More Pennies

[jelida]

4 minutes ago, alfnail said:

Just back from holiday.

Whilst away, on 26th January, I bought a lot of 25 low grade Victorian pennies.

One coin amongst them was the very rare 1889 with the 9 high right in the exergue.

After 2 to 3 days I enquired of the seller when he intended to post the lot, as he was supposed to have sent tracked, but no details yet on ebay. After a couple more days, and further chasing, he advised that he had sent them, but not tracked. Anyway, a package was received by my neighbour on 3rd February, so I thought that was ok after all.

I returned home today, and opened the package to find that the 1889 was not as I expected. The return window has also closed earlier today!  

I just wanted to check with other members that you agree with me that the received 1889 is not what I bought. The picture on the sale was not great, but I still think that the differences are clear enough. Apart form the different numeral 9 location, I believe there are several other obvious differences. For example, around Britannia's head the received coin has a more pointed top to the plume, a dent in the head and a dark mark on border. 

I feel fairly confident that the delay must have been because someone else has alerted the seller as to the rarity of this variety, and he has swapped it with a different 1889. However, bearing in mind the poor quality of the image, I would welcome the thoughts of other members before I complain.

   

Definitely different coins. A complaint is certainly in order, and negative feedback. I would point out to the vendor that the coin is still legally yours, and that it has unique features that make it identifiable in the future. However sadly legal action , even should the opportunity arise, would likely be prohibitively expensive. No harm in publicising the vendor if you don’t get redress.

Jerry

[alfnail]

Thanks both, much appreciated 

 

[copper123]

what an a**hole

[Peckris 2]

They're unquestionably different. The rare coin you bought has noticeably more wear, which you can see clearly on Britannia's robes.

[SilverAge3]

23 hours ago, alfnail said:

Just back from holiday.

Whilst away, on 26th January, I bought a lot of 25 low grade Victorian pennies.

One coin amongst them was the very rare 1889 with the 9 high right in the exergue.

After 2 to 3 days I enquired of the seller when he intended to post the lot, as he was supposed to have sent tracked, but no details yet on ebay. After a couple more days, and further chasing, he advised that he had sent them, but not tracked. Anyway, a package was received by my neighbour on 3rd February, so I thought that was ok after all.

I returned home today, and opened the package to find that the 1889 was not as I expected. The return window has also closed earlier today!  

I just wanted to check with other members that you agree with me that the received 1889 is not what I bought. The picture on the sale was not great, but I still think that the differences are clear enough. Apart form the different numeral 9 location, I believe there are several other obvious differences. For example, around Britannia's head the received coin has a more pointed top to the plume, a dent in the head and a dark mark on border. 

I feel fairly confident that the delay must have been because someone else has alerted the seller as to the rarity of this variety, and he has swapped it with a different 1889. However, bearing in mind the poor quality of the image, I would welcome the thoughts of other members before I complain.

   

No question, these are not the same coin.

[Bronze & Copper Collector]

On 2/18/2026 at 11:10 AM, alfnail said:

Just back from holiday.

Whilst away, on 26th January, I bought a lot of 25 low grade Victorian pennies.

One coin amongst them was the very rare 1889 with the 9 high right in the exergue.

After 2 to 3 days I enquired of the seller when he intended to post the lot, as he was supposed to have sent tracked, but no details yet on ebay. After a couple more days, and further chasing, he advised that he had sent them, but not tracked. Anyway, a package was received by my neighbour on 3rd February, so I thought that was ok after all.

I returned home today, and opened the package to find that the 1889 was not as I expected. The return window has also closed earlier today!  

I just wanted to check with other members that you agree with me that the received 1889 is not what I bought. The picture on the sale was not great, but I still think that the differences are clear enough. Apart form the different numeral 9 location, I believe there are several other obvious differences. For example, around Britannia's head the received coin has a more pointed top to the plume, a dent in the head and a dark mark on border. 

I feel fairly confident that the delay must have been because someone else has alerted the seller as to the rarity of this variety, and he has swapped it with a different 1889. However, bearing in mind the poor quality of the image, I would welcome the thoughts of other members before I complain.

