Question for you knowledgable types

[azda]

On another note, i did spot this, never seen this before, not even mentioned in Spink 1788 Halfpenny, think it might be a proof or something

[£400 for a Penny ?]

Have we switched to shield backs ?

Hold on (thumbs his Macdonald) there are two with WW either raised or incuse and in aUNC in 2002 they were $750 AUS.

Both the same.

From which we can deduce that the George & Dragon is the one you want.

[Rob]

On another note, i did spot this, never seen this before, not even mentioned in Spink 1788 Halfpenny, think it might be a proof or something

Highly desirable, what catalogue is it from?

[azda]

Its in a dealers auction Rob, i think the start price was 3000 swiss francs

Catalogue is here http://issuu.com/core_tech_gmbh/docs/2174?viewMode=magazine&mode=embed and its lot 447

I blew the picture up a little

400, i already bought the George and Dragon 1871, paid 250 euros for it

Edited October 23, 2010 by azda

[Rob]

Its in a dealers auction Rob, i think the start price was 3000 swiss francs

Catalogue is here http://issuu.com/core_tech_gmbh/docs/2174?viewMode=magazine&mode=embed and its lot 447

It's a farthing (P922), not a halfpenny. The weight is 8.85g which is marginally above the average recorded by Peck. This frequently causes confusion as the halfpenny weighs a whopping 17g or so.

The coin is actually the one from the Oxford collection (217) which made £1000 when sold by Colin Cooke. The image on their site shows a much more honest image as there are quite a few marks which you can't see in the Swiss catalogue, so not so desirable and not for me. The estimate is too high given the problems.

[Coppers]

Its in a dealers auction Rob, i think the start price was 3000 swiss francs

Catalogue is here http://issuu.com/core_tech_gmbh/docs/2174?viewMode=magazine&mode=embed and its lot 447

It's a farthing (P922), not a halfpenny. The weight is 8.85g which is marginally above the average recorded by Peck. This frequently causes confusion as the halfpenny weighs a whopping 17g or so.

The coin is actually the one from the Oxford collection (217) which made £1000 when sold by Colin Cooke. The image on their site shows a much more honest image as there are quite a few marks which you can't see in the Swiss catalogue, so not so desirable and not for me. The estimate is too high given the problems.

Have you ever seen the subsequent lot 448 before?

[azda]

Its in a dealers auction Rob, i think the start price was 3000 swiss francs

Catalogue is here http://issuu.com/core_tech_gmbh/docs/2174?viewMode=magazine&mode=embed and its lot 447

It's a farthing (P922), not a halfpenny. The weight is 8.85g which is marginally above the average recorded by Peck. This frequently causes confusion as the halfpenny weighs a whopping 17g or so.

The coin is actually the one from the Oxford collection (217) which made £1000 when sold by Colin Cooke. The image on their site shows a much more honest image as there are quite a few marks which you can't see in the Swiss catalogue, so not so desirable and not for me. The estimate is too high given the problems.

Good to know, i wasn't thinking of going for it,its a tad over my 50 quid budget

[Rob]

Its in a dealers auction Rob, i think the start price was 3000 swiss francs

Catalogue is here http://issuu.com/core_tech_gmbh/docs/2174?viewMode=magazine&mode=embed and its lot 447

It's a farthing (P922), not a halfpenny. The weight is 8.85g which is marginally above the average recorded by Peck. This frequently causes confusion as the halfpenny weighs a whopping 17g or so.

The coin is actually the one from the Oxford collection (217) which made £1000 when sold by Colin Cooke. The image on their site shows a much more honest image as there are quite a few marks which you can't see in the Swiss catalogue, so not so desirable and not for me. The estimate is too high given the problems.

Have you ever seen the subsequent lot 448 before?

Based on the identical toothed border and a possible trace of spotting between A & N on the reverse in the Spink 95 catalogue, I'd say it was this sale's lot 330 referred to in the Nicholson lot 308 notes. Despite the crap picture in the catalogue, it clearly isn't Nicholson's piece which had a different border profile and which in any case is now slabbed and probably in the US at the moment as NEN had it.

