Half Penny Jon Posted June 30, 2004 Posted June 30, 2004 My dad is trying to do the same thing, but with high grade examples with full or almost full lustre. I am looking out for high grade coins especially bronze or copper for his portfolio. Quote
Sylvester Posted June 30, 2004 Posted June 30, 2004 I wouldn't think bronze was a fantastic investment material, not like copper is a big mover.I would have thought rare coins (like the 1934 crown), highly sought after but not particularly rare (Gothic Crown) or high grade scarce gold e.g 1858 sovereigns would be the best place to put the money into?The best bronze coin i can think of is the 1882 no H penny, for investment purposes that is one of the best i should imagine. Quote
Sylvester Posted June 30, 2004 Posted June 30, 2004 oh and 1860 copper coins, they are always good. Quote
Coppers Posted June 30, 2004 Posted June 30, 2004 Over time, coins have increased in value, but it's not simply a steady upward climb. I've been told by collectors who were into British coins long before I was that back in the early 1980s values increased dramatically. Many no doubt were buying coins as investments, but this was then followed by a sharp drop in their value. We are now in a period where prices have been rising again and it would not surprise me if as they say in the financial markets there is a "correction". I've found that the coins that I've done best on from a viewpoint of appreciation in value have been those that I purchased as a collector and not as an investor. Quote
Sylvester Posted July 1, 2004 Posted July 1, 2004 Over time, coins have increased in value, but it's not simply a steady upward climb. I've been told by collectors who were into British coins long before I was that back in the early 1980s values increased dramatically. Many no doubt were buying coins as investments, but this was then followed by a sharp drop in their value. We are now in a period where prices have been rising again and it would not surprise me if as they say in the financial markets there is a "correction". I've found that the coins that I've done best on from a viewpoint of appreciation in value have been those that I purchased as a collector and not as an investor. That's why i've suggested those in my previous post they will never really drop too far out of favour because they are and will always be of interest to collectors.My advice is stay well away from bullion and low grade gold, high grade rarer dates that collectors will always want. Another good one is Canada mint sovereigns and the 1918-I since it was the only year of issue and some people collect one of each mint (this is before we get to the date/mm collectors), the I mint will never loose it's following quite like the other gold coins say 1925-L could. Quote
Master Jmd Posted July 1, 2004 Posted July 1, 2004 I do not really mind if i purchase a coin for a bit more (up to %20) than its value...i Purchase as a collector, not a investor... Quote
Sylvester Posted July 1, 2004 Posted July 1, 2004 I buy alot of my coins over catalogue price, well it's either grab it while it's there or wait 10 years... and i'm impatient when i actually see one i want. Quote
Sylvester Posted July 1, 2004 Posted July 1, 2004 I would recommend one oft overlooked area of British numismatics that is probably a good investment... high grade tin farthings and halfpennies...Especially 1689 farthings, and anything James II.If it comes to that James II coins usually appreciate comfortably anyhow, the higher the grades the better. Quote
Sylvester Posted July 1, 2004 Posted July 1, 2004 now this IS investment material...http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.c...threadid=301310(i nearly fell off my chair). Quote
Sylvester Posted July 1, 2004 Posted July 1, 2004 ^^ It looks as-struck! i think it is as struck that why. It's sure the best one i've ever seen anywhere... Quote
Master Jmd Posted July 2, 2004 Posted July 2, 2004 It looks lovely...ive never seen a £2 of victoria... Quote
william Posted July 2, 2004 Posted July 2, 2004 Wow, that's a great coin. Ive never seen one either. Quote
Half Penny Jon Posted July 2, 2004 Posted July 2, 2004 MS 68 or better, but they will usually mis-grade it seeing that it is a british coin, they tend to do that. Quote
Sylvester Posted July 2, 2004 Posted July 2, 2004 Oh i didn't look at their grade... i just looked at the pic. But i'll have you know i doubt it very much that many have made it to MS66 let alone MS68!Not an easy grade to get, whether we agree or not.Personally i'd call it Gem UNC, which to me is MS66-MS69 (I don't think there's any need to distinguish further between those grades, as it's only a few minute scratches, hairlines that make the difference between those grades really). Quote
Half Penny Jon Posted July 3, 2004 Posted July 3, 2004 Does anyone know what rarity rating the 1868 Cupro-Nickel Proof Half penny is (R17,R18)etc.....? Quote
Master Jmd Posted July 3, 2004 Posted July 3, 2004 Does anyone know what rarity rating the 1868 Cupro-Nickel Proof Half penny is (R17,R18)etc.....? spink say's that all victorian proofs are ext. rare...but i would not no a specific rarity Quote
Sylvester Posted July 3, 2004 Posted July 3, 2004 Does anyone know what rarity rating the 1868 Cupro-Nickel Proof Half penny is (R17,R18)etc.....?spink say's that all victorian proofs are ext. rare...but i would not no a specific rarity ALL Victorian proofs rare? I think you've read it wrong or they're lying to you... Quote
Master Jmd Posted July 3, 2004 Posted July 3, 2004 Does anyone know what rarity rating the 1868 Cupro-Nickel Proof Half penny is (R17,R18)etc.....?spink say's that all victorian proofs are ext. rare...but i would not no a specific rarity ALL Victorian proofs rare? I think you've read it wrong or they're lying to you... Ok then, Spink says:Proofs exist of most years and are generally extremely rare for all denominations Quote
Sylvester Posted July 3, 2004 Posted July 3, 2004 Interpret that as not 1887 or 1893 which are common in comparison. I think you'll find it's much the same scenario with Elizabeth II, you're tripping over 1970 proofs, but 1965 proofs... well i hope you saved up. Quote
Half Penny Jon Posted July 3, 2004 Posted July 3, 2004 I think it is R17 (15-60 exist) but I don't know, I'll need to confirm it. Quote
Sylvester Posted July 3, 2004 Posted July 3, 2004 Well it's cheaper than the normal proof, or the copper one, so i guess more of the CuNi ones exist. Quote
Coppers Posted July 3, 2004 Posted July 3, 2004 Jon...Jere is the footnote from Peck on these 1868 quarter-farthing through penny copper-nickel strikes..."Usually recorded as nickel. Actually these pieces and the rest of the set down to the quarter-farthing are composed of a copper-nickel alloy. The Mint has no record osf its exact composition, but it is believed to be copper 80: nickel 20, which was the alloy used for the Jamaica penny and halfpenny of 1869. As the latter were the first British coins containing nickel to be used for currency, it is probable that the 1868 sets were trial strikings in connexion with that issue. Pure nickel is magnetic, but ceases to be so when alloyed with more than 30 per cent. of copper. Experiments at the Mint indicated that for coinage purposes, the nickel content of copper-nickel alloys should lie between 20 and 30 per cent. With less than 20 per cent. of nickel the alloy has a yellow tinge, and more than 30 percent, causes bubbles int he castings. (Craig, p.326.)" Insofar as the rarity is concerned, the Penny is listed as Extremely Rare, the halfpenny as Rare, the farthing as Extremely Rare, the third farthing as Very Rare, and the quarter farthing as Very Rare. Quote
Half Penny Jon Posted July 3, 2004 Posted July 3, 2004 The half penny is quite common, I have seen 5 on the market in recent months! 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.