   

Definitely two different coins, a slightly higher 9, but not from what I see the wide date with the high 9

[PWA 1967]

This happens more than you may think , i have had two since CHRISTMAS were the seller has sent me a different coin.

I also purchased two from a major coin auction not long ago, paid my invoice to be told a couple of hours later i couldnt have them and my money refunded 😂.

I believe they are nearly all caused by busy bodies telling sellers what they have who probably already have one.

This one the seller was probably told ? as otherwise why would he just swap one coin that was the only one worth anything.One i bought the seller just said he used a stock picture and sent me one similar and the same year. The other a farthing he said he had mixed the two pictures up of both sides., which wasnt correct as the coin that arrived was nothing like the one pictured.

I know longer expect to receive any that were not attributed untill they arrive, sad but as long as people keep telling sellers it will continue.

[PWA 1967]

4 minutes ago, PWA 1967 said:

This happens more than you may think , i have had two since CHRISTMAS were the seller has sent me a different coin.

I also purchased two from a major coin auction not long ago, paid my invoice to be told a couple of hours later i couldnt have them and my money refunded 😂.

I believe they are nearly all caused by busy bodies telling sellers what they have who probably already have one.

This one the seller was probably told ? as otherwise why would he just swap one coin that was the only one worth anything.One i bought the seller just said he used a stock picture and sent me one similar and the same year. The other a farthing he said he had mixed the two pictures up of both sides., which wasnt correct as the coin that arrived was nothing like the one pictured on any side.

I know longer expect to receive any that were not attributed untill they arrive, sad but as long as people keep telling sellers it will continue.

 

[wlewisiii]

I have more often had sellers who went "oops, I can't find the coin I sold you. I have X if you're interested in it instead".

Nothing expensive (most recently a 1981 Bailiwick of Jersey "Square" Pound and offered a Guernsey Type set in it's place) but annoying nonetheless. 

[Ianb26]

Hi, Newby to the site, first post.

I have an 1859 penny, with a variant that I cannot find much information on.

“ Tie ribbon between curl and neck”

 

Also there is no W.W., not sure if this as standard.

I would be grateful is someone could give me an idea of rarity, grade and value?

I also have recently got an 1858 small date, again would like an idea of grade, rarity and value.

[jelida]

14 minutes ago, Ianb26 said:

Hi, Newby to the site, first post.

I have an 1859 penny, with a variant that I cannot find much information on.

“ Tie ribbon between curl and neck”

 

Also there is no W.W., not sure if this as standard.

I would be grateful is someone could give me an idea of rarity, grade and value?

I also have recently got an 1858 small date, again would like an idea of grade, rarity and value.

The 1859 is interesting, not a deliberate ‘ribbon’ I suspect, perhaps a die flaw or foreign body impact or result of die clash but if more than a ‘one off’ could become collectable though probably not at a massive premium.

The 1858 small date is scarce rather than rare, unless combined with large rose reverse which yours is not. Maybe a small premium over large date but value is low  I think due to poor condition.

Jerry

[Ianb26]

Hi Jerry, this variant is documented and I have seen at least one more for sale on eBay currently, but that is all I can find.

 

[jelida]

30 minutes ago, Ianb26 said:

Hi Jerry, this variant is documented and I have seen at least one more for sale on eBay currently, but that is all I can find.

 

That’s nice, if others have been recognised that likely increases the desirability. I still doubt that it is a deliberate design modification though, given that the planning for the bronze currency was already well advanced.

Jerry

[alfnail]

The 'ribbon' on this 1859 is die clashing, explained on Gouby's website, where he now also references Peck 404.

The 'overlay' picture below also highlights the 'clash' area. 

[Martinminerva]

57 minutes ago, Ianb26 said:

Hi Jerry, this variant is documented and I have seen at least one more for sale on eBay currently, but that is all I can find.

