March London Coins Auction

[Coppers]

is now online...

http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/

[VickySilver]

Draw up your battlelines! Yikes, well there are a couple of bits I like there...

[RChris]

Me too.....but I have a question for you chaps. Just by looking at it and not knowing it's history, how would I know the 1926ME penny (Lot 1889) was "once cleaned, now retoning"? I guess that's a typo for retoned?

[Peckris]

Me too.....but I have a question for you chaps. Just by looking at it and not knowing it's history, how would I know the 1926ME penny (Lot 1889) was "once cleaned, now retoning"? I guess that's a typo for retoned?

No, "retoning" is the standard jargon. It is dealer-speak for "you can still see it was once cleaned so it hasn't retoned back completely yet, but is an ongoing process..". But then, I haven't seen the particular coin you're talking about.

[DaveG38]

Me too.....but I have a question for you chaps. Just by looking at it and not knowing it's history, how would I know the 1926ME penny (Lot 1889) was "once cleaned, now retoning"? I guess that's a typo for retoned?

No, "retoning" is the standard jargon. It is dealer-speak for "you can still see it was once cleaned so it hasn't retoned back completely yet, but is an ongoing process..". But then, I haven't seen the particular coin you're talking about.

From the photos it certainly is obvious that it has been cleaned.

[damian1986]

There are nearly as many mule 20ps listed as there are farthings. At what point can we replace 'mule' with 'first issue Dent' or something?

[RChris]

I wish it was obvious to me....experience tells you? So has it been dipped or previously polished or what? How do you tell?

And at that low estimate - a good buy or don't touch it with a barge pole?

[Coinery]

Without looking at the coin in question, the difference between toned lustre, and toned no-lustre is generally pretty obvious! To be honest, even going back 300 years (more in some cases), an EF+ coin should display some evidence of lustre if uncleaned, and the toning of said lustre has a definite and distinct quality about it! IMHO!

[RChris]

Please have a look at the coin..... http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Catalogue&startres=150&searchlot=&category=&searchtype=1&searchterm=penny

I know I don't have a lot of experience.....but to me it looks to have similar lustre to that remaining on the 1918 & 19 KN pennies listed above it.

It's very difficult!

[Coinery]

Please have a look at the coin..... http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Catalogue&startres=150&searchlot=&category=&searchtype=1&searchterm=penny

I know I don't have a lot of experience.....but to me it looks to have similar lustre to that remaining on the 1918 & 19 KN pennies listed above it.

It's very difficult!

I agree, that IS difficult! Had the description not suggested otherwise, I'd have said it looks right for the grade, and an example of what I was talking about! The obverse is horribly baggy, of course, but that isn't something that should unduly affect the lustre quality!

Without the benefit of seeing the coin in-hand, my instinct would say typo or ignorance?? With the description attached, however, I wouldn't buy it on the images (though I would otherwise), I'd want to see it in the flesh!

Edit: even the print on the reverse, whilst undesirable (though I'm not too stressed about 'attractive' prints), is generally a sign of a better coin, lustre-wise?

Edited February 8, 2014 by Coinery

[Gary D]

Please have a look at the coin..... http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Catalogue&startres=150&searchlot=&category=&searchtype=1&searchterm=penny

I know I don't have a lot of experience.....but to me it looks to have similar lustre to that remaining on the 1918 & 19 KN pennies listed above it.

It's very difficult!

I agree, that IS difficult! Had the description not suggested otherwise, I'd have said it looks right for the grade, and an example of what I was talking about! The obverse is horribly baggy, of course, but that isn't something that should unduly affect the lustre quality!

Without the benefit of seeing the coin in-hand, my instinct would say typo or ignorance?? With the description attached, however, I wouldn't buy it on the images (though I would otherwise), I'd want to see it in the flesh!

Edit: even the print on the reverse, whilst undesirable (though I'm not too stressed about 'attractive' prints), is generally a sign of a better coin, lustre-wise?

To me the colour looks a bit odd and flat compared to the coins above.

[Accumulator]

I agree, it's not immediately obvious from the colours in the photo. London Coins/CGS do tend to photograph (and possibly edit) to show bronze as more lustrous than it actually appears in hand, so this may be hiding the effects of the clean. Also, I do feel that the level of wear (to a very well struck coin) is greater than the corresponding reduction in lustre. They've been quite harsh on the grading and this again suggests something wrong. How often do you find a GVF coin with nearly full lustre?

[jaggy]

Just had a look at this catalogue. Quite a lot in there for me. Not so much new coins but definitely a bunch of quality upgrades.

[Peckris]

Please have a look at the coin..... http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Catalogue&startres=150&searchlot=&category=&searchtype=1&searchterm=penny

I know I don't have a lot of experience.....but to me it looks to have similar lustre to that remaining on the 1918 & 19 KN pennies listed above it.

It's very difficult!

I agree, that IS difficult! Had the description not suggested otherwise, I'd have said it looks right for the grade, and an example of what I was talking about! The obverse is horribly baggy, of course, but that isn't something that should unduly affect the lustre quality!

Without the benefit of seeing the coin in-hand, my instinct would say typo or ignorance?? With the description attached, however, I wouldn't buy it on the images (though I would otherwise), I'd want to see it in the flesh!

Edit: even the print on the reverse, whilst undesirable (though I'm not too stressed about 'attractive' prints), is generally a sign of a better coin, lustre-wise?

I agree with Stuart - if I'd not seen the photo, I'd say it's usually pretty obvious. But that one isn't at all obvious. On the other hand, I would take London's word on it, as they've seen it in hand and presumably it's more obvious?

[azda]

Made 1 Proxy bid today.

[Red Riley]

I agree with Stuart - if I'd not seen the photo, I'd say it's usually pretty obvious. But that one isn't at all obvious. On the other hand, I would take London's word on it, as they've seen it in hand and presumably it's more obvious?

I have bought a few coins on e-bay over the years which have looked like that and turned out to be cleaned so with a little bit of experience I can imagine just what it will look like in the hand. I have to say though, if they hadn't said, I wouldn't have noticed it.