Edited October 23, 2010 by Rob

[Peckris]

With the mess we've made of the economy, it's hard to see any bullion price returning to those levels in our lifetime.

I think you'll find it was bankers (in both senses). Aided and abetted by governments who didn't regulate them.

I think you will find that the bubble will have burst with or without the bankers. The problems we are in at this moment is largely due to government over borrowing. The bankers just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, scapegoat anyone, very convenient.

Gary

I couldn't disagree more. If by "bubble" you mean the housing market, yes we've been there before : 1987 - 1990. It collapsed spectacularly, but the economy didn't. If by "bubble" you mean the stock market, yes, we've been there before, many times; usually followed by a recession which lasted a year or two, then back to bull times.

THIS crash was caused by unregulated credit (fuelled by banks after quick and easy profits), which showed its vulnerability first in the American sub-prime mortgage markets. When that fell, the whole rotten pack of cards went with it - from Lehmann Brothers, Northern Rock, HBOS, Bradford & Bingley, various foreign banks, and the entire world economy with it.

But... thank God that New Labour bailed out the banks here. Can you possibly even begin to imagine what shit we'd be in now if the banking sector had been allowed to collapse? THAT's where the massive deficit came from. It didn't even exist in 2007.

Governments have over-borrowed all last century and this. Sometimes it caused big problems, sometimes it caused small problems, and sometimes - as with the New Deal in the USA in the 1930s - it got the world economy out of the shite. We could do with a little bit more over-borrowing to stimulate the economy and get things moving again.

Yes, I'm a Keynesian. And proud of it.

[Rob]

But... thank God that New Labour bailed out the banks here. Can you possibly even begin to imagine what shit we'd be in now if the banking sector had been allowed to collapse? THAT's where the massive deficit came from. It didn't even exist in 2007.

Governments have over-borrowed all last century and this. Sometimes it caused big problems, sometimes it caused small problems, and sometimes - as with the New Deal in the USA in the 1930s - it got the world economy out of the shite. We could do with a little bit more over-borrowing to stimulate the economy and get things moving again.

Yes, I'm a Keynesian. And proud of it.

The deficit appeared as a result of Gordon Brown's incompetent housekeeping. From coming to power in 1997 up to 2000 he broadly balanced the books in an attempt to show that he was fiscally responsible. All that went out of the window between 2000 & 2005 when he spent 44% more than he took in taxation. The only way that can not be described as a deficit is if the sum involved is zero. 44% of f*** a** being f*** a** etc. etc.. On top of that he continued the time honoured tradition of politicians of wanting to be loved by handing out freebies to whoever labour decided was in need, all provided by vast armies of public sector workers. You can't have a successful economy based on a booming cost base, and sure enough chickens came home to roost because now the outlay has to be paid for. Very, very few public sector jobs directly create wealth for the country.

Sure banks do irresponsible lending sometimes. They always have done, factoring in an allowance for an historical average percentage of bad debts. But, and this is equally important, the availability of credit has to be matched by someone equally willing to spend it without considering repayments. Anyone who has a credit card knows the limits get moved ever higher, but nobody is forced to buy goods they can't afford and in particular the large ticket dicretionary items. A little mea culpa is due from most of roughly half the population who don't pay the cards off every month. Used sensibly a credit card is an asset, used irresponsibly it may land you in the shit; but don't worry, New Labour also made it much easier for bankrupts by allowing people to walk away from their debts and have a clean slate after a year. I think that principle is a disgrace and believe everyone should honour their debts for as long as it takes. If there was a stigma attached to being unable to pay your debts - good!! it might make a lot of people take steps to avoid getting in that position in the first place. If Labour had stopped trying to play Father Christmas and concentrated on being the miserable git in charge of the bank of 50 years ago, there would likely be little or no credit crisis here.

Edited October 23, 2010 by Rob

[£400 for a Penny ?]

