneers who do this. Quote
oldcopper Posted December 5, 2018 Posted December 5, 2018 19 hours ago, secret santa said: The results are now up and differ a little from what I observed in the room. The R over B was unsold as was the 1827. For every lot, Steven Lockett announces that "£x is bid" and then if there are no further bids the hammer drops (actually he taps a drinking glass with a biro) and one might assume that it's been sold for £x. But no, either he's just flying a kite or someone has bid below the reserve (although this happens so often that it can't be a coincidence). It would be more honest to say "I'm looking for £X" in my opinion. Surprising for the 1827- I would have thought LC was a shoo-in for people paying silly prices for key dates, though it wasn't as good as the one they sold in September. Quote
oldcopper Posted December 5, 2018 Posted December 5, 2018 My mail sent before I'd finished, don't know which button I inadvertently pressed. Anyway, the vendor will probably put it in the next LC sale where it may well go for a good price. From recollection, I sold a 1919KN to a dealer (the one ex CC's Workman Collection) a couple of years back and it ended up in an LC auction, it didn't sell, but realised £1500, above estimate, in the next, so that shows the fickleness of the auction world. Also, someone should get a prize for transforming the horribly verdigrised proof 1868 quarter farthing in Pywell-Philips (Lot 831, £150 hammer) into the almost unrecogniseable coin (Lot 796) sold in this auction (£550). I'd like to know their secret! Quote
oldcopper Posted December 5, 2018 Posted December 5, 2018 Just checked - the 1919KN actually went for £1600 hammer (September 2016). It looks a lot more lustrous in the picture than when I had it, may just be the lighting, and the distinguishing spot/stain on the reverse identifies the coin. Quote
PWA 1967 Posted December 5, 2018 Author Posted December 5, 2018 1 hour ago, oldcopper said: Just checked - the 1919KN actually went for £1600 hammer (September 2016). It looks a lot more lustrous in the picture than when I had it, may just be the lighting, and the distinguishing spot/stain on the reverse identifies the coin. I thought it seemed a lot being £1500 over estimate ,having now read the second post yes as you say and know its the same coin Peter although the two pictures are completely different 🙂 Quote
VickySilver Posted December 5, 2018 Posted December 5, 2018 I think that 1827 would have gone for great money if of gEF status in the current condition-conscious trade. Quote
Nonmortuus Posted December 5, 2018 Posted December 5, 2018 3 hours ago, oldcopper said: Also, someone should get a prize for transforming the horribly verdigrised proof 1868 quarter farthing in Pywell-Philips (Lot 831, £150 hammer) into the almost unrecogniseable coin (Lot 796) sold in this auction (£550). I'd like to know their secret! How the heck did they do that?!? Quote
Peter Posted December 6, 2018 Posted December 6, 2018 I suggest verdi care and careful addition of silver dip. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.