1957 Franklin D/D (FS-501): What am I missing?

20cPR

Hi everyone, long term lurker and a collector (spent a lot of time with Morgans, now dabbling with Franklins).

I had been able to purchase a few bank rolls, including two 1957-Ds. Five of them had odd MMs and so I sent them off for variety attribution for the D/D FS-501. I knew when doing so expecting that only two (#1 and #3 in the attached) were "guaranteed", that #4 and #5 were likely a D/D not recognized by PCGS (PRM-002) and that one I didn't really have any idea (#2).

I got the grades back and surprise, none of them made it. I reached out to PCGS and was told, after sending an inquiry off to the grading departing (including sending photos of the coins in the slabs) that they would not reconsider their decision. In the center of the image are examples of the various RPMs from the Franklinlovers site for comparison
.

I understand that grading is subjective. I am truly struggling to understand though at least #1 and #3 did not receive the designation (especially since all of the markers are there). This is not so much a complaint about PCGS missing the variety (it is what is I guess) and more about my own learning (a painful bit of which I have learned in the deep dark recesses of Morgan VAMs too ;-).

Cheers -

tincup

Number 1 and number three sure look like they are notched... and D/D, but not sure if the RPM-001 without closer up photos. The others... not so much.

tincup

Sorry.... duplicate post.

20cPR

Here are zoomed in versions of #1 and #3

tincup

Variety Vista shows the variety has die scratches on the reverse... do your coins show these?

If PCGS will not reconsider, not much you can do. Win some, lose some.

CRHer700

Nos. 1&3 definitely appear to be the FS-501, and No.2 appears to show doubling, but it might be machine doubling.

20cPR

Hi @tincup - yes, they do. For #4 and #5, these both also show a little die clash under the nose (a baby booger clash) that is mentioned in the Franklinlovers narrative for the RPM-002, so I think those are sorted.

Aspie_Rocco

A former forum member and Franklin series expert asked me to share the following with you…
“
Hi 20¢Proof, I helped Brett Parrish with his terrific frnklnlvr.com site back when he was active with the Franklin series. I’ve been kicked off the PCGS forum several times so I am asking my good buddy Rocco to reply.

PCGS struggles with varieties. If you are a VAM guy I am certain you know this. It’s sad.

1 and # 3 are absolutely 100% FS-501. PCGS did miss the variety. The others are not. BTW in my experience (and I have made approximately 1/2 of the PCGS pop for this variety), PCGS will give the 501 to both of the RPM’s illustrated on frnklnlvr, PRPM-001 and PRPM-002

Also, almost all FS-501 will show the booger clash, but the booger shows up on one or two other clawed die pairs for 57-D.

Unfortunately, it would be an extreme uphill climb to try to get PCGS to acknowledge, and correct this oversight.”

—G.L.

As a variety enthusiast and former registry competitor, I have struggled for several years with the gamble of trying to get varieties properly attributed. I don’t understand how or why such a reputable company drops the ball so often with variety attribution but that was a major driving force that led me to close most of my registry sets last year and completely stop submitting coins to them. When you pay for a service you do not receive, it is incredibly frustrating and such a let down. Perhaps they did not make it to the attribution department at all, have you verified they received the attribution service? I hope you are able to get your coins properly attributed at no additional cost. Good luck to you.
Best regards,
Rocco

privatecoin

I've definitely had better results on varieties with ANACS.

20cPR

Thanks @Aspie_Rocco for passing along that feedback from G.L., I appreciate it. Please pass along my thanks. They said that they did make it to the attribution team (and I was charged that fee for the five coins in question).

I would have thought the RPM-002 would have received it as well. I'm still puzzled by #2 - looks like machine doubling (almost smearing) but nothing else on the REV shows this...

I understand that mistakes happen, especially in a volume business, etc. I also understand that sometimes this process is subjective (especially to the grade, things like toning, edge cases around cleaning, etc.). But other times it's not, the pictures tell the story. The frustrating part is after politely notifying them that they had made an error, and sending them all of the info, the response is "nope." I wouldn't have incurred the cost to grade the coins (although nice 64/65FBLs etc) without the variety.

I find it ironic that PCGS is running a quarterly special around verities and just published a piece on how they are the "spice" of collecting. "Great news, you can pay only 1/2 the cost you normally would for us to not designate the variety that exists on your submission."

Live and learn I suppose. