Unfamiliar PCGS Slab
JW77
Posts: 492 ✭✭✭✭✭
Never seen this label before, and the cert # comes up invalid. Anyone familiar with this slab. Decent looking Saint!
Pics are off of a current GC auction.
0
Comments
Hummmm…..
Strike does seems flat around hair, face.
What does the grade 89 represent?
Looks like a bulk submission for a TV, magazine, or newspaper promotion where PCGS only grades them as "Brilliant Uncirculated", verifies the authenticity, and then slabs them with a special label. In bulk, this is less expensive than getting a numerical grade. The target audience of the promotion are non-collectors who want some old gold and wouldn't understand numerical grades.
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
Cannot help with the invalid cert.
However, a quick search revealed the following with a similar label:
~ 1904 Liberty Head
~ 1922 Saint-Gaudens
~ 1924 Saint-Gaudens
~ Random Year Saint-Gaudens
FWIW, I could not verify the the 1904 Liberty Head via cert number.
Interesting, good to know!
thanks
My research shows 89 = Genuine uncirculated.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1077444/code-89-what-does-this-mean
(Edit to add)
https://www.pcgs.com/news/whats-a-pcgs-no-grade-coin#:~:text=Coins that receive a “No,on the Sheldon grading scale.
USAF (Ret.) 1985 - 2005. E-4B Aircraft Maintenance Crew Chief and Contracting Officer.
My current Registry sets:
✓ Everyman Mint State Carson City Morgan Dollars (1878 – 1893)
✓ Everyman Mint State Lincoln Cents (1909 – 1958)
✓ Morgan Dollar GSA Hoard (1878 – 1891)
I don't know if PCGS has a customer advocacy group or representative, but it's about time that us customers of PCGS demand that PCGS publish a comprehensive guide to all of the slabs, labels, and designations that they've issued over the years.
This is a prime example. The PCGS customer who slabbed the coin in this thread is likely to realize a lower resale price because no one can easily find an authoritative source to validate and interpret this certification. PCGS OWES their customers to provide references that allow collectors to know what they are getting and why it may or may not be special. This is essential to proving and showing the value of PCGS slabs, labels, and designations and it hurts their customers to keep this information hidden.
THERE IS NO REASON WHY WE SHOULD BE GUESSING ABOUT THE VALIDITY OF A PCGS LABEL!
This is not the only instance where this is an issue. This is also an issue with designations such as "Early Issue" slabs which are not explained anywhere on PCGS website and we deserve a full public explanation that First Strike is not limited to coins released by the mint within the first 30 days but that it also applies every time the coin is re-issued in another product offering from the mint. I don't understand why PCGS is so secretive with this information which is really doing its customer base a disservice.
I might be way off with this but I'll say it anyway
Maybe the coin was submitted for grading and for some reason it got body bagged.
So the owner resubmits the coin for this lable that only says the coin is real but it doesn't assign a grade.
Possiable?
Mike
My Indians
Danco Set
@Lakesammman
to see if he knows....
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
It is an APMEX exclusive label.
Source: https://www.apmex.com/product/150377/20-saint-gaudens-double-eagle-bu-pcgs-random-prospector-label
I do have the same issue with the gold foil SS Central America Labels. You have to call customer service and give them the SSCA # on the $20 libs to obtain the cert # that can be verified and entered into your inventory or PCGS registry set. It would be very easy to create a cross reference table in the software to enable collectors to verify without going through the hassle.
And calling CS is no longer a viable option. Unless you get lucky you now have to wait for hours on hold or wait for a callback. There are no signs that PCGS is planning to hire enough staff to get back to where they were when you could call and talk to someone within a few minutes.
Well, I learned something here.... Thanks for the inputs from the members. Cheers, RickO
Bravo!
The label in the slab is quite attractive, but we should never have to guess as to the authenticity of any PCGS slab.
No.
Custom labels for bulk submissions.