I accept most of what you say chaps, as valid - without necessarily agreeing with it all, but from my perspective the real damage was done by investment bankers playing games with contracts for difference, short selling etc, games in which they had no idea what the outcome might be.

Yes, the underlying social and economic situation was not good and it still isn't and in my opinion we have only just begun to address it by hopefully culling 500,000 'free jobs', but the roots of the whole debacle can be traced back to leaving the Gold Standard.

The Gold Standard was dropped basically because it prevented the American dream which has now been proven to be a nightmare. China, Russia, India and Brazil will pick up the pieces and be the world leaders from this point, whether America can stomach that remains to be seen.

Heavy stuff for a Sunday morning....

[1949threepence]

All valid points above, IMO.

Although I don't blame Gordon Brown for the global banking crisis, I do believe New Lab compounded the problem from the UK's point of view by profligate and irresponsible spending whilst in office. In particular a bloated public sector. Now the party's over and the price has to be paid.

That said, it does appear that once again it is the "little people" who take the brunt of the punishment in the form of probably forthcoming mass public sector redundancies, reduced pension rights, widespread cuts in benefits and health provisions etc, whilst the wan....err, sorry, bankers, provocatively continue to be paid obscenely high bonuses. Yes, incredibly, it's still going on even now.

I would like to know what steps are being taken to ensure that bail out money for banks is going to be paid back to the treasury ~ something that there appears to be a curious silence about at the moment. Moreover, mass redundancies in the public sector, combined with lack of recruitment following natural wastage, will do nothing to stimulate demand led recovery in the economy, if the private sector is unable to take up the slack.

[azda]

Wow, we should start an economics forum lol, although it amazes me that people can still afford high end coins now that the world economy went pear shaped. Anyone know when the Spink 2011 book is due out? Also is Chris writing a 2011 CCGB book?

Just as a side note, i do love my country, that being SCOTLAND :-) but am seriously happy that i'm not living there right now, it may take 10-15 years to repair the UK as a whole, and as 1949 said, it's the little people that are getting the brunt of the crap, when will the bankers and MPs take a wage cut etc, when will they have their salaries frozen for 2-3 years? One word for the lot of them......Ars....es!!!

Edited October 24, 2010 by azda

[1949threepence]

Wow, we should start an economics forum lol, although it amazes me that people can still afford high end coins now that the world economy went pear shaped. Anyone know when the Spink 2011 book is due out? Also is Chris writing a 2011 CCGB book?

Just as a side note, i do love my country, that being SCOTLAND :-) but am seriously happy that i'm not living there right now, it may take 10-15 years to repair the UK as a whole, and as 1949 said, it's the little people that are getting the brunt of the crap, when will the bankers and MPs take a wage cut etc, when will they have their salaries frozen for 2-3 years? One word for the lot of them......Ars....es!!!

Some very good points above, Dave. I wonder if the ability to afford high end coins comes from a combination of those who still have money and secure jobs/retired with a good income, and the speculative sound investment angle.

Incidentally, there's a series of high quality buns on e bay being offered by someone, and the location is Germany. It's not you is it ?

[azda]

Wow, we should start an economics forum lol, although it amazes me that people can still afford high end coins now that the world economy went pear shaped. Anyone know when the Spink 2011 book is due out? Also is Chris writing a 2011 CCGB book?

Just as a side note, i do love my country, that being SCOTLAND :-) but am seriously happy that i'm not living there right now, it may take 10-15 years to repair the UK as a whole, and as 1949 said, it's the little people that are getting the brunt of the crap, when will the bankers and MPs take a wage cut etc, when will they have their salaries frozen for 2-3 years? One word for the lot of them......Ars....es!!!

Some very good points above, Dave. I wonder if the ability to afford high end coins comes from a combination of those who still have money and secure jobs/retired with a good income, and the speculative sound investment angle.

Incidentally, there's a series of high quality buns on e bay being offered by someone, and the location is Germany. It's not you is it ?

