Trade dollar, chop marked questions

spyglassdesign

This trade dollar is identified as ngc Unc chop marked. I'm wondering what pcgs might grade it? Would they potentially straight grade it noting the chops? I'm not sure what's going on to the left of Ms Liberty... Could that be considered damage, or a possible messed up chop?

What's your thoughts on how pcgs would handle this coin if attempted to cross?

FYI not my coin but is under consideration. I like the toning and usually I avoid chopped or counter stamped coins but this one is a cc and the chops aren't overly distracting to me.

lermish

It all depends on how well Goldberg imaged the coin. They seem to think it's a 63 and at least from the pictures that is within the realm of reason.

Assuming it's a straight graded coin, no cleaning or surface issues, PCGS will straight grade with chop marks. The chops are considered a variety.

slider23

If anyone has crossed a chopped marked NGC holder to a straight grade PCGS, I sure would like to see before and after photos.

slider23

The damage left of miss Liberty looks like the reverser pineapple shape chop showing through on the obverse.

spyglassdesign

@slider23 said:
The damage left of miss Liberty looks like the reverser pineapple shape chop showing through on the obverse.

Ah I see it now 👍

ChopmarkedTrades

PCGS assigns straight numerical grades to chopmarked Trade Dollars assuming no other issues, with unique PCGS numbers compared to their unmarked counterparts; for instance, this coin would be PCGS number 87035, but an unmarked 74-CC would be 7035.

Numerical grading of chopmarked Trade Dollars at PCGS is relatively conservative at the moment compared to prior years, and NGC tends to be a bit more forgiving of condition issues with these, particularly hairlines. I've crossed several chopped T$s from NGC UNC holders to PCGS, and they've landed everywhere from 58 to 62 for me personally, though some (particularly ANACS UNC holders) have gone as high as the top possible grade at PCGS (64; chopmarked Gem T$s currently aren't recognized even if the detail is there).

lermish

@slider23 said:
If anyone has crossed a chopped marked NGC holder to a straight grade PCGS, I sure would like to see before and after photos.

Probably best to do them raw but I managed to cross a nice but not spectacular 74-S and a very scarce 73CC.

lermish

@ChopmarkedTrades said:

Numerical grading of chopmarked Trade Dollars at PCGS is relatively conservative at the moment compared to prior years, and NGC tends to be a bit more forgiving of condition issues with these, particularly hairlines.

This is very, very much accurate.

Also, often but not always, NGC will detail a coin for chopmarks but not necessarily list other detail issues like cleaning, environmental damage, etc.

davewesen

To get the PCGS chopmark grade, do you have to pay for variety attribution or else it will be details?

I have one that came from a details ANACS photocert, but can not remember how I submitted it.

spyglassdesign

@davewesen said:
To get the PCGS chopmark grade, do you have to pay for variety attribution or else it will be details?

I wouldn't think so but hopefully someone will chime in with knowledge.

spyglassdesign

@lermish said:

@slider23 said:
If anyone has crossed a chopped marked NGC holder to a straight grade PCGS, I sure would like to see before and after photos.

Probably best to do them raw but I managed to cross a nice but not spectacular 74-S and a very scarce 73CC.

What did pcgs grade them?

lermish

@davewesen said:
To get the PCGS chopmark grade, do you have to pay for variety attribution or else it will be details?

No, they will straight grade it (assuming it is deserving) but will not make mention of the chops if you don't pay for variety attribution. (In theory. I have gotten the attribution on a couple inadvertently without paying for it)

The 73-cc is xf40. I think it should be a 50 or 53. The 74-s is AU55 which is reasonable although I do think 58 is probably more accurate.

spyglassdesign

Well I missed out anyways, but good to know for future re pcgs grading of chopped trades!

slider23

What did the coin sell for?

spyglassdesign

@slider23 said:
What did the coin sell for?

$1,450 + BP or about $1,800. Good deal at 62+ but less not so much.

Rampage

PCGS straight-graded my chopmark Trade dollar a number of years ago. It was graded AU55 Chopmark.

slider23

@spyglassdesign said:

@slider23 said:
What did the coin sell for?

$1,450 + BP or about $1,800. Good deal at 62+ but less not so much.

I am at AU 58 at best.

spyglassdesign

@slider23 said:

@spyglassdesign said:

@slider23 said:
What did the coin sell for?

$1,450 + BP or about $1,800. Good deal at 62+ but less not so much.

I am at AU 58 at best.

NGC disagrees 😉 it's Unc but the question was where in the spectrum. Someone pointed out that they rarely if ever give out 65 so that leaves 60 to 64. 60 to 61 would have been a reasonable deal, 62+ would have been a better deal. 63 or 64 = a steal.

lermish

My experience is anecdotal but I've submitted 6 NGC holdered chopmarked trade dollars to PCGS in the last year. Every single one has come back one to two levels lower (UNC to AU or XF, AU to XF).

