5th Variety of 1931 Penny discovered

[serenitystan]

Firstly, what is required are proper high res pics.
Until then this debate will just go around in circles.
Because its impossible to prove anything much until then either way.

Next, we actually need images taken with a digital microscope of the date areas.
If they are fake then there will be ample evidence of alterations.
If genuine then it will be obvious.

Regarding the issues with the date numerals, the ideal way to demonstrate the variations is by ortho rectifying the images.
Its mathematical and precise down to the individual pixels.
I can do this, but its not worthwhile with the low res images provided so far.
Happy to provide further info about this process.

Regarding the question as to why the fakers would use a 1929 Indian, its a matter of cost.
Technically the best donor coin would be a 1931 Indian die with the normal date I guess.
Cost wise about $50 a pop.
Next best is a 27 Indian, again about $50 each.
A 1929 Indian can be picked up for a few cents.

Further to this issue of 1929 Indians please check these images.
There is a die flaw visible on SOME 29 Indians.
I can see the same flaw on Unicorn number 8.
Again the resolution is frustratingly not good enough, however it looks like a match to me.

" 
" /

Yurist says he has posted ultra hi res pics on this site. Please compare Echidna's image of the 29 and Yurist's of the 31....I have checked ever post from day one and cannot find a pic by Yurist anywhere near as good as Echidna's...Yurist should either front up or shut up.. :dodgy:

[Yurist]

Stan, I don't recall claiming to have posted "ultra hi res pics" into this thread.  However, I definitely said that there are such images on my website including 1000x microscopic images.  In fact, some of these images were then re-posted into this thread by others.

[Yurist]

These coins all show significant wear.
No way they were put away in the 30s or even the 40s.

Are you an expert on coin wear?  Do you know of any studies conducted on this question?  Please enlighten us with your rationale.  How do you come to this conclusion?

Yuri,blind Freddy can tell these Coins are heavily circulated,i admire your passion with this Coin but regulary in your Posts you show a naivety as far as pre-Dec. Coins go.
I don't think you had much of a collector/researcher background in Oz. pre-Dec before you jumped on this bandwagon,i still don't understand your motives & over the top passion,it can't be money as if these are sold as genuine & PCGS or the like consider them altered dates the sellers will be in court.

Basil, I've only had some 40+ years experience collecting and researching the Australian penny.  But, I'm not a dealer and have never sold a single coin in my life.  I do it for the pursuit of facts and clarity with the aim of shining a light onto some of the darker corners of Australian numismatic history. 

As for "blind Freddy", he may need a little schooling on the experimentation that was taking place at the Melbourne Mint around the relevant time.  It's a well-established fact that different steels, dies, and die markers were being utilised to optimise production and track the coins.  What steels were used to produce experimental coins and how durable these were in terms of wear is now a moot point.

[serenitystan]

Yurist, OK. My mistake. It was Hi Res Images instead of Ultra Hi Images on the thread. Which are just as CRAPPIE as your ''Ultra Hi Res Images with 1000x microscopic images on your website..Is it that you just do not have the Tech-Equipment to post an image as good as the 29 or does Mr Coote and company have something to hide..If they where my coins i would be abusing the shit out of you for posting those pathetic images of my coins...

[Yurist]

Stan, Frankly I have no idea what you're talking about.   Have you actually seen the image gallery on my website?  Since I populated the website with the ultra high res and microscopic images, I haven't received any complaints from anyone (other than yourself) about them being insufficient in any way.  Some of the microscopic images have since been copied and referenced in this thread.  Sorry, but I can't do more than 1000x magnification, and there is little that can be hidden under a microscope.  If that's not good enough for you, then I suggest you get your eyes checked.  By the way, for your information, Echidna's image that you're so fond of is around 50x.

[nealeffendi]

I should point out that the level of magnification isn't the most important thing in examining the finer details but the resolution is. Echidna's 50X image has fairly high resolution (but still short of being high resolution let alone ultra high resolution). Blown up photos (to high X) just produce fuzzy images, lets just say most of the '31 images are way too fuzzy to be useful. Have a look over on CCF at some examples of Extreme Macro Coin Photography where they can spend hours doing layered shots on fancy setups to produce crisp images of tiny details.  Those are the sort of images that are needed.

[Basil]

As for "blind Freddy", he may need a little schooling on the experimentation that was taking place at the Melbourne Mint around the relevant time.  It's a well-established fact that different steels, dies, and die markers were being utilised to optimise production and track the coins.  What steels were used to produce experimental coins and how durable these were in terms of wear is now a moot point.

