Test Jump to content
The British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

Recommended Posts

Posted
13 minutes ago, mrbadexample said:

Description robbed from LCA but not sure about the pictures. But definitely a bargain as worth £1600+ and up for just £350.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Uncirculated-1862-very-rare-Victoria-farthing-penny/202201957087?hash=item2f142d02df:g:kYQAAOSw57xaaLuW

And illustrated using a halfpenny............................ So maybe you get a farthing, halfpenny and a penny. :)

Great. Kills three birds with one stone.

  • Like 2
Posted
6 minutes ago, declan03 said:

His title wasn't robbed from anywhere. ..Farthing penny??

I said description, not title:  Uncirculated 1862 Victoria farthing penny in amazing condition very old and rare coin Penny 1862 Small Date from Halfpenny die Freeman 41dies 6+G, Fine and superior to most examples seen of this type, Very rare with all major details very clear, the finest we have handled, and possibly one of the finest knownexamples

http://londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Pastresults&searchterm=1862+Halfpenny&searchtype=1

Lot 2981, the penny. :rolleyes:

  • Like 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, Rob said:

And illustrated using a halfpenny............................ So maybe you get a farthing, halfpenny and a penny. :)

Great. Kills three birds with one stone.

I think the odds of receiving the pictured coin are about the same as receiving a penny farthing bicycle. :)

  • Like 4
Posted
14 hours ago, mrbadexample said:

I said description, not title:  Uncirculated 1862 Victoria farthing penny in amazing condition very old and rare coin Penny 1862 Small Date from Halfpenny die Freeman 41dies 6+G, Fine and superior to most examples seen of this type, Very rare with all major details very clear, the finest we have handled, and possibly one of the finest knownexamples

http://londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Pastresults&searchterm=1862+Halfpenny&searchtype=1

Lot 2981, the penny. :rolleyes:

Why such a description and mucking up the title !!

Posted

Cheers Rob as always your advice is appreciated. 

There just seemed to me that there were a lot of scratches on the obverse compared to the reverse. Also, both parts of the reins go across the horses neck, is that unusual?

Posted
1 hour ago, declan03 said:

I don't think it is necessarily polished - but it is very badly photographed, and therefore I would avoid it if going from the picture is your criterion. 1889 is by far the easiest JH crown to find, even in top grade, so I'd advise holding your horses.

  • Like 1
Posted
27 minutes ago, declan03 said:

Cheers Rob as always your advice is appreciated. 

There just seemed to me that there were a lot of scratches on the obverse compared to the reverse. Also, both parts of the reins go across the horses neck, is that unusual?

I think that's just a combination of a crap picture and reflection. The marks just indicate which side took more hits.  

  • Like 1
Posted

Lol@ hold your horses 🐴🐴 . Wasn't really wanting the coin. Just looked a bitty odd. As you say, quite possibly the bad pictures. This thread has made me paranoid! Thanks for the info. 🍺🍺

Posted (edited)

It certainly looks "ok" (I wouldn't peronally want it though) - I've been looking at 1887 crowns for months aiming for the right one (bidding for a bragain of good quality), and the think I'd say most about these is that if you can see both sides of the chest straps you're probably as close to mint as you can get - in this one only 1 side is visible.

In a world where everyone has a camera on their phones, I find it impossible people are unable to photograph coins for ebay without getting them blurry (or take that as they're blurry because the item for sale is crap).

 

As for some clarity on what isn't a good one ...

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1887-CROWN-VICTORIA/183034951765?hash=item2a9dbbb855:g:WBAAAOSwXOVaaGsq

 

This is so bad I laughed!

Edited by Unwilling Numismatist
Clarity
Posted (edited)

Looks polished to me.  Especially noticeable in the obverse fields and on the bust.  You can see the original unbuffed surface in the periphery where the lettering has protected it against damage.

Edited by Nick
Posted
5 hours ago, Nick said:

Looks polished to me.  Especially noticeable in the obverse fields and on the bust.  You can see the original unbuffed surface in the periphery where the lettering has protected it against damage.

Yes, that's the clincher to tell the difference between mirror finish and polished - if it doesn't gleam between the letters, it's almost certainly been polished. And is that polish still within the loop of the 9 ? :o

  • Like 1
Posted

"it had a very faint but rather dull patina, that did the coin,no justice at all,so I reluctantly took the decision to,give it a light polish,it turned out to be the right decision,as it has great eye appeal,and that ,will be enhanced even more in a few years time"

I hate to think what he would call heavy polishing. 

s-l1600 - Copy.jpg

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1849-Godless-Florin-superb-coin-great-eye-appeal/263463383277?hash=item3d57a430ed:g:qZ4AAOSwl2haGBGG

 

 

Posted
On 25/01/2018 at 0:44 PM, Unwilling Numismatist said:

It certainly looks "ok" (I wouldn't peronally want it though) - I've been looking at 1887 crowns for months aiming for the right one (bidding for a bragain of good quality), and the think I'd say most about these is that if you can see both sides of the chest straps you're probably as close to mint as you can get - in this one only 1 side is visible.

In a world where everyone has a camera on their phones, I find it impossible people are unable to photograph coins for ebay without getting them blurry (or take that as they're blurry because the item for sale is crap).

 

As for some clarity on what isn't a good one ...

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1887-CROWN-VICTORIA/183034951765?hash=item2a9dbbb855:g:WBAAAOSwXOVaaGsq

 

This is so bad I laughed!

Ohhhh....chest straps on St.George!!!!!

And there was me thinking you meant Victoria.....

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, ozjohn said:

Coming from Hong Kong on a buy it now for £4.50. Whilst it doesn't say copy, it clearly is, and there's no intention to deceive in my view because they aren't trying to milk the market with an auction. If you are looking for inconsistencies, there is no die number that I can see.

Posted
1 hour ago, ozjohn said:

Very suspect.  The pictures show two different coins, neither of which has a die number when they should.  The queen's dress is usually weakly defined, but these are not.  Looks like 1877 florin can be added to the list of fakes.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...
Test