Those pictures make the coin look pretty fantastic and certainly a 62 or 63 would be within range but pictures can be deceiving and PCGS has been pretty tight on chopmarked dollars compared to prior years.

spyglassdesign

@lermish said:
My experience is anecdotal but I've submitted 6 NGC holdered chopmarked trade dollars to PCGS in the last year. Every single one has come back one to two levels lower (UNC to AU or XF, AU to XF).

Those pictures make the coin look pretty fantastic and certainly a 62 or 63 would be within range but pictures can be deceiving and PCGS has been pretty tight on chopmarked dollars compared to prior years.

Yeah I guess they have to protect their bottom line now more so with those guarantees now that they are a larger corporation. But, good to know!

Bullsitter

I sold this one a few years ago.

ricko

Here is mine... Had it for a long time....Cheers, RickO

ricko

Almost forgot the TruView.... Cheers, RickO

Cougar1978

Would keep as is not be worried about it. Agree with the grade. Not somebody who would buy a chop marked TD anyway. Prefer that description vs some numerical grade possibly details description.

Your coin Looks nice for one. Would spend that cross money on something like a Mexico Slabbed PCGS MS 69 1 oz Onza.

TPRC

I don't think I have pictures, but I purchased an NGC details 74-cc chopmarked piece from a Heritage or Stacks auction a few years ago because I thought it was unc. I graded it 2 shot 3 and sent it to our hosts where it graded 64. That was tied for top of the heap back then; however, in fact, it was no better than 3rd best as there were 2 nicer coins of that grade. I think TradeDollarNut started a discussion on it as he had the nicest 74-cc chopmarked dollar known, I think, but I cannot fully remember.
It is difficult to tell from your pics, but I suspect that the "damage" you refer to is just the other side of the chop. Also, from the pic, the piece looks MS to me, so I would encourage you to submit it.

TPRC

I think this was the coin I purchased.

https://coins.ha.com/itm/trade-dollars/silver-and-related-dollars/1874-cc-t-1-chopmarked-ngc-details-unc-ngc-census-0-0-pcgs-population-2-39-pcgs-87035-/a/1251-10045.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515

Here is the coin after I graded it at our hosts.

https://www.pcgs.com/cert/83995474

I no longer own the coin.

Edited to add: Warning- I don't know how anyone can buy a coin like this without seeing it in-hand.

Cougar1978

The 1874CC Dollar shows $2875 MS60. Per Coins Magazine - NN Coin Market.

spyglassdesign

@Cougar1978 said:
The 1874CC Dollar shows $2875 MS60. Per Coins Magazine - NN Coin Market.

I was going by the data from coinfacts and the recent auctions they follow. Either way, it's someone else's now!

Cougar1978

A similar piece went for $1860 at auction per coin facts but was graded NGC Unc Details. As far as how I would price such a piece (op coin) probably just cost plus. But if the buyer bought that one at $1860 then marked up 50pct price wb abt $2800 starting price - negotiation / that’s close to the NN MS60 Coin Market price of $2875.

My question - would he be able get all the money (say 2800) from his table at a show?

DDR

I purchased this one as NGC UNC, cracked it out and it came back as PCGS MS-62. Coin has super eye appeal.

DDR

@TPRC below is a TrueView of Bruce Morelan's @tradedollarnut 74-CC in PCGS MS-64 which you mentioned. I purchased it from him a number of years ago as part of a larger deal.

spyglassdesign

@DDR said:
I purchased this one as NGC UNC, cracked it out and it came back as PCGS MS-62. Coin has super eye appeal.

Very nice!

TPRC

@DDR said:,
@TPRC below is a TrueView of Bruce Morelan's @tradedollarnut 74-CC in PCGS MS-64 which you mentioned. I purchased it from him a number of years ago as part of a larger deal.

That's it. Clearly a superior coin to mine even from photos. There was another one that we collectively agreed was also superior to the coin I owned. My coin had a 64 reverse, but the obverse, as I said was not nearly as clean as the one pictured. Mine got a bump for originality, but I still thought of it as a 63 coin - tops! Congratulations on the acquisition.

TennesseeDave

I have submitted several Chopmarked Trade dollars and have never paid for variety attribution. I don't know, but they may have changed that since I last sent any in.

lermish

@TennesseeDave said:
I have submitted several Chopmarked Trade dollars and have never paid for variety attribution. I don't know, but they may have changed that since I last sent any in.

It could be that I got some sort of a hard ass but on one of my recent submissions I had to go toe-to-toe with customer service because the coins were sent back to me with the normal, non-chopped PCGS numbers and they said I had not marked Variety Attribution so they wouldn't do it by default.

