1949threepence Posted March 30, 2019 Posted March 30, 2019 I'm not convinced this is a Freeman 112, 1882 No H, as touted by DNW. I don't think it's obverse 11 as the nose is not hooked. Thoughts? Quote
Paddy Posted March 30, 2019 Posted March 30, 2019 (edited) Even I can see that the R and I of BRITT are touching, which makes it Obverse 12 and therefore can't be an 1882 no H. PS - I have emailed DNW with that same view. Edited March 30, 2019 by Paddy Added PS 1 Quote
Bernie Posted March 30, 2019 Posted March 30, 2019 19 minutes ago, 1949threepence said: I'm not convinced this is a Freeman 112, 1882 No H, as touted by DNW. I don't think it's obverse 11 as the nose is not hooked. Thoughts? I agree, value 0.00 1 Quote
1949threepence Posted March 30, 2019 Posted March 30, 2019 Thanks gents. Some poor unsuspecting individual might well have fallen for that one. I wish auction houses would do their homework a bit more thoroughly. Seems they just accept the vendor's word for it. 1 Quote
Peckris 2 Posted April 1, 2019 Posted April 1, 2019 On 30 March 2019 at 7:40 PM, 1949threepence said: I'm not convinced this is a Freeman 112, 1882 No H, as touted by DNW. I don't think it's obverse 11 as the nose is not hooked. Thoughts? There are some very suspicious abrasions beneath both '8's. Someone lend me a bargepole please, so that I have something not to touch it with? 1 Quote
PWA 1967 Posted April 1, 2019 Posted April 1, 2019 Yes i looked at the large picture through a glass and sure i can see the H. Its one coin i think i will always be happy not to have , as would constantly have doubts if it really was one. Quote
1949threepence Posted April 4, 2019 Posted April 4, 2019 On 3/30/2019 at 7:52 PM, Paddy said: Even I can see that the R and I of BRITT are touching, which makes it Obverse 12 and therefore can't be an 1882 no H. PS - I have emailed DNW with that same view. Did you receive a reply, Paddy? I note the coin is still advertised an F112. Quote
Paddy Posted April 4, 2019 Posted April 4, 2019 No - no response at all. Disappointed in DNW - they are usually better than that. 1 Quote
mrbadexample Posted April 4, 2019 Posted April 4, 2019 On 3/30/2019 at 7:52 PM, Paddy said: Even I can see that the R and I of BRITT are touching Plus the TT in BRITT. Clear to me. Now that you've pointed it out. Quote
1949threepence Posted April 5, 2019 Posted April 5, 2019 Not quite "penny acquisition of the week" territory. But still I'm very pleased with this 1921 F191. Zero ghosting, very good breastplate detail, and very good hair detail to the King's head as well. Great value GEF completely issue free bargain for just £5.00 from e bay seller hollingtonmoss. A well above average specimen from the poorly struck ghosting period of George V. 5 Quote
Peckris 2 Posted April 5, 2019 Posted April 5, 2019 2 hours ago, 1949threepence said: Not quite "penny acquisition of the week" territory. But still I'm very pleased with this 1921 F191. Zero ghosting, very good breastplate detail, and very good hair detail to the King's head as well. Great value GEF completely issue free bargain for just £5.00 from e bay seller hollingtonmoss. A well above average specimen from the poorly struck ghosting period of George V. That is good value. You will find F191 well struck up more often, as the head is shallower relief allowing Britannia to be fully struck up, and much less ghosting. 1 Quote
1949threepence Posted April 11, 2019 Posted April 11, 2019 (edited) Interesting one here Edited April 11, 2019 by 1949threepence Quote
1949threepence Posted April 12, 2019 Posted April 12, 2019 4 hours ago, alfnail said: Did you buy it Mike? No Ian. I thought it was an interesting one to post, but I wasn't that keen personally. Quote
azda Posted April 13, 2019 Posted April 13, 2019 1827 for sale at Baldwins https://www.baldwin.co.uk/product/1827-george-iv-penny/?_bta_tid=23981765045476431787335921338632720270556357552051629960382536157447520619660131161405776514105221878280 Quote
oldcopper Posted April 13, 2019 Posted April 13, 2019 It's that Pywell-Phillips/LCA one again. They just can't keep it down! Quote
PWA 1967 Posted April 13, 2019 Posted April 13, 2019 On 4/11/2019 at 1:56 PM, 1949threepence said: Interesting one here A curiosty thats a bit different , why the seller finished the sale early there is an inverted 1928 penny in the next LCA with a lower estimate if its the kind of thing anyone is looking for. Quote
azda Posted April 13, 2019 Posted April 13, 2019 2 hours ago, oldcopper said: It's that Pywell-Phillips/LCA one again. They just can't keep it down! I don’t keep tabs on pennies so I can’t say, but I thought it may interest someone Quote
Cliff Posted April 13, 2019 Posted April 13, 2019 On 4/12/2019 at 1:11 PM, alfnail said: Did you buy it Mike? twas me 3 Quote
1949threepence Posted April 13, 2019 Posted April 13, 2019 31 minutes ago, Cliff said: twas me The Royal MInt letter is of almost as much interest as the coin, especially as it's written and signed by the very knowledgeable Graham Dyer. Quote
1949threepence Posted April 18, 2019 Posted April 18, 2019 Curious 1868, with a wonky final 8 if anyone's interested - link Quote
RLC35 Posted April 18, 2019 Posted April 18, 2019 31 minutes ago, 1949threepence said: Curious 1868, with a wonky final 8 if anyone's interested - link Mike, That looks like a "S" over a "8"...really strange. Quote
1949threepence Posted April 19, 2019 Posted April 19, 2019 7 hours ago, RLC35 said: Mike, That looks like a "S" over a "8"...really strange. It does Bob. Certainly the 8 is distinctly out of position. Never seen any other date oddities on an 1868. Quote
1949threepence Posted April 27, 2019 Posted April 27, 2019 On 4/4/2019 at 10:19 PM, Paddy said: No - no response at all. Disappointed in DNW - they are usually better than that. Just remembered this one and looked it up to see what eventually happened. It was withdrawn prior to sale. So it looks as though your e mail was acted upon after all, Paddy. link 1 Quote
jelida Posted April 27, 2019 Posted April 27, 2019 1 hour ago, 1949threepence said: Just remembered this one and looked it up to see what eventually happened. It was withdrawn prior to sale. So it looks as though your e mail was acted upon after all, Paddy. link I also had emailed DNW, and at the Midland Coin Fair Chris Finch mentioned it and reminded me (I had forgotten). They had taken the issue up with the vendor, it seems he was aware of the doubts and had been ‘trying it on’ rather. Anyway they had agreed to withdraw it, quite correctly. Likewise was a little surprised at the lack of an email acknowledgment though. Jerry 2 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.