Options
PCGS Guarantee Resubmission Results - 1907 $10 Indian PCGS AU58
illini420
Posts: 11,466 ✭✭✭✭✭
As some of you may recall, I recently sold a 1907 $10 Indian PCGS AU58 to another forum member. The coin was then submitted by that forum member to CAC who rejected the coin because they said the coin had been puttied. Ultimately, I bought the coin back from the other forum member and submitted it at the Long Beach show to PCGS in a Guarantee Resubmission and let them know it was rejected by CAC for putty on the form. I was charged $25 to submit the coin (plus handling and shipping) but was told I would be refunded the $25 fee in the event they agreed the coin had a problem.
Before sending to PCGS via Guarantee Resubmission I took the following photos of the coin. I apologize as it seems my white balance may have been off just a touch on these, still learning the new camera:
Was expecting the guarantee review process to take quite awhile based on what I've heard from others so I was surprised to get the coin back in the mail this week. The coin came back in a new holder and is still graded PCGS AU58. The coin no longer has the toning it had and the coin appears a little brighter overall. It still looks like a nice coin to me and looks like a decent AU58. No information regarding what was done to the coin by PCGS was provided to me so I can only speculate, but it's clear to me that something was done by them.
Here are the photos of the coin after sending to PCGS via Guarantee Resubmission:
I did call PCGS to find out if they could tell me what was done to the coin and they had no information for me. I also tried to confirm if I was going to be charged the $25 fee since it was clear the coin had a problem and they fixed it and to my surprise I was told I would be charged (and my credit card has since been charged). I was told by customer service the fee is only waived in the event the coin downgrades! Not exactly what I was told when I submitted the coin. That may be their policy, but I find that a little troubling as there seemingly was an issue with this coin and they seemingly agreed there was an issue as they cracked it out, fixed it and reholdered it. Had I not done the guarantee resubmission, there would be a problem coin in their holder still out on the market. But will dealers really send their potentially problematic coins into PCGS to get reviewed if they are going to have to pay to get those problem coins fixed in the event PCGS still thinks the grade is ok after they do their work? Not sure that is the right incentive to get folks to get problematic coins fixed.
Anyways, glad to get the coin back in the same grade even though I had to pay for them to fix it and even though the coin is now worth quite a bit less since gold has crashed
Mike
Edited to add that PCGS Customer Service contacted me today (6/28) and I was told that I would be getting the $25 fee refunded as a one-time courtesy
Before sending to PCGS via Guarantee Resubmission I took the following photos of the coin. I apologize as it seems my white balance may have been off just a touch on these, still learning the new camera:
Was expecting the guarantee review process to take quite awhile based on what I've heard from others so I was surprised to get the coin back in the mail this week. The coin came back in a new holder and is still graded PCGS AU58. The coin no longer has the toning it had and the coin appears a little brighter overall. It still looks like a nice coin to me and looks like a decent AU58. No information regarding what was done to the coin by PCGS was provided to me so I can only speculate, but it's clear to me that something was done by them.
Here are the photos of the coin after sending to PCGS via Guarantee Resubmission:
I did call PCGS to find out if they could tell me what was done to the coin and they had no information for me. I also tried to confirm if I was going to be charged the $25 fee since it was clear the coin had a problem and they fixed it and to my surprise I was told I would be charged (and my credit card has since been charged). I was told by customer service the fee is only waived in the event the coin downgrades! Not exactly what I was told when I submitted the coin. That may be their policy, but I find that a little troubling as there seemingly was an issue with this coin and they seemingly agreed there was an issue as they cracked it out, fixed it and reholdered it. Had I not done the guarantee resubmission, there would be a problem coin in their holder still out on the market. But will dealers really send their potentially problematic coins into PCGS to get reviewed if they are going to have to pay to get those problem coins fixed in the event PCGS still thinks the grade is ok after they do their work? Not sure that is the right incentive to get folks to get problematic coins fixed.
Anyways, glad to get the coin back in the same grade even though I had to pay for them to fix it and even though the coin is now worth quite a bit less since gold has crashed
Mike
Edited to add that PCGS Customer Service contacted me today (6/28) and I was told that I would be getting the $25 fee refunded as a one-time courtesy
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
0
Comments
Too bad they couldn't throw you a bone as to what they did and why they did it.
You didn't resubmit it for conservation, right? Just Guarantee.
I like both the before and after.
"If I say something in the woods and my wife isn't there to hear it.....am I still wrong?"
My Washington Quarter Registry set...in progress
I had a similar problem with a 12P some years ago and the same thing happened. I got charged when the coin came back in the same grade. There were a LOT of $10 Indians subjected to the putty treatment it seems.
jom
My Ebay Store
<< <i>So they must have done a conservation/restoration?
Too bad they couldn't throw you a bone as to what they did and why they did it.
