| Author |
 Replies: 17 / Views: 3,187 |
|
Pillar of the Community
4628 Posts |
A good conversation starter and an objective opinion, so please anyone who loves some of the coins described here by me or anyone else - don't get offended if they are your favourite. In fact tell us what is your least favourite and how you would like to melt down every George V coin or halfcrown ever made  To be honest I am not endorsing the open destruction of coins, merely letting you all know, some coins are just so MEH! to me. Basically what British coin do you care for the least. I mean a coin that just has no meaning for you, or a coin you are sick of seeing. For me it has to be the CHURCHILL CROWN this ugly as heck coin was issued in 1965 and made out of cheap cupronickel. Not try to dull Churchill's achievements and failures (Gallipoli, geriatric imperialism etc) - the design is ugly beyond belief, hideous block lettering and so called modernist artwork. What else, nearly 20 million minted and absolutely worthless. Even in stunning choice UNC, its not even worth 1 pound (My old tablet does not have a pound sign or pictures sorry - but Churchill crowns are so dirt common, I am sure we all know what they look like and I bet most of you have more than 1 of them in your collections  ). Just a worthless and ugly coin. I mean today I brought a nice collection, with silver, nice coin sets, an old Aussie $50 note South African 10 pound note, but also out pops 4 butt ugly Churchill crowns, all UNC but who cares. So that is my least loved British coin. What is yours. Others in my hall of shame. Any other 25p crown including 1972 Royal Anniversary, 1977 Jubilee, 1980 Queen mother and 1981 Princess Di (Aargh) 1936 and 1938 pennies worn - so many of them. Ugly old one pound coins (1983 - 2016) especially the 80s ones. Modern 5 and 10p (Just ugly tiny coins) Can't wait to hear your replies, I just know Benjamin Bunny and Diversity 50ps will feature  . |
|
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
215 Posts |
Surely it's the 1971 new penny.  Found one in a $2 roll in Australia last year and am still having nightmares about it. That's right, this totally worthless coin cost me $2.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
9406 Posts |
I'm sick of the sight of 5p coins.
I have about 300 spares of those coins and 114 of those are 1990.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
725 Posts |
I agree about Churchill. Ugly coin for our most overrated citizen. I'm not a fan of any commemoratives, though. Beatrix Potter coins make me shudder.
My least favourite circulation coins are anything after about 1983. But that might just be because I've seen too much of them and had to actually use them. When you use them more factors come into play. Historically, people hated the double florin, the cartwheel tuppence and James I/Charles I copper farthings because of the practical challenges they posed - I happen to like all of those. I can only think of the Godless florin as a coin before Elizabeth II that was hated purely for its design but today most people love it.
Edited by JohnConduitt
04/20/2022 09:07 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5174 Posts |
Quote:
Historically, people hated the double florin, the cartwheel tuppence and James I/Charles I copper farthings because of the practical challenges they posed - I happen to like all of those. I can only think of the Godless florin as a coin before Elizabeth II that was hated purely for its design but today most people love it.  My least favorites are probably the George II (and to a lesser extent George III) halfpennies and/or farthings. Ugly pieces of bronze with hardly any design, and even the date is usually illegible. Churchill crowns are meh; not pretty, but I'm sure they'd be less disliked if they weren't so common. I read somewhere that they're technically legal tender at 25 pence. No idea if that's actually true. I wonder how many would get spent if a store started openly accepting them at that value. |
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
665 Posts |
Unlike other responses, I actually like circulating commemoratives; I think they add collectible interest to circulation coins in all grades and can get new and younger faces into the hobby at a very affordable level but I think I am with @Princetane in some of the stated weaknesses. In particular I dislike the 20th century Elizabeth II Cupro nickel crowns whether 5/- or 25p. By the time they moved to 5 pound Face Value, they were exclusively NCLT and in a different category. Whether the 1965 Churchill or the 1981 Charles & Diana... I call it a toss up for bottom of the barrel. The '77 Jubilee looked more like a medal than a coin and the common reverse of the '53 and '60 leave me cold. I actively collect Crowns but the range I look for is from