No its not me, but i was watching his last bunheads about 3 weeks ago, he sold some excellent stuff and i think he had an 1871 that went for 719 pounds, it also had a missing colon. Watching all those right now. Our cleaner friend that sold the 1903 last week has a high grade 1869 for sale at the mo, last time i looked it was at 770 pounds. This was the German guys 1860, look at the colon after FD

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=230526540181&ru=http%3A%2F%2Fshop.ebay.co.uk%3A80%2F%3F_from%3DR40%26_trksid%3Dp4712.m570.l1313%26_nkw%3D230526540181%26_sacat%3DSee-All-Categories%26_fvi%3D1&_rdc=1

Edited October 24, 2010 by azda

[Peckris]

All valid points above, IMO.

Although I don't blame Gordon Brown for the global banking crisis, I do believe New Lab compounded the problem from the UK's point of view by profligate and irresponsible spending whilst in office. In particular a bloated public sector. Now the party's over and the price has to be paid.

That said, it does appear that once again it is the "little people" who take the brunt of the punishment in the form of probably forthcoming mass public sector redundancies, reduced pension rights, widespread cuts in benefits and health provisions etc, whilst the wan....err, sorry, bankers, provocatively continue to be paid obscenely high bonuses. Yes, incredibly, it's still going on even now.

I would like to know what steps are being taken to ensure that bail out money for banks is going to be paid back to the treasury ~ something that there appears to be a curious silence about at the moment. Moreover, mass redundancies in the public sector, combined with lack of recruitment following natural wastage, will do nothing to stimulate demand led recovery in the economy, if the private sector is unable to take up the slack.

Quite right 1949. A "Robin Hood" tax on the banks (the real cause of the crisis two years ago, and without which there would be no talk of "deficit"), would raise in one stroke, what Osborne is about to wring out of the sick, disabled, and every other little pot he's raiding.

Wow, we should start an economics forum lol, although it amazes me that people can still afford high end coins now that the world economy went pear shaped. Anyone know when the Spink 2011 book is due out? Also is Chris writing a 2011 CCGB book?

Just as a side note, i do love my country, that being SCOTLAND :-) but am seriously happy that i'm not living there right now, it may take 10-15 years to repair the UK as a whole, and as 1949 said, it's the little people that are getting the brunt of the crap, when will the bankers and MPs take a wage cut etc, when will they have their salaries frozen for 2-3 years? One word for the lot of them......Ars....es!!!

It's part of the propaganda we are being fed Az. The Chancellor began his so-called "review" by telling us the Coalition had pulled Britain back from the brink of bankruptcy. Absolute tosh. Even Zimbabwe - the nearest thing to a bust economy - isn't bankrupt. Nations don't become bankrupt. They incur budget deficits, which they all do from time to time, to varying degrees. If nations went bankrupt, then Britain was bankrupt from the Napoleonic Wars right up until the 1980s or 90s, when we paid off the final instalment of the National Debt. Like I say, it's just propaganda.

[declanwmagee]

I'm not sure it was that the game was played badly by whoever was in Nos 10/11 at the time, more that the game is rigged and you can't win it, whether you're a Nation, a company, or an individual. You only win it if you're a lender. If 99.9% of all money is introduced by the creation of new debt, then where is the interest supposed to come from? You can't just go out and earn it - it's not there! Simple fix: you can't lend what you don't have.

Banks threatening armageddon if they don't get bailed out doesn't wash with me. The average per capita income, globally, is £200. "Ooh I couldn't live on that". Course you could, and you would, it wouldn't mean you'd be poorer, just that your pounds would be bigger. Inflation isn't things getting more expensive, it's the currency getting smaller. Exactly who gains from the progressive shrinking of the currency anyway?

These bubbles; housing, dot com, etc, are man-made phenomena, they aren't the weather, they are a strategy. Suck money up the pyramid by convincing ordinary people that there's money to be made in something, then when you've pushed your luck as much as you dare, dump it all and clear the table. Who is to say that precious metals won't be next? Hoard it, inflate the price, then cash in. So of course it's the little people that lose out - that's the whole idea! He who pays the piper calls the tune, and Osborne is just doing what he's told. If you're really running the show, you ain't on the telly.