TLDR
please note that the other examples shown are easily verified by cert #. There is some problem, possibly legitimate, with the cert # on that coin and the 1904
Yes, but in this case, the cert number cannot be verified on the PCGS website and PCGS has deviated from their standard of (coin number).(grade)/(cert number) because in lieu of the grade it says (89). 89 is not a code listed on https://www.pcgs.com/grades
Edited to add:
Why this is an issue is because of this, I would never consider buying this slab which is bad and sad for the seller because assuming others think the way I do, the seller will inevitably realize lower value which is entirely unnecessary if PCGS would just provide this basic information for their customers about their own products.
it's about time that us customers of PCGS demand.......................
Everyone should know the difference between a demand and a request.
And it is time to demand this, not request this because requests are falling on deaf ears. It is not a big ask. It is also not unreasonable that PCGS publish a guide for its products that the entire industry relies upon and that they supposedly stand behind. They are doing their customers and the industry a disservice by keeping this information about their products hidden and secret or otherwise impossible or difficult to obtain.
PCGS customers should demand to be able to verify and understand any and all PCGS slabs and designations without talking to customer service.
I suggest you demand away and see how much progress that makes. Maybe you should start a thread here that starts out something like:
--- "We, the loyal customers of PCGS, immediately DEMAND that PCGS publishes a list of.................."
I will wait for that thread, but I won't hold my breath and I wouldn't be one to sign it, either.
I agree the label is very attractive; but what exactly does Brilliant Uncirculated Mean. I was under the impression that it is synonymous for MS65, but if this was a MS65 coin why not have a numerical grade to maximize value. Does the use of this term without a numerical grade cause confusion and lower value, or do the knowledgeable graders take advantage of the lack of clarity. How would you grade this coin? Looks pretty nice to me except for what i believe is a weak strike.
No, "gem uncirculated" is MS65. BU is just unc. I would not expect anything more than a 62
Brilliant means it's bright and lustrous. Uncirculated means it doesn't show any wear.
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
Thanks for clarifying for me, but also confirms the confusion for unsophisticated buyers (maybe I'm in that group
)
First of all, I have made the requests and PCGS doesn't care. I suppose I was never talking to the right people about this either though, which is I why I asked if there was a customer panel.
Second, why don't you care? A proper guide strengthens the PCGS brand and value. Why would you support the status quo which is people wondering if valid PCGS slabs are legitimate and wondering what some designations mean?
@PCGS_Moderator
There is a PCGS-certified coin currently up for auction at 'Great Collections' (i.e., GC Item #1353688). The PCGS Cert Number, 36070482, CANNOT be verified at www.PCGS.com/cert. This is the response:
What is the best way to officially alert PCGS to this issue, or would you prefer that GC be contacted?
I did send GC an inquiry yesterday on this item . I have not received a response yet, but after reviewing some of the responses above my guess is it is all legit.
@MetroD Thanks for reaching out.
First off, this coin is authentic.
Some of these coins will not populate correctly through cert verification for various reasons.
For example, if a coin is sent in to be graded, the cert link for that coin will not be accessible for the time it is going through the grading process.
For more specifics on this issue, please reach out to our customer service department Monday - Friday 7:00am - 5:00pm Pacific Time. In the United States call toll free at (800) 447-8848. Outside the United States call (949) 833-0600.
Or you can send in a message here: https://www.pcgs.com/contactus
Thanks
Well, you could page da man himself... @ianrussell
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
Interesting that the PCGS logo is not molded into the lower right front of the holder.
“In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." - Thomas Jefferson
My digital cameo album 1950-64 Cameos - take a look!
It is there. I did a screen grab on the OP slab and then messed with the coloring some to make it stand out more.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=_KWVk0XeB9o - Ruby Starr (from 'Go Jim Dandy') Piece Of My Heart
.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=D0FPxuQv2ns - Ruby Starr (from 'Go Jim Dandy') Maybe I'm Amazed
RLJ 1958 - 2023
It is now possible to verify the PCGS cert number for the 'coin/slab' in the OP. Link
So this indignation expressed by some replies is a moot point since there's no monkey-business going on, just the machinery of a bulk submission working out at the Factory. Now I can sleep at night!!
I could verify on my laptop, but it still comes up invalid on my Iphone. Obviously a genuine slab as indicated by moderator and now verified, probably a software snafu with PCGS. I hope this discussion elevates the hammer price for the individual who listed the coin with GC. I like it!
No. The grading code of (89) still remains unexplained in any official publication by PCGS.
