Based upon the Royal Mints published mintage numbers for each year and the fact that they believe approximately 2.5% of circulating pound coins are fakes, the odds of you having each year date are as follows (according to my calculations);
1983 - 5 to 1.......ie for every 5 pound coins to pass through your hands, 1 would be of this year
1984 - 14/1
1985 - 9/1
1986 - 196/1
1987 - 52/1
1988 - 287/1 - Enough to classify this as the most rarest until 2008
1989 - 29/1
1990 - 21/1
1991 - 53/1
1992 - 56/1
1993 - 18/1
1994 - 69/1
1995 - 59/1
1996 - 23/1
1997 - 36/1
1998 - Uncirculated, unknown mintage numbers
1999 - Uncirculated, unknown mintage numbers
2000 - 19/1
2001 - 32/1
2002 - 26/1
2003 - 33/1
2004 - 52/1
2005 - 21/1
2006 - 52/1
2007 - 78/1
2008 - 522/1 - The Ornamental Arms 3rd Portrait Decus coin holds the current distinction of rarest circulated pound coin
2008 - 69/1 - New Shield design
Faked Coins - 40/1
Therefore by laws of average you are more likely to come across a fake pound coin rather than 12 of the legitimate designs listed above and 13 TIMES more likely to receive one as opposed to the 2008 OA3D coin!!!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Interesting list of probabilities Simon.
ReplyDeleteOne of the things that has puzzled me since starting to research fake pounds, is the apparent rarity of fakes of the commonest circulated pounds. I have yet to find a fake of the 1983 pound with Machin portrait (though I've heard they exist) despite the officially minted coin being so common in circulation, and I am also yet to find any fake of the Welsh leek reverse. Again, the numbers of the official Welsh leek coins minted and in circulation are very high - so wouldn't a forger have been tempted to slip a few of those into circulation rather than copying some of the less common designs instead, such as Irish Flax?
An explanation for there being few, if any, fakes of the Welsh leek design, might be the need for the less common Welsh inscription instead of DECUS ET TUTAMEN as used on UK, English and Irish coins. But this argument falls down when you see that this didn't stop the forgers from copying the more recent Welsh design of 1995/2000, the Welsh dragon. And (on pre-2004 coins) they usually just stick with 'DECUS' etc for the edge legend regardless of the reverse design.
So assuming I haven't missed loads of faked pounds with the Welsh leek reverse, does anyone have an explanation for why they don't appear to have been faked, nor the original 1983 pound, or at least not in as much quantity as other designs?
Both the designs mentioned exist as forgeries. I have a very obvious white metal/painted version of a 1983 and a couple of really good - and I mean *good* - brass 1983s. One is a weak strike which draws your attention to it, but they are all very good quality. One tell tale sign is they all seem to have been minted fairly recently.
ReplyDeleteAs for the Welsh leek design, I have one dated 1985 which I am almost certain is fake, having a granulated finish. When I got it it was very discoloured, possibly deliberately, which disguised the poor quality of the actual finish. I have two others of that year which are of dubious provenance and although worn, are not worn in the same way that the normal circulating coins are worn. The edge lettering on one is extremely good and of Royal Mint quality, but it is in a sans serif typeface which is unusual, and which I have seen in only three or four coins. (It is not unknown for the Royal Mint to change the edge typeface mid run, for example, in 1989 when the size (height) of the typeface was reduced from that first seen in 1983 the first coins of 1989 bore what was a smaller version of the original type (albeit NEMO... &c.) part way through the run the style changed to a more chunky serif face which has continued to the present date.)
For 1990 I have two examples with the Welsh leek reverse. One would easily pass as genuine in the hand, but under magnification the detail is not quite deep enough. The edge lettering (correct) is good - too good -and once more the coin looks as if it is newly minted. The second one has a granular finish and although the edge lettering is correct it is crudely executed.
I don't think that many forgers have any interest in making the coins they produce technically accurate. Generally most seem to make a reasonable attempt, for them it is just a lucrative business and the aesthetics are irrelevant provided the finished product is accepted by the man (or woman) in the street who in general does not scrutinise each and every coin (as we do!).