Options
Really?!! Major auction house and TPG laziness #1
rampop
Posts: 13 ✭
First in a series. View this link attributed to NGC:
https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/5706/counterfeit-1856-flying-eagle-cent/
Highlighted by the image snippet attached. This was also published subsequently by Coinweek, giving credit of authorship of course to NGC, when in fact both could've just as well delegated the charm to Pewdeepie
One simple statement of fact in the article is wrong. Which is it?
1
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
You are the well-known "Ex-Pert" posting this discussion. Please share your knowledge with all of us. Thanks in advance!
The 6 was sculpted from a 7 not an 8? Correction. The comment about NGC.
I didn’t finish reading the article, after finding this misstatement (or typo):
“The most commonly seen counterfeit 1856 Flying Eagle Cents are actually altered date 1856 Flying Eagle Cents.”
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Just goes to show, we are humans.
bob
Could just be circular thinking.
Since you could call the counterfeit presented an "altered date 1856 FE cent", the sentence does make sense. It's just an ugly mind-bender.
As my high school English teacher would say, "Better choices are available".
I have a feeling that ISN'T what the OP was getting at, though. (Hard to generate anger based on that!?).
But unless he's claiming the presented coin is GENUINE, this thread is going to run out of steam in a big hurry....
I agree with you about the circular thinking and even considered editing my post, but decided not to. You’re likely also correct about the OP getting at something else.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
They talk about correct large letters in obverse motto. Where is the obverse motto ?
Hmmm...what does this have to do with an auction house?
yawn...
The only thing lazier than the auction house and TPG is the OP who seems to feel that actually completing a thought is optional
Looks like it's the first thread in a series, pointing out apparent laziness by either an auction house or a TPG, not necessarily both at the same time. #2 has already been posted, critiquing the grade an auction house gave to a raw coin.
Yes, I saw #2. I think I'm going to skip the rest of the series. Not worth my time to play guessing games over the occasional mistake. I don't pretend to be perfect like the OP.
I have a feeling any series of threads dedicated to pointing out TPG and auction house mistakes is going to be short lived.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Agreed. There's pretty much an error every week in an auction from a major. I fail to see a reason to get upset unless I'm the consignor.
I once consigned a coin to an auction that was the 2nd highest graded. Because it was newly graded, the auction company listed the coin as "0 in grade, 1 better". It made me laugh. I sold a pop zero coin! Beat that. LMAO
I’ll venture the same about the OP’s time on this forum.
Smitten with DBLCs.
@rampop Do we have a winner? I believe that what @fiftysevener is referring to is what we more commonly know as the obverse "legend".
Well now... moving right along... Is there any chance that @rampop might return and further add to his/her enigmatic OP?? Cheers, RickO
OMG!!!!!!!
OMG!!!!!!