Collecting experience

"Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in message
...
I assume you know of the websites that deal with the MTT.

If he didn't, he'd never admit it.
See this web site for insight into Goldie's issues:
Right Man Syndrome by Andrew T. AustinAn Exploration of Right Man Syndrome By
Andrew T. Austin, author, trainer, therapist.
http://www.rightmansyndrome.com/

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On 2/21/2010 12:33 PM, Nick Knight wrote:
, on 02/20/2010
at 10:29 PM, "Clyde babbled:

Ahhhhhhhh shaddup, you festering gob of conceit.

Perfect. Another one for the bit bucket.

This is one tactic. I guess it works for you. What I do, typically, is
engage those who flame and bait, but briefly before ignoring it, mostly
ignoring it. Right now Bruce Remick seems to be the lead flamebaiter, but
others have served this role in the past, responding as he has done
recently to every post or most posts with flame junk, just being
disruptive, trying to sabotage threads, then as he's doing now trying to
explain it away by saying they're engaging in some kind of high art.

One of your favorite tactics is to rag on your critics in your responses to
others, not to the critic, especially after the initial flame has been
extinguished. You obviously consider all comments that in any way demeans
what you say as "flamebaiting". You know you would never call me a moron
or challenge me to my face, so you're quite safe at your keyboard. No need
to whine to Nick the Plonker about me. Why not address your comments to me.
I'm right here. I was content to move on here until you just had to sneak
in your dig on me in a response to Nick, which by the way had nothing
whatsoever to do with coins.

I see you've found a few friends now so enjoy yourself. I won't butt in,
unless of course you decide to mention me again in a post to someone else
and I happen to notice it.


Sometimes you get sucked in, and drawn down, to their depth, into the
sewer, or I do anyway. Others have been attacked in a similarly obsessive
way here over the years, Ira, Frank, Fred, and so on. As I said I believe
it's the flame junk combined with the excessive off-topic chat about the
weather and such that's the chief reason Usenet is in such decline. Still,
you pick out the nuggets, and there are some, still making it worthwhile
to check things out once in a while. And as others have pointed out, there
are differences among different newsgroups, but as far as I have seen, and
as reported by others as well, this is the general trend.

You must have quite a reach if you have concluded that all Usenet is in
such a decline and that you know why. Haven't you noticed that the most
prolific and active threads in RCC seem to be the OT ones or ones that you
initiate? People just enjoying themselves. With such a severe decline here
in RCC, I have to wonder who you thought would be left to care about your
million word treatise on how you started collecting coins.

Why is it that you seem to be the only one who feels stymied here by
"flames"?

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
While in Scottsdale, my wife, kids, and I visited the Buffalo Museum of
America.

Does anyone doubt that Reid is probably henpecked to the point of emasculation
and that his wife wears the pants in their relationship?
It would explain why he has to come here to huff and puff about what a genius he
is.

In , on 02/21/2010
at 11:00 PM, in ) said:

bust halves seem as varied as varieties of hi-tops.

But that's what makes them so fun!

Nick
- "378 down, plenty left to find"

(and that's not counting the bogo collection

exactly. too bad both have gotten pricey.
you still have theat page on the bogs?

It hasn't been updated in quite some time, although it IS on my "to do"
list:

http://www.mr2ice.com/coins/bogos/bogolist.html


Nick

In article , "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote:
wrote:
In article , "Mr. Jaggers"
lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote:
Reid Goldsborough wrote:
On 2/21/2010 12:28 AM, in wrote:

i had to get all the walkers. 3 times....then i grew up, kept one
set of the best, though i did keep the keys from the other 2.
meaning just the 21's and obverse mint mark. and the 38 d's.

Walkers are a very cool series. Big coins, silver, extremely
attractive, among the three most beautifully designed of all U.S.
coins, I'd say, and unlike the others much more affordable. If you
had posted this when I was a kid I probably would have tried
something similar. g
I sold off all of my collection as a teenager when I stopped
collecting. Wish I hadn't. I feel especially bad about selling my
grandfather's silver dollars. My mother was mildly piqued at my
doing that but only mildly. I wish today I had kept at least one. I
got little for all of it. Took it to the local coin shop where I had
bought a lot of stuff previously. All he did was talk everything
down. I knew what he was doing but didn't want to spend the time
shopping the coins around so I just took the money and ran. Dumb
kid.

