Why does PCGS *not* do PL designations on old gold?
Clackamas1
Posts: 1,689 ✭✭✭✭✭
Gold coins from the same era as Morgans can be PL. Here is a photo of a $20 Lib that is way more PL than the trueview. https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1868-20/8953
0
Comments
Gorgeous coin!
They do award PL to these coins albeit rarely. Maybe the mirrors are a little flat around the reverse lettering?
If not, you have a great eye, maybe you should send it in for reconsideration.
chopmarkedtradedollars.com
They view it as semi-proof like and not FULL proof like. Frustrating isn't it. However, I recently did a survey on this forum and the concensus was we don't need another coin designation.
PL and DMPL are not new designations. while they may be on that coin, if it is PL acknowledge the reality.
put the designation on any coin type that deserves it
They started designating a all regular series as PL a few years ago when Brett was president. The coin may have been graded before then and subsequently reholdered, PCGS could have missed it, or PCGS may have determined that the mirrors are not deep enough for a PL designation.
They do
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
It's a fairly recent cert number, so they were already doing PL when that one was sent in. Looking at the TrueView, the reverse looks to be less PL than the obverse. Gorgeous coin, though.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
I would like to see the reverse without the coinfacts glamour shot.
Great coin. Scarce date.
Incredible registry set.