More Pennies

[VickySilver]

Wish I could post, but was pleased to win the 1964 OMS strike penny in copper-nickel at the Heritage auction  today & so have the 1964-67 run in OMS. Well, no gold though! My only penny purchase in at least two years!

[PWA 1967]

9 hours ago, PWA 1967 said:

I purchased this 1897 High tide about three weeks ago which arrived today.

I have not noticed before that the price i paid has been added on to the information.......Latest auction appearances.

Does anyone know please how this has happened ,such as has it been added by the seller or does it pick up the details from the ebay sale.

 

https://www.pcgs.com/cert/82915544

 

Pete.

I have just been asked what indicators there are for this and directed him to Richards site

.However another i use aswell as the P in Penny to gap is the shield almost touches the teeth and on the normal one the gap is larger.

Dont know if it may help someone else ,so thought i would mention it 🙂

[secret santa]

3 hours ago, VickySilver said:

Wish I could post, but was pleased to win the 1964 OMS strike penny in copper-nickel at the Heritage auction  today & so have the 1964-67 run in OMS. Well, no gold though! My only penny purchase in at least two years!

[oldcopper]

18 hours ago, secret santa said:

The other Heritage photos were more impressive:

Don't wish to be too picky but I thought there was a hint of an edge bruise between the 5 and the 9 of the date. Nice colour though.

This Heritage "Lake Collection" offering was a very interesting one - the only coin I recognised or could spot from an old catalogue was the Dick Ford Jersey 1865 1/13 proof (Spink Auction ~1990). So I presume he bought this (I'm assuming it's a he) in 1990 or later via a dealer. I didn't recognise any of the rest of the copper so I think the collector probably had most of these for several decades.

 

[1949threepence]

1 hour ago, oldcopper said:

Don't wish to be too picky but I thought there was a hint of an edge bruise between the 5 and the 9 of the date. Nice colour though.

This Heritage "Lake Collection" offering was a very interesting one - the only coin I recognised or could spot from an old catalogue was the Dick Ford Jersey 1865 1/13 proof (Spink Auction ~1990). So I presume he bought this (I'm assuming it's a he) in 1990 or later via a dealer. I didn't recognise any of the rest of the copper so I think the collector probably had most of these for several decades.

 

Yes, something there. But it seems to be a slight discurvature of the linear circle, as opposed to to the actual edge. Maybe a minting anomaly of some description? 

[PWA 1967]

You have better eyes than me Mike if you can see a linear circle .

Like quite a lot of the coppers the top edge has had a tiny knock that probably hasnt touched the other and an edge bruise would sound fair.

Yes Peter i think your being a bit picky  but well spotted.

[secret santa]

Still, a beautiful coin that I was outbid on.

[alfnail]

Did you get any of the other Proofs Richard, I was tempted by the 1853?

[VickySilver]

Thanks, Richard for the assist!

 

I remember the 1853 pennies in proof used to go for peanuts as nobody was interested. What did theirs go for?

For some reason I can't get excited by the 1841s, though the '59 ok. They seem to get recycled in the wash and come up for sale more often than I would think....

[azda]

On 4/29/2019 at 10:23 PM, PWA 1967 said:

I purchased this 1897 High tide about three weeks ago which arrived today.

I have not noticed before that the price i paid has been added on to the information.......Latest auction appearances.

Does anyone know please how this has happened ,such as has it been added by the seller or does it pick up the details from the ebay sale.

 

https://www.pcgs.com/cert/82915544

 

Pete.

They have trackers fitted into the slab 😀

[PWA 1967]

1 minute ago, azda said:

They have trackers fitted into the slab 😀

Joking aside Dave i was going to send you a PM as never seen it before........Do you know how it happens please ?

[1949threepence]

8 hours ago, PWA 1967 said:

Joking aside Dave i was going to send you a PM as never seen it before........Do you know how it happens please ?

Why don't you just ask them Pete?

[PWA 1967]

2 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Why don't you just ask them Pete?

 

I just thought maybe someone on here may know but will do  🙂

Edited May 1, 2019 by PWA 1967

[blakeyboy]

Tell you what Pete, I'll give you $170 for it- problem solved.....;)

[PWA 1967]

1 hour ago, PWA 1967 said:

 

I just thought maybe someone on here may know but will do  🙂

I sent an email asking the question and have had a reply with just there telephone number on 

Never mind its not important.

[azda]

20 hours ago, PWA 1967 said:

Joking aside Dave i was going to send you a PM as never seen it before........Do you know how it happens please ?

I've no idea either Pete.

[1949threepence]

12 hours ago, PWA 1967 said:

I sent an email asking the question and have had a reply with just there telephone number on 

Never mind its not important.

Funnily enough, even as I was typing out the suggestion you contacted them, Pete, I thought you might encounter communication issues. I certainly have in almost every recent attempted contact with a major concern. 

To get a reply with literally just a telephone number on it and no other explanation, or even a few words asking you to call, is a joke.