Yurist,that's pathetic,not even worth replying to but for the last time,your egs. are heavily circulated Coins ,there is no way these were removed from circulation in the early 1930's.
If you can't see that then you better seek a 2nd opinion.

[Yurist]

Basil, I actually didn't say that all Unicorn Pennies were taken out of circulation in the 1930's.  In fact, in my post #250, I said:

"...what I guess wasn't clear from my earlier post is that while Fred's dad started his daughter's 1931 penny collection, Fred sister continued to collect these specific date coins for some years thereafter.  So, it's not impossible that some of the Unicorn Pennies were added to the collection after the father left for WWII."

I've been reviewing my records and speaking with Fred Coote about it again.  He notes that his sister actually continued to collect 1931 pennies from her loose change up until decimalisation.

[Yurist]

FYI, following my request, Fred Coote graciously allowed me to share some of his family's information in order to allay any concerns from those who have doubts about his credibility and the truthfulness of his story.  

Fred's father's name was Frederick Edmund Coote.  He was borne on 25th March 1908 and owned a dairy in Lakember, NSW.  Following the economic struggles of the 1930's, his father enlisted in the RAAF and served as a mechanic from 1939 until the end of 1945.  

In August 1930, Frederick's wife Isabelle gave birth to a girl named Heather Margaret.  In July 1933 they also had a boy who they named after their father (Fred Jnr.).  

Fred Snr. worked as a milkman before the war and collected pennies of two specific dates that were left under billy cans.  Every 1933-dated penny he found, he gave to his son (Fred Jnr.) and every 1931-dated penny that he found he gave to his daughter (Heather).  While he obviously wanted to gift his daughter 1930-dated pennies, unfortunately there were no pennies officially minted that year, so he resorted to gifting her 1931 pennies instead.  

Heather passed away a few years ago and left her extensive collection of 1931 pennies to her brother Fred Jnr.  

According to Fred Jnr., Heather "collected 1931 pennies... from every day shopping until decimal currency came in on 14th Feb 1966."   

I will attach some documents that confirm the above.

[Yurist]

[attachment=3992]

[Yurist]

Sorry to all the die-hard sceptics out there, but the provenance turned out to be true!  

Shame they don't have a middle finger emoji.   It would have been so fitting now!

[Basil]

Hi, Just my two bobs worth..No One Numismatist can authenticate a coin. This must come from a unanimous group decision . 

I just noticed your post and it raises some good points. 
There is a dearth of knowledge,IMO,at the moment as the older Numismatists/Dealers retire/pass-on,the newer brigade are hooked on PCGS/NGC etc. and accept their decisions,mostly without question.  
When i first got involved in collecting in 1960,the Numismatic Society of NSW and the Australian NS(NS of A?) had verification committees that looked at disputed Coins,mostly 1930 & 1923 due to the large number of fakes starting to appear,but also various varieties and unique Coins needing ID.Gilbert Heyde was the Chairman of both committees  
We need something similar again that is available to rank & file collectors not just the elite arguing over a Roman Coin they know nothing about except for overseas research that may or may not be accurate. 
Ancient Coin forgers had people write Books & Research papers to verify their fakes.

A fellow collector up here on the North Coast of NSW is ex-Police,he said at Xmas a statement that stuck in my mind,you have to look at the Facts & Evidence in any research,not hearsay,peoples opinions,what the Mint may have or may not have done 100 years ago is just a diversion/tangent.Mint Records may be incomplete,falsified,corrupted or just plain covering up illegal activity like the Sydney Mint.,they only can be used as a guide,not fact. 

The facts & evidence here are the Coins and finding Die pairings that actually struck the Coins,not trying to divert attention to Hubbing problems,Mint experimenting with Blanks/Planchets & Strike pressure etc. 

These Coins needs a thorough examination by several experts including a X-ray of the date area and an explanation of why the Patina seems to show the whole Coin being heated. 

Until that happens i'm not wasting any more time posting.

[Yurist]

Fair enough Basil.  I just can't help but get the feeling that even with more experts, more hi-res photos, more documentary evidence and x-ray analysis etc., there will still be someone out there that points to something like the 'patina' they noticed on a bad quality photo of a coin and conclude that all the samples were probably heated.  Frankly, I don't think that Jim Noble, nor most other highly reputable experts, routinely x-ray every 1930 penny that they authenticate.  With many years of experience, you know when you're holding a fake coin and when it's warranted to put your name behind a genuine one.   I, as many other experienced numismatists, who have had the opportunity to personally hold and inspect these coins, view them under a microscope, subject them to UV and Infra-red light etc. etc. etc. all concur with the observations that John Dean made back in 1965, that these coins are genuine.   I rest my case for the time being and will continue updating my website with further evidence and information as it comes in.