Like you, I sold my collection when I was eighteen, in my case to
raise money for college. I kept only two pieces from that
collection, a 1787 British shilling and a Maria Teresa restrike
thaler. Those were enough "seed" to gnaw at me until a couple of
decades later when I started all over again.

I like to think that I made *most* of my collecting errors as a kid,
but reality dictates otherwise.

James the Only Somewhat Reconstructed


don't forget what flaubert said.

Qu'est-ce que Gustave a dit?

Jacques


that wich is written without pain is read without pleasure.
profit but no honor in his own land.

In article , "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote:
mazorj wrote:
"Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in message
...
tony cooper wrote:
On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 19:45:22 -0600, "Mr. Jaggers"
lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote:

In all due honesty, I was only on those two usage groups for a
short time, at the end of which I got my hiney chewed royally for
my analysis of the proper sequencing of tenses/moods that was the
subject of a query post. I did it as a relative newbie, from the
point of a classically trained Latin scholar, and that was all it
took.

To give you an idea of how tolerant the group is, I would put the
period at the end of that quote after the closing quotation mark in
violation of the accepted American style. However, because I am
consistent in this, no one has ever Oy'd me on it. It's regarded
as a style choice.

I've had a lot of surprises after reading the latest edition of the
Chicago Manual of Style, which I received as a Christmas gift. A
lot of the rules I learned in school have changed, it seems. For
example, we were taught that one should always capitalize President
when referring to the POTUS. Apparently that is as passé as "23
skiddoo". Or is it "skiddoo."? "Skiddoo?." Oh, I give up.

James the Indecisive

Is this just when it's a stand-alone noun, or when it's used in a
title, e.g., "President Bill Clinton"?

Having cut my stylistic teeth on the AP Style Manual, I lower-case
the noun but UC the title. I still stumble over the antiquated
formalistic capitalizations that you find in business and legal
writing. "The Corporation observes all Regulations under under the
Act as promulgated by your Agency."

Thankfully, I never had to wrestle with the CMS. Too many of its
nit-picky rules appear to be intended for formal academic and legal
requirements or to please overweening prescriptive grammar kops, and
not for everyday use. I had one nice very old lady as a copy editor
who meekly tried to impose CMS on my scribblings. I politely but
firmly ignored most of her suggestions.
- mazorj
"whom ain't got no use for silly speling or grammer rules. or the
caps key EXCEPT ON USENET!!!!!!"

Well, damn!

James the Profane


he dunt spel so gud, hisself, yimmy!

In article , "Nick Knight" wrote:
In , on 02/21/2010
at 11:00 PM, in ) said:

bust halves seem as varied as varieties of hi-tops.

But that's what makes them so fun!

Nick
- "378 down, plenty left to find"

(and that's not counting the bogo collection

exactly. too bad both have gotten pricey.
you still have theat page on the bogs?

It hasn't been updated in quite some time, although it IS on my "to do"
list:

http://www.mr2ice.com/coins/bogos/bogolist.html


Nick

that's ok. it's still fun. there is too little goddam fun in the world.

On Feb 20, 1:13�am, Reid Goldsborough
wrote:
This year marks exactly ten years of my beginning coin collecting again.
Time for a retrospective, some analysis. Read at your own risk. This
will be long (winded). Consider this post a medium-length magazine
article, though more personal and less focused. Though this includes
some dealer criticism, and some dealers may consider it anti-dealer, it
also includes some dealer praise, and I consider it, overall,
pro-dealer, pro-collector, and pro-numismatics. This may be a prelude to
something else, or not. An earlier version of this, dealing almost
entirely with ancient coins, appeared elsewhere.

During the summer of 2000 I found myself standing over a bowl of Indian
Head cents and another of Buffalo nickels. I had been invited to give a
talk about the Internet at a national marketing convention in
Scottsdale, Arizona. I wrote and still write a nationally syndicated
newspaper/magazine column about computers and the Internet, and before
this I wrote a book about the future of the Internet, which was used
among other places in some college classrooms during the 13 minutes in
which it was still up to date.