Best most straightforward trading contact I've had in recent years (in any field) was Dave Craddock, who just says "hello" in the old school way when he answers the landline phone. What a refreshing change that made.     

[PWA 1967]

3 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Funnily enough, even as I was typing out the suggestion you contacted them, Pete, I thought you might encounter communication issues. I certainly have in almost every recent attempted contact with a major concern. 

To get a reply with literally just a telephone number on it and no other explanation, or even a few words asking you to call, is a joke.

Best most straightforward trading contact I've had in recent years (in any field) was Dave Craddock, who just says "hello" in the old school way when he answers the landline phone. What a refreshing change that made.     

I would always phone first as i dont like emails or text messages to try and find something out , but didnt think it was worth phoning America with what was probably a daft question 

The email reply was obviously a computer generated one with opening times  and a telephone number ,but as i said not important.

[1949threepence]

Scrubbed - it was my imagination.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 3, 2019 by 1949threepence

[jelida]

On 4/28/2019 at 12:20 AM, jelida said:

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

Chris Finch of DNW asked me to look at the 1882 no H penny at the MCF yesterday. There is no visible evidence of the ‘H’ under the loupe but I also felt it was a little ‘dished’ under the date.  No recent shenanigans, but as it is one of those coins that has considerable surface patination it is quite possible that the ‘H’ might have been lost. Either that, or a filled die, as the obverse is clearly ‘wrong’ for the ‘no H’ as we recognise it, though I don’t know that can be entirely written in stone.

My advice was that if they do try to sell it,  an explanation of the reservations about its authenticity would have to be included in the description, then the punters can make up theit own minds. Not one for me.

The links can be found above.

Jerry

[oldcopper]

On ‎4‎/‎30‎/‎2019 at 8:50 PM, VickySilver said:

Thanks, Richard for the assist!

 

I remember the 1853 pennies in proof used to go for peanuts as nobody was interested. What did theirs go for?

For some reason I can't get excited by the 1841s, though the '59 ok. They seem to get recycled in the wash and come up for sale more often than I would think....

If memory serves me right, up to about 2001, 1853 proof pennies were more expensive than their 39 counterparts. Then over the next few years the 53s lost value. I thought at the time this was mainly due to the fact that of the few examples until the late 2000's to come to market, there weren't any good ones that I spotted. eg Colin Adam's (Spink 2003) had a big spot in front of the bust, and I think that started a trend which has only been reversed in the last few years. Of course there may have been other reasons, eg first year of issue of Vic pennies and a proof-only date, but the 39 is about twice as common as the 53, so the 53 should hold it's own to say the least.

The 1841's are slightly heavier on thicker flans than most of the other proof pennies (that I've seen) so is a distinctive type. Sometimes people sell the no colon variety as a proof, but I don't know if the examples are 100% credible.

[secret santa]

Yes, my 1839 prof cost £250 in 2001 and my 1853 copper proof cost £300 on 2000. Since then they've gone through the roof.

[1949threepence]

7 hours ago, jelida said:

Chris Finch of DNW asked me to look at the 1882 no H penny at the MCF yesterday. There is no visible evidence of the ‘H’ under the loupe but I also felt it was a little ‘dished’ under the date.  No recent shenanigans, but as it is one of those coins that has considerable surface patination it is quite possible that the ‘H’ might have been lost. Either that, or a filled die, as the obverse is clearly ‘wrong’ for the ‘no H’ as we recognise it, though I don’t know that can be entirely written in stone.

My advice was that if they do try to sell it,  an explanation of the reservations about its authenticity would have to be included in the description, then the punters can make up theit own minds. Not one for me.

The links can be found above.

Jerry

Plus, if it's the one I'm thinking of, wasn't it the wrong obverse for a F112, Jerry? 

[jelida]

2 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Plus, if it's the one I'm thinking of, wasn't it the wrong obverse for a F112, Jerry? 

Yes, that was the main indicator of the doubt, and what DNW didn’t seem to get to grips with at first but I think Chris does now.  I think that whatever the (historic) cause of the dishing of the flan below the date,  the end result is the removal of the ‘H’. It looks to me like a coin that may have been in the ground at one time, and when cleaned on recovery a thin layer of patina was rubbed off, along with the mintmark.

But I have seen several ‘no H’ with the wrong obverse offered for sale, including by LCA. What would it take, I wonder, for this combination too to be considered a true variety?

Jerry

[1949threepence]

51 minutes ago, jelida said:

Yes, that was the main indicator of the doubt, and what DNW didn’t seem to get to grips with at first but I think Chris does now.  I think that whatever the (historic) cause of the dishing of the flan below the date,  the end result is the removal of the ‘H’. It looks to me like a coin that may have been in the ground at one time, and when cleaned on recovery a thin layer of patina was rubbed off, along with the mintmark.

But I have seen several ‘no H’ with the wrong obverse offered for sale, including by LCA. What would it take, I wonder, for this combination too to be considered a true variety?

Jerry

A really good specimen that left you in absolutely no doubt.