[nealeffendi]

Thanks for those excellent details Yuri. They are clear evidence that the father was a milko, served honourably and had a wife and kids. They all strongly support the family background.
There are a few quibbles I have though.
They were married at Chatswood (1929) and were living at Gordon (1940). Plus a search of electoral rolls found him living in North Sydney in 1930, 1931 and 1933; these are all North shore suburbs. In 1935 he was enrolled in Wentworth (the Eastern suburbs). In 1936 he was enrolled in Lang (which at one stage included Lakemba) and that area is in the Southern suburbs. In 1943 in Parramatta and in 1949 and 1954 in Bradfield (North shore, includes Gordon). Later on he was in North Sydney until at least 1980 (BDM gives his death as 1989).
Now the reason that I raise all these details is that he wasn't in Lakemba until circa 1936 (and was back on the North shore by 1940) so if he collected there then he only had 3-4 years to do it and more importantly his daughters additions through life as she was shopping would not be there. Or alternatively he (and his daughter) collected them on the North shore. Now if it was the North shore then again there are issues. If collected pre 1936 then they should be in less circulated condition than they are. If collected 1940 on then the father was away (so no milk run pennies) and the daughter would only have a limited number of pennies go through the house (pennies were in acute short supply and hence the extra pennies supplied by the Indian mint). If post war then yes the father might have become a milko again and the daughter as she grew to adulthood might have more pennies go through her hands (perhaps she worked in retail and had good access to plenty of pennies?). But then the issue is that the North shore was well populated with a population in the hundreds of thousands and just across the bridge from the rest of Sydney. So it isn't like these pennies were circulating in some rural region or coastal town but in the biggest city in Australia among 2 million people post war. Gordon, Chatswood and North Sydney are all on the North shore line and any pennies would have quickly diffused up and down the line and into Central as both change for rail fares and as workers and shoppers headed each day into department stores like Mark Foys, Buckinghams, Farmers, Marcus Clark, David Jones etc etc (all long gone except for David Jones).
Plus why did they collect 1931 pennies if the daughter was born in August 1930 :huh:  Ok now I accept the logic that 1930 pennies might have been unavailable so why didn't the father collect the halfpenny instead.
I understand Yuris frustration with us Doubting Thomas's but when the mule halfpenny first surfaced they did run tests like x-ray analysis. So it isn't unreasonable for sceptics to want LOTS of evidence before they will commit. And visual inspection by experts isn't enough to detect many fakes (if it was the PCGS and NGC wouldn't have slabbed so many fake pre decimals).
I would actually be happy for the Unicorn to be proved genuine, but for the time being I'll be agnostic.

[Yurist]

Neal, I think you're slightly over-complicating your analysis and perhaps missing the main point here, which is that Fred Coote is not some fraudster, as he was made out to look by some  contributors to this thread.  

So, let's put things into perspective.  Fred has been selling on eBay for the last 15 years, over which time he received (according to eBay) a 100% positive rating.  His story about the origins of his 1931 pennies held up to scrutiny, tracing the Unicorn Penny to a collection that was started in the 1930's.  We don't know when each Unicorn Penny entered his sister's extensive collection, but we do know that she collected them in a habitual way from loose change up until 1966.  She was not a numismatist and did not buy or sell her 1931 pennies. This accounts for all the concerns over heavy wear.  

We also know that John Dean documented the coins some time prior to 1965.  We also know that the coins have been subjected to essential testing and that the date numerals are not glued or welded on.  In fact, photos of microscopic analysis (using normal and UV light) clearly show that the numerals are fused to the base of the coin.  

Finally, at least one of the sample coins has now been personally inspected and authenticated by Jim Noble - one of Australia's top authorities on coinage.  

Yes, we can continue thinking of new questions that we can ask such as "why didn't the father collect the [1930] halfpenny instead [of the 1931 penny]", but whatever the answer is, it will not change the facts above.  Maybe the father felt that his older child should not settle for a half-penny when his younger child was getting a whole one.  But it doesn't really matter.  These questions are of no consequence to the obviously growing body of evidence that is supporting the Unicorn Penny.  Every time we dig deeper into it (be it a physical inspection or a historical one), we only uncover information that falls in favour of the coin being a genuine 5th variety of the 1931 penny.        

You have the right to be agnostic if you wish, but I will stick with the evidence and remain a believer.