You didn't resubmit it for conservation, right? Just Guarantee.
I like both the before and after. >>
I submitted it under "Guarantee Resubmission" on the regular form. Not conservation/restoration which I believe is an entirely separate form. But it's clear they conserved/restored the coin anyways and I'm surprised they'd do so without letting me know. I'm guessing I probably consented to them doing that somewhere in the fine print on the back of the submission form, but it's too tiny to read
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
It'd be interesting to know what/how they did what was done to it. I guess that's why they can charge for it whatever it is.
Too many positive BST transactions with too many members to list.
I really disagree with this policy. Is it new?
Nice coin it will find a home although I liked it better before the dip in the old style holder.
Basically the premium being asked for the coin initially was for the color, which came from putty. Thankfully there was nothing major under the putty.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>Sounds about right to me and I think pcgs treating and reholdering the coin for only 25$ is a deal. The part about the process that leaves a bad taste in my mouth is the person you originally sold it to expecting a refund after buying it. I would have and have told him to go to stick it for such behavior, add to that the gall to consider himself a "dealer".... Oh never mind
Nice coin it will find a home >>
It is NOT $25 that it cost him!!! $25 + shipping both ways + insurance both ways + time and hassel + shipping and insurance when he sold it to the other person + the drop in GOLD VALUE!....all of this to fix a PCGS error!
Your comment about $25 is pretty far off in my opinion. I would say it is closer to $100 + the drop in GOLD value...that is if you value your time at anything.
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
i said, "is this puttied?"
he looked at it and said, "yeah, but why do you care? it's au58!"
perhaps that sheds some light.
<< <i>i once showed a 1908 au58 $10 indian that i believed to be puttied to david hall at a pcgs show during the ask the expert thing he does.
i said, "is this puttied?"
he looked at it and said, "yeah, but why do you care? it's au58!"
perhaps that sheds some light. >>
That's sad and sounds very elitist! I could list dozens of reasons why someone would care.
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>Get that sticker yourself and capitalize further >>
Now just imagine if it gets a Gold sticker...
AnkurJ will be first in line begging to buy it again!
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Shouldn't have been holdered with putty.
Should have been handled at no charge.
You should have received an email and given the option of taking the grade guaranty or conserving and reholdering
The coin was OK at AU-58 the whole time. I agree with the comments attributed to David Hall.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
<< <i>I know I'm way into this thread, but I never heard of puttying coins. What is the purpose, and how does one tell? I've read every post, and it seems this is not a huge problem, especially since it can be reversed and restored, and while I feel original is best, I have some raw Indians and would like to know if this is an Indian problem, or can any coin be puttied? And again, what does this accomplish? >>
Putting is supposed to hide hairlines.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
a) the surfaces look identical-something that seems implausible with putty removal, since the idea behind puttying is to mask or change something- and
b) it looks like they simply dipped or washed it in something.
In the OP it was stated that PCGS would have advised if they saw a problem; puttying would obviously be considered a problem, so based on what occurred and seeing no physical differences before/after, it appears (to me at least) that the coin wasn't puttied and simply had some sort of copperish tone in a couple of areas that was removed by dipping of some sort. Agree? Disagree? Comments?
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
<< <i>I know I'm way into this thread, but I never heard of puttying coins. What is the purpose, and how does one tell? ........ And again, what does this accomplish? >>
Doug Winter Article on Doctored Gold
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
<< <i>After scrutinizing both the before and after pics, it seems to me that
a) the surfaces look identical-something that seems implausible with putty removal, since the idea behind puttying is to mask or change something- and
b) it looks like they simply dipped or washed it in something.
In the OP it was stated that PCGS would have advised if they saw a problem; puttying would obviously be considered a problem, so based on what occurred and seeing no physical differences before/after, it appears (to me at least) that the coin wasn't puttied and simply had some sort of copperish tone in a couple of areas that was removed by dipping of some sort. Agree? Disagree? Comments? >>
I think you might be on to something.
Coin Rarities Online
"I spoke with customer service this morning and color me annoyed...
I have to pay outbound and inbound shipping. $8 handling fee and another $25 for it to be taken care of. All in all $65 for their mistake. "
Successful Transactions With: JoeLewis, Mkman123, Harry779, Grote15, gdavis70, Kryptonitecomics
<< <i>After scrutinizing both the before and after pics, it seems to me that
a) the surfaces look identical-something that seems implausible with putty removal, since the idea behind puttying is to mask or change something- and
b) it looks like they simply dipped or washed it in something.
In the OP it was stated that PCGS would have advised if they saw a problem; puttying would obviously be considered a problem, so based on what occurred and seeing no physical differences before/after, it appears (to me at least) that the coin wasn't puttied and simply had some sort of copperish tone in a couple of areas that was removed by dipping of some sort. Agree? Disagree? Comments? >>
It looks acetone wasn't just used to remove the putty but it was also dipped.