But I've also submitted (prior to that) where they automatically attributed the chops without extra charge.

So, I dunno. Now I just pay for the attribution because it is not worth the hassle and additional months of waiting in case they don't attribute the chops.

ChopmarkedTrades

It shouldn't be a variety attribution, but you do need to submit them under the correct PCGS numbers (for chopmarked rather than unmarked Trade Dollars).

spyglassdesign

@ChopmarkedTrades said:
It shouldn't be a variety attribution, but you do need to submit them under the correct PCGS numbers (for chopmarked rather than unmarked Trade Dollars).

Good to know. I'll keep that in mind if I have the opportunity.

DDR

I've submitted scores of chopmarked Trade Dollars to PCGS and have never marked nor paid for variety attribution.

lermish

It seems like I am the only one who was told to mark variety attribution and who has received back coins without the chopmark designation (despite using the correct chopped PCGS#). So they have just been chiseling me for an extra $18 a coin. Very frustrating.

Ntwillia10

@lermish said:
It seems like I am the only one who was told to mark variety attribution and who has received back coins without the chopmark designation (despite using the correct chopped PCGS#). So they have just been chiseling me for an extra $18 a coin. Very frustrating.

I just ran into this issue with my recent submission of four chopmarked trade dollars in NGC and ANACS holders for express crossover and ended up at a different but similarly frustrating place. I had submitted all four with the correct PCGS number specific to the chop mark (ie 87032), and those that crossed ended up without the Chop Mark designation and the standard PCGS number (ie 7032).

Unfortunately, I’m not surprised. After my coins were entered as received, they were marked as a Problem Order and I got this email (after waiting a couple days for a reply):

“We would like to know if you wanted the variety service add-on as some of these coins may have variety, The variety add-on service is $20 per coin, if you would like this to be added we would need your authorization, or if you would like to proceed without it.”

I replied “No, I do not want to add the Variety Service Add-On. My understanding and experience is that PCGS provides the Chop Mark attribution by default for eligible US Trade Dollar submissions without any Add-On Service.”

Frustrating that they inconsistently interpret Chop Mark designation as a variety requiring an additional charge for trade dollars. I of course also flagged this to Customer Service within an hour of the grades posting when I noticed the 7032 PCGS coin number (see cert https://www.pcgs.com/cert/47363967 ) and they did not do anything about it, so now that they have left PCGS, no doubt I will be expected to pay for another submission to get this rectified.

spyglassdesign

@Ntwillia10 once customer service gets back to you, chances are they will have you send it back as a mechanical error, assuming they agree with your assessment. Mechanical errors are usually paid both ways by them.

lermish

@Ntwillia10 said:

@lermish said:
It seems like I am the only one who was told to mark variety attribution and who has received back coins without the chopmark designation (despite using the correct chopped PCGS#). So they have just been chiseling me for an extra $18 a coin. Very frustrating.

I just ran into this issue with my recent submission of four chopmarked trade dollars in NGC and ANACS holders for express crossover and ended up at a different but similarly frustrating place. I had submitted all four with the correct PCGS number specific to the chop mark (ie 87032), and those that crossed ended up without the Chop Mark designation and the standard PCGS number (ie 7032).

Unfortunately, I’m not surprised. After my coins were entered as received, they were marked as a Problem Order and I got this email (after waiting a couple days for a reply):

“We would like to know if you wanted the variety service add-on as some of these coins may have variety, The variety add-on service is $20 per coin, if you would like this to be added we would need your authorization, or if you would like to proceed without it.”

I replied “No, I do not want to add the Variety Service Add-On. My understanding and experience is that PCGS provides the Chop Mark attribution by default for eligible US Trade Dollar submissions without any Add-On Service.”

Frustrating that they inconsistently interpret Chop Mark designation as a variety requiring an additional charge for trade dollars. I of course also flagged this to Customer Service within an hour of the grades posting when I noticed the 7032 PCGS coin number (see cert https://www.pcgs.com/cert/47363967 ) and they did not do anything about it, so now that they have left PCGS, no doubt I will be expected to pay for another submission to get this rectified.

I'm sorry to hear that but not particularly surprised. Unfortunately cert verification is down right now so I can't view your coin but look forward to it.

In the 8 months since this post I have embarked on a variety set so I have backed into having the varieties being a positive rather than a negative. But I still yearn for a consistent policy and experience.

Ntwillia10

@spyglassdesign said:
@Ntwillia10 once customer service gets back to you, chances are they will have you send it back as a mechanical error, assuming they agree with your assessment. Mechanical errors are usually paid both ways by them.

Thanks Spyglass as always. I would be good with that. Fingers crossed!

The other surprise on this order was that, of the four coins, they DNC’d two even though my minimum crossover grade was Details. I’ll be curious to see if there’s a 83, 86, 90, 96, or 99 code on the sticker when I get the box in the next day or two. Neither NGC nor ANACS had noted any Details problems aside from the chops. Will post pics when they get back.

Ntwillia10

I'm sorry to hear that but not particularly surprised. Unfortunately cert verification is down right now so I can't view your coin but look forward to it.

Nothing very exciting condition/variety-wise, but some tougher dates for my set.

1873-CC (1.0 mm wide), purchased raw, submitted to PCGS and returned Authenticity Unverifiable, submitted to ANACS and returned VF Details Chopmarked Cleaned Bent, re-submitted to PCGS for crossover and returned VF Details Cleaned.

1873-S purchased raw, sent first to ANACS and returned XF-45 Details Chopmarked, submitted to PCGS and crossed XF Details Cleaned :-(

Two didn’t cross: a second 1873-S in a NGC VF Details Chopmarked holder and a 1874-CC in an ANACS XF-45 Details Chop Marks holder.

ChopmarkedTrades

@Ntwillia10 said:

I'm sorry to hear that but not particularly surprised. Unfortunately cert verification is down right now so I can't view your coin but look forward to it.

Nothing very exciting condition/variety-wise, but some tougher dates for my set.

1873-CC (1.0 mm wide), purchased raw, submitted to PCGS and returned Authenticity Uncerifiable, submitted to ANACS and returned VF Details Chopmarked Cleaned Bent, re-submitted to PCGS for crossover and returned VF Details Cleaned.

1873-S purchased raw, sent first to ANACS and returned XF-45 Details Chopmarked, submitted to PCGS and crossed XF Details Cleaned :-(

Two didn’t cross: a second 1873-S in a NGC VF Details Chopmarked holder and a 1874-CC in an ANACS XF-45 Details Chop Marks holder.

Both scarce dates!

lermish

@Ntwillia10 said:

I'm sorry to hear that but not particularly surprised. Unfortunately cert verification is down right now so I can't view your coin but look forward to it.

1873-CC (1.0 mm wide), purchased raw, submitted to PCGS and returned Authenticity Unverifiable, submitted to ANACS and returned VF Details Chopmarked Cleaned Bent, re-submitted to PCGS for crossover and returned VF Details Cleaned.

I tried this exact strategy with my 73-P but PCGS didn't like it the second time either so in the ANACS it stayed.

I like both of your coins, all of the 73s are tough!

Ntwillia10

I tried this exact strategy with my 73-P but PCGS didn't like it the second time either so in the ANACS it stayed.

I like both of your coins, all of the 73s are tough!

Oh man!! I was wondering how that 73-P was coming along. Ugh.

fiftysevener

Damaged coins may have a place as a historical bookmark but not as solid numismatic material. Seems like 9 of 10 Trades offered for sale are Details or Chopmarked.
This Chopmarked stuff (either NGC or PCGS) goes against the TPGs surface preservation guidlines. In this day and age even more absurdities will be showcased if money can be made. A chopmark on the obverse means DAMAGE on the reverse.
My Trades will only be original straight graded coins and very scarce as such.

lermish

@fiftysevener said:
Damaged coins may have a place as a historical bookmark but not as solid numismatic material. Seems like 9 of 10 Trades offered for sale are Details or Chopmarked.
This Chopmarked stuff (either NGC or PCGS) goes against the TPGs surface preservation guidlines. In this day and age even more absurdities will be showcased if money can be made. A chopmark on the obverse means DAMAGE on the reverse.
My Trades will only be original straight graded coins and very scarce as such.

Absurdities like you coming into a thread specifically for chopmarked collectors to bash how we like to collect? I've got news for you, none of your coins in perfect condition as they were the moment they were minted. They have bag marks or circulation wear or any number of other issues. And deciding that what a TPG has to say about "surface preservation guidelines" is like the gospel handed down from heaven is beyond absurd. How did people collect before TPGs?

By the way, I can guarantee you that I have several straight graded chopmarked coins (and CAC approved if you care about that) that are MUCH more scarce than any trade dollars you have. So I guess you are just collecting common trash?

Pound sand.

@Ntwillia10 Here's a pic...unfortunately my ugliest coin by far. I guess I'll wait 5-10 years to upgrade and then flip it

spyglassdesign

@lermish I agree whole heartedly. Calling what someone else might like as having no solid numismatic character is wild.

As an aside, I don't think that coin looks ugly personally... granted I haven't seen it in hand but from the pictures it has some good things going for it. Sure it has the strike on the rear, but it seems to have strong strike characteristics. I like it, personally.

lermish

Thanks @spyglassdesign , appreciate it but I think that picture obscures how badly it's been polished. I'm not the biggest fan of buying something just to fill a hole but the 73-P can easily go 5+ years without showing up on the open market; coin facts has no auction records period. So I got it anyway 😐

.