Cromwell to KGVI but as @Princetane predicted... Yup, I have more than one 1965 Churchill in my collection... I also have them in beneficial use... they are effective as "levelling feet" under furniture where the floor is a little uneven I had one under a dining room sideboard. I remember as a kid, the 1973 EU 50p or as we called it the "Handy-Fifty"; it was ubiquitous... and maintained a level of interest in collecting for me as a kid. I don't understand the philosophy behind the manufactured rarity I see in coins like the Kew Gardens 50p and others. It is clearly designed as a circulating commemorative and can be used to purchase goods (unlike a Nelson commem Crown) but not issued in sufficient quantity to allow it to be generally held by those interested in collecting as a hobby. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United Kingdom
17940 Posts |
Good question! The decimal half penny was pretty well universally reviled. Even in 1971 it had little purchasing power, and it was very small and easy to lose, with no design other than the crown and value:  I was never that keen on the first series of 'regional' pound coins issued from 1984-7, especially the 1985 leek design, which wore badly and looked pretty awful after a few years in circulation:  Among current coins I'm not that keen on the 'jigsaw shield' low value coins and I think the 20p on its own looks silly. Which way up is it supposed to be?  I think some of the NCLT £5 coins issued over the past few years, like the Elton John one, are rather unattractive, but I only buy them now if I like the design. |
|
Pillar of the Community
 4628 Posts |
Good answers and everyone has contributed something I agree with. Even the modern 5 pound crowns I am not crazy about - anything Royal based is "Numismatic poison", I don't know why so much royal themed tatt comes out. I am sure even Her Majesty is tired of some of the dubious crowns from places like Tristan Da Cunha and St Somewhere in the West Indies issues. Agree about horrible 1971 dated copper.I think 1971 in the UK, horrendous helvetica bold lettering - brutalist architecture, Bee Gees like hair and places like Runcorn and long haired women called Pauline who listen to the Sweet. Even worse are the clowns who load up 1971 dated 1p and 2p coins on ebay thinking they are rare ancient discoveries or errors (As every coin is an error in bunny land) for like 5,000 quid. Steve, I also have about 30 or 40 5p and 10p coins and most are either dated 1990 for the 5p and 1992 for the 10p along with 3 or 4 ubiquitous 1997 dated 50p coins. Another pet unlike is a folder called "Britain's First Decimal coins" from the late 1960s. Its a cheap blue plastic folder with a cheap stained PVC pouch and the coins on a acidopeherous piece of cardboard. It only goes to the 10p, but I suspect it was issued before late 1969 when the 50p was added to the line up. They were at one stage going to issue the 50p as a note on the design of the old 10 bob note. Anyway these folders are always worn and stained, the copper coins dated 1971 but are likely minted in 1968/69 are always dark and worn down to EF, the 5p and 10p have lost their lustre and these wallets are dirt common. I have 3 and all are apalling. The only thing I don't agree with is the 1953 and 1960 crowns, these two I kind of like - a nice complex and regal looking design (Okay they are cheap muck metal - but more attractive than old Churchill any day of the week). |
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
725 Posts |
Quote:
I remember as a kid, the 1973 EU 50p or as we called it the "Handy-Fifty"; it was ubiquitous... and maintained a level of interest in collecting for me as a kid. I don't understand the philosophy behind the manufactured rarity I see in coins like the Kew Gardens 50p.not issued in sufficient quantity to allow it to be generally held by those interested in collecting
I totally agree - that is the problem. I used to love the 1973 50p. It was the first coin I collected (by the dozen) because you could actually get hold of it. The Kew Gardens is more like one of those marketing schemes by McDonalds to get you to collect all of the Monopoly properties. You try for weeks but you can never get Mayfair. Hateful. Having said that, this year I gave my 5 year old nephew 3 coins for his birthday. A 1945 halfcrown, a 1973 50p proof and a Constantine the Great nummus found in his county. He liked them all, but wrote a story about the Roman coin. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
725 Posts |
Quote:
My least favorites are probably the George II (and to a lesser extent George III) halfpennies and/or farthings. Ugly pieces of bronze with hardly any design, and even the date is usually illegible.
Churchill crowns are meh; not pretty, but I'm sure they'd be less disliked if they weren't so common.