Although I'm not a fan of dipped gold this example now has eye appeal which betters what's commonly seen in MS62 holders.
<< <i>I submitted an obviously puttied $10 IH and was also charged. It's just their police I guess. This was my post in my thread:
"I spoke with customer service this morning and color me annoyed...
I have to pay outbound and inbound shipping. $8 handling fee and another $25 for it to be taken care of. All in all $65 for their mistake. " >>
Wouldn't their guarantee cover this? It was their mistake after all.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>That is a bit odd that they would still charge you for the service even if they found a problem. I understand shipping and maybe their $8 handling fee but I would think that the $25 would be waved. Still looks like a nice coin. I wonder if J.A. would put a bean on it now. >>
They would only waive the $25 fee if the grade is reduced. Since the grade stayed the same after they did what they did, ya gotsta pay.
<< <i>
<< <i>I submitted an obviously puttied $10 IH and was also charged. It's just their police I guess. This was my post in my thread:
"I spoke with customer service this morning and color me annoyed...
I have to pay outbound and inbound shipping. $8 handling fee and another $25 for it to be taken care of. All in all $65 for their mistake. " >>
Wouldn't their guarantee cover this? It was their mistake after all. >>
That's what I would have thought and was pretty frustrated when it wasn't. Since it kept its grade I had to pay. Even though it was horribly puttied.
Successful Transactions With: JoeLewis, Mkman123, Harry779, Grote15, gdavis70, Kryptonitecomics
I agree the coin looks much better without the putty.
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
Edited to add that another benefit of this situation is that the coin is now in a newer edge-view holder. I know many of you don't like the edge-view holders on all coins, but on a $10 Indian it is awesome. One of the coolest parts of the $10 Indian design is the edge. The raised up stars are just awesome and it's great to be able to see those while the coin is slabbed
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
I guess in some ways I don't understand the angst and emotional suffering over a coin with only a couple hundred dollars worth of numismatic value. For your average circulated coin collector this might be a lot, but for people putting themselves out there as dealers, this sort of thing doesn't seem significant enough to warrant bringing it to everyone's attention for public judgment. If you multiply the number of people who have read this (factoring in lurkers) by the square root of the number of words written, and finally divide by the logarithm of the value of our collective time it doesn't add up.
Other thoughts:
- I'm no expert here, but isn't puttied gold easier to see long after its initial application? Shouldn't the grading service be given a little leeway for missing it the first time around?
- Why bother puttying an AU58, common date coin? Hardly seems worth the effort. It's not like someone was going to mistake this for an MS65.
- Despite my comments above regarding the trivial dollar amount, calling a person's integrity into question warrants a robust defense.
- In this case, the resubmission fees, shipping fees, and such make it illogical to have bothered fixing it.
- It looked like a nice coin before and it still does.
- I'm not so certain the original color ever came from the putty. It looks like natural toning to me. I'm guessing the coin was treated in a solvent and then dipped.
- The drop in the gold price isn't relevant. It had an equal chance to go up during the same period.
- Nice photos!
type2,CCHunter.
<< <i>- The drop in the gold price isn't relevant. It had an equal chance to go up during the same period. >>
Well, actually it was, since gold had already dropped significantly before the buyer decided he was entitled
to a refund.
If based only the photos, I'd have to agree. But I saw the coin in person at Long Beach, it looked much different that in the photo, and there's no doubt that it was puttied.
And for those of you that think you learned something from the images in this thread, forget about it.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
i said, "is this puttied?"
he looked at it and said, "yeah, but why do you care? it's au58!"
Sounds like HRH thought he was talking to a dealer, not a collector. That, or he just wasn't thinking. Happens to the best of us.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>For a $30 grading fee and a few cents of putty, in the mind of the coin doc this nice AU58 was probably worth taking a crack at for a MS61-62 grade. That would have provided a nice return, especially back in 2006-2010 when better type gold was much higher in price with fatter spreads. >>
The original slab was older than 2006 as a first GEN blue holder but with that being said I haven't heard solid proof that it was puttied other than the second hand account of a grader who never held the coin in hand out of the holder recanted by a fool, more than enough for reasonable doubt IMO. I am not sure PCGS didn't just dip it Just in case as it is easier than trying to convince collectors to the contrary most of the time.
<< <i>... I saw the coin in person at Long Beach, it looked much different that in the photo, and there's no doubt that it was puttied. >>
Well there you go then.
what we learned:
1) JA got it right
2) Putty is not a reimbursable issue IF PCGS can get it off w/o affecting grade.
i dunno, can't tell from a picture
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
It's my opinion, based on the bluish tinge of the cloudiness. (Again, I've seen the coin in person.) Perhaps something other than putty can impart the same look, but I'm reasonably comfortable with my call.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.