While in Scottsdale, my wife, kids, and I visited the Buffalo Museum of
America. Mesmerized, I stood over these VG and G cents and nickels, the
cents priced at $1 each, the nickels at $2 each. Like many collectors
today I collected as a kid, U.S. type coins for me while my best friend
at the time worked on Whitman sets, before like many I gave up
collecting for other things. In this little museum, almost exactly 30
years later, I couldn't take my eyes of these beat-up old coins. I
bought one Indian Head cent and one Buffalo nickel. Total outlay: $3.
What possible harm could this lead to?

At the end of that summer the ANA had its big national show in
Philadelphia, close to us. OK, I'll go. First day I bought the most
affordable nice enough coin I could find having a date beginning with
the numbers 17. I couldn't afford a 1798 large cent when I was a kid.
The next day I bought a 1908 no-motto Saint, feeling genuinely guilty
about the money I was spending.

It was all downhill from there. This Saint quickly led me to what I
regarded and still regard as the most fabulous of all U.S. coins, Bust
dollars with heraldic eagle reverses. The 1804 dollar is considered the
"king" of American coins not only because of its rarity and the
circumstances surrounding its minting but also, I'd contend, because of
the beauty of its design, and the 1798 to 1903 heraldic eagle Bust
dollars have all the beauty without the stratospheric priceyness.

I went fairly crazy with Bust dollars, creating several sets of these
fairly big-ticket items, then wound up buying and selling for profit,
playing dealer, buying what I regarded as undervalued Bust dollars at
national and local coin shows as well as through eBay and selling
entirely through eBay, doing well. My column at the time was being
published among other places in AirTran's in-flight magazine, before
AirTran switched publishers, and as payment here I received free
airfare, so I wound up going not only to the NY Int'l and Baltimore
shows by car and train but also by plane to the F.U.N. show and Chicago
Int'l each year. In retrospect I probably should have also gone to a few
Long Beach shows, but I didn't want to take advantage.

I also began going backward in time, before the onset of U.S. coinage.
The further back I looked the more interesting it seemed. All other
things being equal, old is more interesting, but all other things aren't
equal. Ancient coins, particularly ancient Greek coins, are considered
by many today, myself included, as the most beautiful of all coins,
though some modern U.S. and world coins give the Greeks a, well, run for
their money. Ancient coins also have some terribly interesting history,
with science, democracy, western philosophy, and the entire western way
of life having its origins in ancient Greece. Rome copied Greece, and
the founding fathers of the U.S. copied Rome.

So I wound up focusing mostly on ancient Greek coins, more engaging to
me in general than Roman coins. Just as Rome copied Greece with
mythology, philosophy, science, architecture, and so on, it also copied
Greek coins, only made them in general smaller, more often debased, and
less attractive artistically. Rome also made the same mistake the U.S.
has made over the past hundred years or so, in my view, by using human
portraits as primary, obverse devices rather than more imaginative and
inspirational symbolic or mythological figures.

Greek coins were fantastic. I began specializing in discrete areas --
Alexander the Great, Athenian Owls, pre-Greek Lydian electrum, etc., 21
Greek-era areas in all, as of right now. I've also elected to focus on
three Roman areas and several later areas, including English pennies
through the centuries, Pieces of Eight and other Age of Exploration
trade coins, Bust dollars, Saints, and a whacky set of holed U.S. types
coins that I'm able to acquire for under $10 each (still looking for a
holed Presidential dollar, if anybody comes across one).

I've tried going deep in each area, soaking up as many journal articles
and books as I could along with the coins, and still do. The acquisition
of knowledge for me is just as enjoyable as the acquisition of coins,
and I've spent many enjoyable hours at the libraries of the ANS and the
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, near
me. The ANA library has also been a good resource for me, as has Ted
Buttrey, the well-respected numismatist and all-around good guy from the
mother ship who has graciously put up with my disagreeableness about his
thinking on Egyptian Owls.

Fairly early on in beginning to collect again, however, I got caught up
again in what partly led me to quit coin collecting back as a teenager.
I got sucked in by the inevitable pull toward greed and deception. I
suppose this is something that everybody who collects, and even more so
everybody who deals, has to wrestle with, more or less. How honest will
you be? By honest I'm referring not only to the accuracy of the
information you knowingly communicate -- errors of commission -- but
also whether you communicate all the relevant information you know --
errors of omission.