Sorry about the rant - I'm afraid once you see the game, you see it everywhere.

[Peckris]

I'm not sure it was that the game was played badly by whoever was in Nos 10/11 at the time, more that the game is rigged and you can't win it, whether you're a Nation, a company, or an individual. You only win it if you're a lender. If 99.9% of all money is introduced by the creation of new debt, then where is the interest supposed to come from? You can't just go out and earn it - it's not there! Simple fix: you can't lend what you don't have.

Banks threatening armageddon if they don't get bailed out doesn't wash with me. The average per capita income, globally, is £200. "Ooh I couldn't live on that". Course you could, and you would, it wouldn't mean you'd be poorer, just that your pounds would be bigger. Inflation isn't things getting more expensive, it's the currency getting smaller. Exactly who gains from the progressive shrinking of the currency anyway?

These bubbles; housing, dot com, etc, are man-made phenomena, they aren't the weather, they are a strategy. Suck money up the pyramid by convincing ordinary people that there's money to be made in something, then when you've pushed your luck as much as you dare, dump it all and clear the table. Who is to say that precious metals won't be next? Hoard it, inflate the price, then cash in. So of course it's the little people that lose out - that's the whole idea! He who pays the piper calls the tune, and Osborne is just doing what he's told. If you're really running the show, you ain't on the telly.

Sorry about the rant - I'm afraid once you see the game, you see it everywhere.

I think you are cynical but probably quite correct Declan. You should be a socialist!

[declanwmagee]

I think you are cynical but probably quite correct Declan. You should be a socialist!

I was once! My Dad used to say if you're not a communist by the time you're 18, you've got no heart; if you're still a communist by the time you're 30, you've got no head.

Now I'm just a good old fashioned conspiracy loon.

[£400 for a Penny ?]

Exactly who gains from the progressive shrinking of the currency anyway?

Wankers with leveraged positions trading money that doesn't exist in some kind of 'game' that no-one fully understands.

[1949threepence]

Exactly who gains from the progressive shrinking of the currency anyway?

Wankers with leveraged positions trading money that doesn't exist in some kind of 'game' that no-one fully understands.

That's about the size of it.

Doesn't it piss you off intensely that a few bloated, up themselves, individuals have so much unmitigated power

[Peckris]

Exactly who gains from the progressive shrinking of the currency anyway?

Wankers with leveraged positions trading money that doesn't exist in some kind of 'game' that no-one fully understands.

That's about the size of it.

Doesn't it piss you off intensely that a few bloated, up themselves, individuals have so much unmitigated power

I just found a brilliant summation of the argument against the cuts! Here is the link (it says it all much more logically, fluently and coherently than I could ever hope to) :

http://www.pcs.org.uk/en/campaigns/campaign-resources/there-is-an-alternative-the-case-against-cuts-in-public-spending.cfm

[Rob]

http://www.pcs.org.uk/en/campaigns/campaign-resources/there-is-an-alternative-the-case-against-cuts-in-public-spending.cfm

The PCS are hardly a model of neutral assessment. What they fail to do is make an objective argument based on the overall liabilities of the nation, i.e. they are living for today because tomorrow is too horrible to contemplate. I note they are getting their public debt figures out before the real ones are released. Not included in their figures are the costs of buying the stakes in the banks which have yet to appear in the public financial statements, the PFI future costs and the enormous future liability of unfunded public sector pensions, which don't show up in the current statistics because they are laibilities whose cost has yet to be crystallised. If you take on board all the off-balance sheet items such as PFI so beloved by GB (as the cost would only be realised once he was gone)and the liabilities not yet showing up in the national debt statistics then you get an entirely different picture.