 

Just because someone has made a random claim on eBay that this is a "rare variety" does not make it a documented fact of any substance. And herein lies the whole problem of so called "AI" - it just regurgitates superficial stuff trawled from the internet with no discernment or discrimination and presents it as gospel truth.  Alfnail's quoting Gouby regarding die clash damage above is proper scholarly documentation, actual fact, and derived from many years of human expertise, experience, analysis and real intelligence. Yet AI couldn't manage to reconcile that internet based evidence...

[secret santa]

As Ian says, this is the result of a die clash and definitely NOT a "distinct ribbon knot".

Some people may find it collectable, but it is not, in my view, an intentional or accidental man-made "variety".

I have an example myself but I haven't even bothered to distinguish it from a "normal" 1859 large date penny.

[Ianb26]

Hi, Ok point taken the “documented” and what is stated on eBay.

From my perspective as a novice to collecting and variants, etc… which is a minefield by the way, when I saw what looks very like a piece of fluted ribbon and at least 2 other people, albeit on eBay saying it is a rare variant, I thought that I had one and asked ‘the experts’ for more information.

In your photo above just looks like a smudge and mine attached looks a lot more like an actual addition with folding and pleating as you would expect in material of the day.

Thank you all for you help, support and instructional responses to my query.

[Martinminerva]

Have a look at Gouby's (brilliant) website if you want to learn more about all the various types of coin varieties, and specifically at this page for this die-clash ribbon issue: https://michael-coins.co.uk/cp1848 ribbon.htm

I also insert a screenshot of some of the subtly different clashes that have typically been observed by Gouby based on the impact pressure and transfer of detail for separate clashes.

 

[alfnail]

I particularly like the 1860/59 tie ribbons (plural)............always present in same place + further clashing under Victoria's chin.

 

 

[Ianb26]

Thanks for the clarification.

[terrysoldpennies]

1861  Freeman 28   5+G   Managed to pick this one up recently ,  in not to bad a condition and its an upgrade for me .          A devil of type to find in high grade !!! 😊

[alfnail]

On 10/26/2024 at 3:26 PM, secret santa said:

Gouby says this variety (1898Ab) is "scarce ?"

But 1898 Ba and Ca are both "rare"

So, almost certainly No but I doubt that anyone has done a serious analysis.

I recently found this 1898 penny on ebay. I believe it is Gouby type Ca, which is rare, but I cannot easily find and auction (or other) sale information for this sub-variety. Does anyone have any sale information which might help me value please?

  

[Rob]

On 3/31/2026 at 4:58 PM, alfnail said:

I recently found this 1898 penny on ebay. I believe it is Gouby type Ca, which is rare, but I cannot easily find and auction (or other) sale information for this sub-variety. Does anyone have any sale information which might help me value please?

  

No idea. I have a few bisected 8s in the pile here, but all low grade, so I usually put them in the trays at a tenner or thereabouts and hope someone buys them. Ultimately, they aren't that collectable except to the die nerds, which pennies of all ages seem to attract. It isn't obvious without a glass and specialists obviously want a mint sate example. Needless to say, if anyone pays silly money for an obscure variety at auction, then dealers will naturally follow suit. The attached sold for the princely sum of £8

[PWA 1967]

38 minutes ago, Rob said:

No idea. I have a few bisected 8s in the pile here, but all low grade, so I usually put them in the trays at a tenner or thereabouts and hope someone buys them. Ultimately, they aren't that collectable except to the die nerds, which pennies of all ages seem to attract. It isn't obvious without a glass and specialists obviously want a mint sate example. Needless to say, if anyone pays silly money for an obscure variety at auction, then dealers will naturally follow suit. The attached sold for the princely sum of £8

Your own coin Rob is not the same as Ians which is Bisect BP1898Ca and much rarer, yours is Ba. Although i agree not the easiest coin to sell Ians is probably worth about £80 if he can find someone that wants one, obviously he can asks what he wants its just finding someone that wants one and priced any higher may have it a while.

[absence of uniformity]

A sold example of the BP1898Ca with remaining luster graded A/UNC sold for £400.

 

Edited April 7 by absence of uniformity