With me, with one particular eBay sale, I withheld information when
selling a Bust dollar, not disclosing in full how I believed the
surfaces looked in hand. I had been asked by someone who turned out to
be the winning bidder if I saw anything that my fairly revealing photo
didn't reveal. The surfaces of this raw, unslabbed coin were pretty
rough, with excessive porosity for a coin of this type (I hadn't paid
much it), appearing this way more so with the coin in hand than in the
photo. I felt bad about not fully disclosing this, saying instead
something, which I don't recall exactly, that only approached full
disclosure. The buyer didn't return the piece or complain. But he left
no feedback either, positive or negative. I knew he must have known that
I didn't disclose what I knew.

Granted, this was far from the worst of numismatic sins, and I know that
many dealers inevitably do similar things as part of making a living
through dealing. You put coins in the best possible light, figuratively
and actually. Most dealers appear to adhere to the maxim that if asked,
you disclose, if not, you don't. But some, I know, don't even when
asked. In this particular case I didn't disclose either. On the other
hand, some dealers, even those at the top of the profession, don't
disclose what they should, including serious concerns from reliable
sources, at times even the most respected museum and academic people in
the world, about the authenticity of expensive and sometimes very
expensive coins.

But mostly, I believe, the majority of coin dealers do the right thing
in the majority of cases, pulling questionable coins and describing
coins accurately, though forgery-detection skills, the use of
hyperbole/exaggeration, grading accuracy, and attribution accuracy vary
widely. Still, dealers as a whole can be trusted as a reliable means of
building an enjoyable collection, as I've said many times.

The old saw in numismatics very much applies, that to better protect
yourself from fakes you should buy from reputable and knowledgeable
dealers, even if this protection is not or could ever be ironclad or
foolproof and even if having your own expertise provides additional
protection in itself. Dealers are still indispensable, today, in the age
of the Internet when collectors can easily buy and sell to one another
directly. Because they handle so many coins, the sharpest coin dealers
will be better at coin authentication than the sharpest collectors or
academics ... provided the inevitable self-interest doesn't excessively
cloud their perceptions. Dealers are also very good at making markets --
bringing sellers and buyers together.

I don't want to give too much weight to my little guilt trip over this
one incident of nondisclosure, since a number of other factors were and
are involved in my attitudes and decisions about numismatics. I respect
the profession of coin dealing as I respect the category of retailing in
general. My mother's father owned a small retail hardware store for some
60 years, and when in high school I helped out there one summer. I've
also spent a little time selling at computer swap shows, which are
similar to large coin shows in that you stand behind a table, your wares
in front of you, trying to sell to those who stop at your table.

So coin dealing turned out not to be for me. I stopped selling on my own
for profit, though since then I have offloaded coins on occasion when
cleaning out dupes, extraneous material, and coins in areas I thought I
would specialize in but never did, selling to or through dealers.

This episode of ...

read more �

If I bid and win on a coin off of Ebay and if it dosen't remarkably
look like the photo, I return it and I don't bid on "no return" unless
the coin is graded and one of the big three and slabbed. I learned
this after getting coins where lighting or photoshop were used to
enhance the appearance. If I am not sure, I question the seller, just
to have a record of the inquiry.

On 2/22/2010 8:30 AM, Relayer wrote:
If I bid and win on a coin off of Ebay and if it dosen't remarkably
look like the photo, I return it and I don't bid on "no return" unless
the coin is graded and one of the big three and slabbed. I learned
this after getting coins where lighting or photoshop were used to
enhance the appearance. If I am not sure, I question the seller, just
to have a record of the inquiry.

This happens a lot, sometimes deliberately, sometimes not, it seems.
Many dealers blast a darkly patinated bronze coin with high-intensity
light, or bump up the lightness and contrast in an image editing
program, so bidders can better see the coin's details. Of course, when
you actually have the coin in hand, the details can only been seen if
you do the same things -- under ordinary light the details are obscured.
My view is that if this is done, it should be disclosed when selling the
coin, something like, "Coin image was lightened to make details better
identifiable." But this doesn't seem to be the norm.