[...]
Apologies to the OP for the tangent.
Interesting.
Consider the following "Early Issue" coin currently for sale on eBay.
Source: https://www.ebay.com/itm/275412983476
Despite the "Early Issue" designation, the PCGS cert verification indicates that it is "First Strike".
Source: https://www.pcgs.com/cert/35789718
So does the PCGS coin number.
Source: https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/2018-w-1-burnished-silver-eagle-first-strike/675871/70
I am NOT a label expert. That said, I had no idea that PCGS was using "Early Issue" in lieu of "First Strike" on certain labels. To me, the use of different terminology on contemporary items could be confusing to the customer base.
Exactly. This sows uncertainty and doubt as there are probably some potential buyers that will see this, run the cert, and then pass on it because of the inconsistency resulting in lower value for PCGS customers. While it would be best not to have the inconsistency, a simple entry on the designations web page to explain all of the nuances of the Early Issues designation would go a long way to resolving this. Again, this is not a big ask nor is it unreasonable.
@ProofCollection said: The grading code of (89) still remains unexplained in any official publication by PCGS
Apparently the meaning of that code is known, check the thread linked below.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1077444/code-89-what-does-this-mean
Here is where it's explained, though this may not satisfy everyone. Where the grade should be it lists the code and its meaning.
Unfortunately for this 1927 $20, it has some high point friction (eagle's breast/neck and central portions of Miss Liberty). Her face is struck weak. In the old days this would have been called "Commercial Uncirculated." Gold dealers call 'em AU/BU as the pricing is pretty much the same either way.
https://pcgs.com/photograde#/20Saint/Grades
Such a guide would be nice, but since we're talking about them investing finite resources to do that, I'd rank it well behind improvements in turnaround, variety attribution, and customer service responsiveness.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
It's known but there should be an authoritative and easy-to-find source or reference. Why is everyone so content to have to dig and research basic information that should be published?
I would disagree. Maintaining the strength and value of the name and brand ranks first priority. As far as the other items, they aren't hurting for business so PCGS just needs to find the balance of what price they need to charge to deliver the service level the customers expect for the price.
I will also add that PCGS should stop issuing new designations and labels and codes until they have the resources to properly document it for the public.
Respectfully, not everyone frequents this forum. (Only the really cool people do.
)
PCGS has an existing page where they describe their "no grades". Link
So, they clearly consider a reference for these types of codes to be value-added.
As such, IMHO, it would not be unreasonable to request that they add an entry for "genuine".
I will send a request to CS via e-mail, and ask that they consider adding an entry to the "no grades" reference for "genuine". Stay tuned for their response.
What am I missing here?
The verification failed when the post began on4/17, but as a result of this discussion and moderator involvement, PCGS has corrected the issue and all is now good!
Simply another facet of the counterfeit detection issue that is 'near and dear' to you.
People, to varying degrees, rely upon the PCGS 'cert verification' to establish authenticity. Contrary to the cases you normally highlight, this item was legitimate, but could not initially be verified via the cert number.
I said that I would contact PCGS CS, and ask them to consider adding code "89" to the existing 'PCGS Grading Standards'. This is the follow-up.
It took nearly two weeks and multiple e-mail exchanges, but I have an answer. PCGS will not be adding code "89" to the grading standards, because it is "mainly used" for bulk submitters or dealers, as opposed to other customers.
Can't say that I agree with, or even understand, this policy. In my mind, 'bulk/dealer' submissions end up in the same marketplace as "Collectors Club" submissions. As such, it is rational to include all of the possible codes in the grading standards, regardless of the original submitter.
I could have told you that would be the response.
They are so incredibly myopic on this issue, focusing only on the person/entity submitting the coin and not even being concerned about the collector trying to find out what their slabs mean and if they are legitimate. They don't understand that their customer isn't just the bulk submitter, it's everyone who will eventually own one of these coins. I don't see how they can dismiss the responsibility to stand behind and support every slab they produce but they do.
And the silly thing is, we're not asking for anything more than a small/quick text update. That small update will add value to every one of these slab, and the absence of that information removes value. So silly.
The effort you put in is much appreciated even if the final decision is less than satisfactory.