Nice George III Halfpenny For Someone

Lloyd

Link

I was going to go for it myself but asked the seller about the "full lustre" comment. He said it should read "some lustre".

The thing to note here is the King's eye and eyebrow. Probably not fully unc but could get a big rating from the slabbers. Rarely seen like this.

Lloyd

ccrdragon

Nice coin, but I spent the budget for the month already....

mongoose

I wish I had seen your post earlier Lloyd. Do you see many of the 1774 or 1775 differentiated obv 1/2ds? I am somewhat bothered that Spink has yet to differentiate between the 1770-1773, and the 1774/1775 series, they lump them all as one S#. I would like a 1774 or 1775 as a single type coin.

This is one of those coins I will add to my collection eventually, but the circumstances haven't gone my way yet.

Lloyd

Joe
I think the way Spink look at it, is to show the main varieties of these, such as ball below blade and no stops etc. If they went to town on every copper variety the book would double in size, since they would have to explain the varieties properly, as they have done now with the Victoria bun head pennies. I see the point though, and as a copper freak I would love to see everything detailed. Perhaps they would do well to split the annual into milled and hammered, including all the Peck, Freeman, Rayner and Davies varieties in the former, and the North varieties etc in the latter.

Even though Spink show huge 21st century commercial tendencies, you can't help but think that they long for the days when coin collecting was for Lords, Country Squires and Military officers "in town for the day". The good old days when copper and bronze didn't appear in their form book.

I can get just about any date 1770-75 Halfpenny in GEF - UNC Lustre. The problem is that everyone wants one but not many are prepared to pay the price. Seen a nice 1775 in UNC (traces of lustre) the other day and it was struck medal alignment (en medaille). I could have had it for less than £200 but if I put it up at £225 - £250 it would be lucky to get a second glance.

Lloyd

mongoose

Lloyd, thanks for the response. Given the portrait redesign/change from 1773 to 1774-1775, I see the 1774-1775 as a different type than S#3774. A different type rather than a variety.

I do understand what you are saying in regards to balls, stops, beads, berries, ribbons, etc. in distinguishing varieties/microvarieties, but this was a portrait design change. It just stumps me that Spink doesn't differentiate.

I have a nice 1771 1/2d, but figured I'd see more of the legit 1774/1775 in higher grades. It just seems like there are tons of counterfeits or below F coins. I don't get to look at many true gEF/UNC 1774s or 1775s.

coinkat

Thanks for posting this link Lloyd because it not only raised issues associated with the sport of reaching for varieties for this series but what to look for in terms of applying an appropriate grade as well. I like this one and by US standards would probably make MS62 or 63 BROWN. It may have a tougher time making the MS grade in the UK. The coin seems to have a slightly above average strike and looks to be free of corosion and other problems that can plague copper coins of this vintage. There does not seem to be any distracting marks and the price seems reasonable for the quality... However won did quite well from my perspective.