Figures bandied about vary from £2 trillion up to £5.5 trillion for the true national debt depending on who was providing the argument. The answer is usually somewhere in the middle and indeed the ONS puts the number at £4 trillion. That's a very big number - over 250% of GDP, but shows the true cost of public sector employment and fiddling the balance sheet. The public sector pensions do not figure in the national debt, yet most left of centre people desire an expansion of the public sector with the consequent increase in future liabilities beyond even today's stratostpheric level. If the banks can resume steady earnings and profits then the state can cash in its stake at a convenient time to maximise the return. (As with the private individual, it is much better for nations to pay down debt than to pay interest over the rate of inflation). This is probably the best and only option as things stand to recoup money because PFI was a commitment to spend lots of money way into the future on the taxpayers' behalf and the public sector unions are unlikely to willingly give up their future pensions amounting to around the £1 trillion mark. So repaying debt and stopping excavation work on the already large hole we are in should be the order of the day. Cutting the future liabilities is a fundamental part of solving the public sector problem.

And for the record I am not, nor am I every likely to be a member of or affiliated to any political party - I just believe everyone, nation states and myself included should be living within their means. So no triple unite for me (as this is a coin forum).

Edited October 25, 2010 by Rob

[1949threepence]

Exactly who gains from the progressive shrinking of the currency anyway?

Wankers with leveraged positions trading money that doesn't exist in some kind of 'game' that no-one fully understands.

That's about the size of it.

Doesn't it piss you off intensely that a few bloated, up themselves, individuals have so much unmitigated power

I just found a brilliant summation of the argument against the cuts! Here is the link (it says it all much more logically, fluently and coherently than I could ever hope to) :

http://www.pcs.org.uk/en/campaigns/campaign-resources/there-is-an-alternative-the-case-against-cuts-in-public-spending.cfm

Good summation, although I do take on board some of Rob's arguments as well.

There are certain moves which might lead a cynical person to believe that the government is not being entirely truthful with us. For example, the news last night that a "universal pension" of up to £140 per week, irrespective of National Insurance contributions, being dangled as a carrot. Apparently this won't get going until after the next election, which, assuming the coalition doesn't fall apart before then, will be 2015. Note the operative phrase: after the next election. What a transparently blatant attempt to scoop the grey, female and baby boomer vote in one fell swoop. Or am I the only one to think this cynically ?

Yes it came from Vince cable, but he's only acting as Cameron and Osborne's puppet.

The money's there when they want it to be, Peck. Either that or they're lying.

[azda]

Exactly who gains from the progressive shrinking of the currency anyway?

Wankers with leveraged positions trading money that doesn't exist in some kind of 'game' that no-one fully understands.

That's about the size of it.

Doesn't it piss you off intensely that a few bloated, up themselves, individuals have so much unmitigated power

I just found a brilliant summation of the argument against the cuts! Here is the link (it says it all much more logically, fluently and coherently than I could ever hope to) :

http://www.pcs.org.uk/en/campaigns/campaign-resources/there-is-an-alternative-the-case-against-cuts-in-public-spending.cfm

Good summation, although I do take on board some of Rob's arguments as well.

There are certain moves which might lead a cynical person to believe that the government is not being entirely truthful with us. For example, the news last night that a "universal pension" of up to £140 per week, irrespective of National Insurance contributions, being dangled as a carrot. Apparently this won't get going until after the next election, which, assuming the coalition doesn't fall apart before then, will be 2015. Note the operative phrase: after the next election. What a transparently blatant attempt to scoop the grey, female and baby boomer vote in one fell swoop. Or am I the only one to think this cynically ?

Yes it came from Vince cable, but he's only acting as Cameron and Osborne's puppet.

The money's there when they want it to be, Peck. Either that or they're lying.

On the other hand of the arguement, there was a nobel prize winning economist that said the Governments cuts were to severe and actually took the country backwards and portrayed the debt as more than it actually was, i assume he was a neutral, which would in turn make his point quite valid? Basically what i think this Government is doing, is making to severe cuts, then just before an election, giving a little back in order to sweeten the elector in the next general election. WATCH THIS SPACE

Edited October 26, 2010 by azda