dicker

The likelihood there would not be a huge difference in the composition though there can be detectable variances. 
 
The one the left looks very questionable to me, (but that’s another matter)
coins can have very different lives, some staying in tubes or bags for the vast majority of the time or some that have been heavily circulated or just had a harsh life, some could have be subject to all manner of external factors, water, chemicals left out in the elements etc that can have a noticeable effect on the appearance of the coin…..just look at some change you have in your pocket.
 
 
 
 
 
 

@trp Many thanks for running another year’s Christmas raffle!
Awesome as always!
Best
Dicker

Glad you got that sorted out.  
 

Quick update.I had to redo the payment today at 12:00 as there was a problem from last Friday as stated above.I got in contact with Lloyds today as no email or money had been taken out from my bank account and after I repeated the payment I have received an email from Lloyds as a confirmation for my international payment request.APMEX confirmed they received my payment at 15:18 today.I`m really surprised they got my money in just a few hours 😲
Very pleased with Lloyds services and quick confirmation from APMEX.

@Silverlocks It really would be worth you setting up your own grading thread rather than taking other dedicated discussions off course with your views on grading.

520.713 is the total mintage of that year (1874) for the london sovereign coniage. But that includes both the St George and the shield reverses. How that number is split between the 2 is officially unknown

that s an interesting contribution but i feel this discussion is going a bit off topic; my intention was to focus on the scarcity (r3? /r4?) of a specific sovereign (1874 London shield) and to get all thoughts that could be shared on that
 

@trp Many thanks for running another year’s Christmas raffle!
Awesome as always!
Best
Dicker

There's a few on here who might get accused of that in Iran😁

Shocked maybe, but not as surprised as Vahid Mazloumin and his colleague. We often lose sight of the fact that our western society is relatively benign and genteel.

shotgun every time...  maintenance is doable and ammo is cheap and stackable..   but mainly because most people can't shoot for terrible so you want a big spread. 

Well if it's good enough for St George..............

There are a really surprising number of bunkers in the U.K. 
Lots of Cold War bunkers ranging ROC Bunkers (many sadly  vandalised) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Royal_Observer_Corps_/_United_Kingdom_Warning_and_Monitoring_Organisation_Posts_(A–E)
To regional control centres - many of which have been sold off to
I have been to a few.  The one I have never been able to confirm is one that is supposed to be a super deep level control centre beneath Moorgate tube, quite possible that it’s still in use or mothballed until needed.   These are generally known as “Citadels”.  Fascinating!
 

There is a lot of sovereigns being scraped today for being under weight especially Jubilee heads……if they look worn they are almost under weight all the time on the carat scales. 

Trust me loads of jubilee heads sold on here are very likely to be under weight.   I suspect some selling scrap sovereigns as full weight sovs……..I know my sovereigns. 

@trp Many thanks for running another year’s Christmas raffle!
Awesome as always!
Best
Dicker

@trp Many thanks for running another year’s Christmas raffle!
Awesome as always!
Best
Dicker

Marsh scarcity rating is subjective, but measures coins in grade VF or higher and NOT all coins that exist.
The first edition of Marsh was published in 1980.  A time that there was no way of consolidating data sources easily to be super accurate about populations.  Four subsequent versions of Marsh have revised some of the population metrics, but not extensively or radically so.
I suspect that using meta analysis of auction results and dealer inventories (if this were ever possible) would allow for much more accurate population reports. This is is standard practice in academia where data from multiple experiments are pooled to get a better view using larger data sets.
Die numbers listed in Marsh are an example of where Marsh is lacking.  You don’t have to look at all far in auctions / sales to find die numbers that are not listed in Marsh.  
Marsh is a great reference, but the reader needs to understand:
- The point about VF
- Scarcity rating is a guide only
- Marsh certainly doesn’t contain all rarities / varieties
- There will be sovereign collections that exist / bags of Sovs in vaults that could fundamentally change the scarcity ratings once “found”

 
 

@trp Many thanks for running another year’s Christmas raffle!
Awesome as always!
Best
Dicker

@trp Many thanks for running another year’s Christmas raffle!
Awesome as always!
Best
Dicker

@trp Many thanks for running another year’s Christmas raffle!
Awesome as always!
Best
Dicker

First time for me as well, and I’m a bank note collector!

Found these on the Bank of England website. Won’t be issued until mid 2024 though. When they do, please keep any AA 01………..Serial numbers. Treat them like proof coins - no folds etc, and I will pay good money! 😃
 

Marsh scarcity rating is subjective, but measures coins in grade VF or higher and NOT all coins that exist.
The first edition of Marsh was published in 1980.  A time that there was no way of consolidating data sources easily to be super accurate about populations.  Four subsequent versions of Marsh have revised some of the population metrics, but not extensively or radically so.
I suspect that using meta analysis of auction results and dealer inventories (if this were ever possible) would allow for much more accurate population reports. This is is standard practice in academia where data from multiple experiments are pooled to get a better view using larger data sets.
Die numbers listed in Marsh are an example of where Marsh is lacking.  You don’t have to look at all far in auctions / sales to find die numbers that are not listed in Marsh.  
Marsh is a great reference, but the reader needs to understand:
- The point about VF
- Scarcity rating is a guide only
- Marsh certainly doesn’t contain all rarities / varieties
- There will be sovereign collections that exist / bags of Sovs in vaults that could fundamentally change the scarcity ratings once “found”

 
 

Thought it might be interesting to see where members see Gold price in 1 year.
My prediction is GBP1525

Marsh scarcity rating is subjective, but measures coins in grade VF or higher and NOT all coins that exist.
The first edition of Marsh was published in 1980.  A time that there was no way of consolidating data sources easily to be super accurate about populations.  Four subsequent versions of Marsh have revised some of the population metrics, but not extensively or radically so.
I suspect that using meta analysis of auction results and dealer inventories (if this were ever possible) would allow for much more accurate population reports. This is is standard practice in academia where data from multiple experiments are pooled to get a better view using larger data sets.
Die numbers listed in Marsh are an example of where Marsh is lacking.  You don’t have to look at all far in auctions / sales to find die numbers that are not listed in Marsh.  
Marsh is a great reference, but the reader needs to understand:
- The point about VF
- Scarcity rating is a guide only
- Marsh certainly doesn’t contain all rarities / varieties
- There will be sovereign collections that exist / bags of Sovs in vaults that could fundamentally change the scarcity ratings once “found”