I read somewhere that they're technically legal tender at 25 pence. No idea if that's actually true. I wonder how many would get spent if a store started openly accepting them at that value. George II and III halfpennies are pretty dull. But I can't hate the grotesque portraits. There are lots of old coins that are still legal tender - including Victoria double florins at 20p - but usually they're worth far too much to spend at face value and few checkout people would know what they were to accept them, so they don't (since they don't have to). The Churchill might be the only coin you would test them with. Quote:
anything Royal based is "Numismatic poison" It really is. I don't know why, but Royal events seem to have to be accompanied by days of dreadful TV/online news, hideous commemorative tat and a series of awful coins. I'd be a republican if it wasn't for Charles I and his coins. Edited by JohnConduitt
04/20/2022 4:00 pm
|
|
Moderator
 Australia
16830 Posts |
If we're talking coinage that the people actually forced to use them hated the most, that would have to be the debased late-period coinage of Henry VIII - "Old Coppernose" earned his nickname because the thin silver wash quickly wore away from the high points of the coins, showing the coppery alloy underneath. People either refused to accept them or offered a steep discount.
Shortly after Henry's death, most of the debased coins were withdrawn and destroyed and the fineness of the coinage was restored to pre-Henry levels. But Henry VIII came oh-so-close to taking England down the same path of debasement that saw billon coins become commonplace in continental Europe.
All of which, of course, makes those coins that survived the purge rare and highly sought after today. Though as is common with debased-silver coinage, it's hard to find one in half-decent condition.
Don't say "infinitely" when you mean "very"; otherwise, you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. - C. S. Lewis
|
|
Pillar of the Community
4628 Posts |
I got the same vibes from the millions of Royal themed stamps issued by the UK and all the Commonwealth territories. If you think royal themed coins are over the top, then look at the stamps. Mountains of wallpaper rubbish or every royal wedding, jubilee, anniversary and birthday every 5 years or every child being born. The legitimate British ones are bad enough, but you will see how many nations like St Vincent, St Kitts, Guyana, Tuvalu, Ghana etc issue and all are tacky.
No royal stamp issue since 1935 has gained any value, and most are good for starting fires with only and like coins, you get the stupid face values like 10 pounds on a Gibraltar 85th birthday stamp etc.
Basically a royal themed coin with a 5 pound face value, will only ever be worth 5 pounds regardless of what you pay for it and if a precious metal, will be worth the exact melting value of that metal and not a cent more, unless there's a spelling mistake and they only minted 500 with it.
I too am a supreme republican, but respect her Majesty - NONE of the others. I see a mountain of Republics, Republicas and Democratic People's republics soon.
|
|
Valued Member
United Kingdom
251 Posts |
The shield design circulating coinage. It is ugly, looks ludicrous and does not even tessellate properly (you can't make the shield properly because the coins are different shapes).
The Churchill is, by far and away, my most hated coin though. It's big, bulky and ugly.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
856 Posts |
"The decimal half penny was pretty well universally reviled. Even in 1971 it had little purchasing power, and it was very small and easy to lose"
True. However it's not far off the diameter of the old silver pennies which circulated as pretty much the universal currency across Europe and the Mediterranean for around 800 years (well, until groats turned up!)
I work in a shop and have to count the cash in the till. Every time I tally up all the 5p pieces I think how tedious medieval money lenders lives must have been with all those fiddly tiddly pennies to count!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
1321 Posts |
Not that I was around at the time but the silver 4d from Victorian times must have been pretty bad being the same size as the 3d! (although a bit thicker)
Edited by andyg
04/25/2022 3:17 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
4628 Posts |
Glad to see you back my erstwhile benefactor!
Don't worry NONE of the coins you sold me are mentioned here (Well maybe Diversity 50p, but that was a garnish rather than a sale).
The 4d is an interesting one, they are similar size, but it had its fans back then as it was used to pay hansom cabs drivers who demanded 4d for a certain distance and often refused to change 6d coins. Hence the joey named after MP Joseph Hume who had it introduced in act of Parliament in the mid 1830s.
It lasted from 1836 through to around 1860, although an issue of 1888 was British Guiana bound. I think they at least tried to make it look different from the 3d with Britannia rather than the crowned numeral on it and looking in my catalogues, not that many actual 3d were issued for circulation before 1860, in fact most seemed to be for colonial use only. My guess is it stopped being used when the cabbies up their fares to 6d, or people just jumped on an omnibus, train or one of those Bone shaker things!
|
| |
Replies: 17 / Views: 3,187 |
Posted 04/20/2022 08:08 am