There are lots of other ways that coin images can be photoshopped to
improve them, even more blatantly deceptive. And there are lots of ways
that Photoshop and similar programs can be used to more closely make a
coin on screen look the way it looks in hand.

--

Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

On Feb 20, 2:13�am, Reid Goldsborough
wrote:
This year marks exactly ten years of my beginning coin collecting again.
Time for a retrospective, some analysis. Read at your own risk. This
will be long (winded). Consider this post a medium-length magazine
article, though more personal and less focused. Though this includes
some dealer criticism, and some dealers may consider it anti-dealer, it
also includes some dealer praise, and I consider it, overall,
pro-dealer, pro-collector, and pro-numismatics. This may be a prelude to
something else, or not. An earlier version of this, dealing almost
entirely with ancient coins, appeared elsewhere.

During the summer of 2000 I found myself standing over a bowl of Indian
Head cents and another of Buffalo nickels. I had been invited to give a
talk about the Internet at a national marketing convention in
Scottsdale, Arizona. I wrote and still write a nationally syndicated
newspaper/magazine column about computers and the Internet, and before
this I wrote a book about the future of the Internet, which was used
among other places in some college classrooms during the 13 minutes in
which it was still up to date.

While in Scottsdale, my wife, kids, and I visited the Buffalo Museum of
America. Mesmerized, I stood over these VG and G cents and nickels, the
cents priced at $1 each, the nickels at $2 each. Like many collectors
today I collected as a kid, U.S. type coins for me while my best friend
at the time worked on Whitman sets, before like many I gave up
collecting for other things. In this little museum, almost exactly 30
years later, I couldn't take my eyes of these beat-up old coins. I
bought one Indian Head cent and one Buffalo nickel. Total outlay: $3.
What possible harm could this lead to?

At the end of that summer the ANA had its big national show in
Philadelphia, close to us. OK, I'll go. First day I bought the most
affordable nice enough coin I could find having a date beginning with
the numbers 17. I couldn't afford a 1798 large cent when I was a kid.
The next day I bought a 1908 no-motto Saint, feeling genuinely guilty
about the money I was spending.

It was all downhill from there. This Saint quickly led me to what I
regarded and still regard as the most fabulous of all U.S. coins, Bust
dollars with heraldic eagle reverses. The 1804 dollar is considered the
"king" of American coins not only because of its rarity and the
circumstances surrounding its minting but also, I'd contend, because of
the beauty of its design, and the 1798 to 1903 heraldic eagle Bust
dollars have all the beauty without the stratospheric priceyness.

I went fairly crazy with Bust dollars, creating several sets of these
fairly big-ticket items, then wound up buying and selling for profit,
playing dealer, buying what I regarded as undervalued Bust dollars at
national and local coin shows as well as through eBay and selling
entirely through eBay, doing well. My column at the time was being
published among other places in AirTran's in-flight magazine, before
AirTran switched publishers, and as payment here I received free
airfare, so I wound up going not only to the NY Int'l and Baltimore
shows by car and train but also by plane to the F.U.N. show and Chicago
Int'l each year. In retrospect I probably should have also gone to a few
Long Beach shows, but I didn't want to take advantage.

I also began going backward in time, before the onset of U.S. coinage.
The further back I looked the more interesting it seemed. All other
things being equal, old is more interesting, but all other things aren't
equal. Ancient coins, particularly ancient Greek coins, are considered
by many today, myself included, as the most beautiful of all coins,
though some modern U.S. and world coins give the Greeks a, well, run for
their money. Ancient coins also have some terribly interesting history,
with science, democracy, western philosophy, and the entire western way
of life having its origins in ancient Greece. Rome copied Greece, and
the founding fathers of the U.S. copied Rome.

So I wound up focusing mostly on ancient Greek coins, more engaging to
me in general than Roman coins. Just as Rome copied Greece with
mythology, philosophy, science, architecture, and so on, it also copied
Greek coins, only made them in general smaller, more often debased, and
less attractive artistically. Rome also made the same mistake the U.S.
has made over the past hundred years or so, in my view, by using human
portraits as primary, obverse devices rather than more imaginative and
inspirational symbolic or mythological figures.

Greek coins were fantastic. I began specializing in discrete areas --
Alexander the Great, Athenian Owls, pre-Greek Lydian electrum, etc., 21
Greek-era areas in all, as of right now. I've also elected to focus on
three Roman areas and several later areas, including English pennies
through the centuries, Pieces of Eight and other Age of Exploration
trade coins, Bust dollars, Saints, and a whacky set of holed U.S. types
coins that I'm able to acquire for under $10 each (still looking for a
holed Presidential dollar, if anybody comes across one).

I've tried going deep in each area, soaking up as many journal articles
and books as I could along with the coins, and still do. The acquisition
of knowledge for me is just as enjoyable as the acquisition of coins,
and I've spent many enjoyable hours at the libraries of the ANS and the
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, near
me. The ANA library has also been a good resource for me, as has Ted
Buttrey, the well-respected numismatist and all-around good guy from the
mother ship who has graciously put up with my disagreeableness about his
thinking on Egyptian Owls.

Fairly early on in beginning to collect again, however, I got caught up
again in what partly led me to quit coin collecting back as a teenager.
I got sucked in by the inevitable pull toward greed and deception. I
suppose this is something that everybody who collects, and even more so
everybody who deals, has to wrestle with, more or less. How honest will
you be? By honest I'm referring not only to the accuracy of the
information you knowingly communicate -- errors of commission -- but
also whether you communicate all the relevant information you know --
errors of omission.

With me, with one particular eBay sale, I withheld information when
selling a Bust dollar, not disclosing in full how I believed the
surfaces looked in hand. I had been asked by someone who turned out to
be the winning bidder if I saw anything that my fairly revealing photo
didn't reveal. The surfaces of this raw, unslabbed coin were pretty
rough, with excessive porosity for a coin of this type (I hadn't paid
much it), appearing this way more so with the coin in hand than in the
photo. I felt bad about not fully disclosing this, saying instead
something, which I don't recall exactly, that only approached full
disclosure. The buyer didn't return the piece or complain. But he left
no feedback either, positive or negative. I knew he must have known that
I didn't disclose what I knew.

Granted, this was far from the worst of numismatic sins, and I know that
many dealers inevitably do similar things as part of making a living
through dealing. You put coins in the best possible light, figuratively
and actually. Most dealers appear to adhere to the maxim that if asked,
you disclose, if not, you don't. But some, I know, don't even when
asked. In this particular case I didn't disclose either. On the other
hand, some dealers, even those at the top of the profession, don't
disclose what they should, including serious concerns from reliable
sources, at times even the most respected museum and academic people in
the world, about the authenticity of expensive and sometimes very
expensive coins.

But mostly, I believe, the majority of coin dealers do the right thing
in the majority of cases, pulling questionable coins and describing
coins accurately, though forgery-detection skills, the use of
hyperbole/exaggeration, grading accuracy, and attribution accuracy vary
widely. Still, dealers as a whole can be trusted as a reliable means of
building an enjoyable collection, as I've said many times.

The old saw in numismatics very much applies, that to better protect
yourself from fakes you should buy from reputable and knowledgeable
dealers, even if this protection is not or could ever be ironclad or
foolproof and even if having your own expertise provides additional
protection in itself. Dealers are still indispensable, today, in the age
of the Internet when collectors can easily buy and sell to one another
directly. Because they handle so many coins, the sharpest coin dealers
will be better at coin authentication than the sharpest collectors or
academics ... provided the inevitable self-interest doesn't excessively
cloud their perceptions. Dealers are also very good at making markets --
bringing sellers and buyers together.

I don't want to give too much weight to my little guilt trip over this
one incident of nondisclosure, since a number of other factors were and
are involved in my attitudes and decisions about numismatics. I respect
the profession of coin dealing as I respect the category of retailing in
general. My mother's father owned a small retail hardware store for some
60 years, and when in high school I helped out there one summer. I've
also spent a little time selling at computer swap shows, which are
similar to large coin shows in that you stand behind a table, your wares
in front of you, trying to sell to those who stop at your table.

So coin dealing turned out not to be for me. I stopped selling on my own
for profit, though since then I have offloaded coins on occasion when
cleaning out dupes, extraneous material, and coins in areas I thought I
would specialize in but never did, selling to or through dealers.

This episode of ...

read more �

Reid, you old windbag.

~Anka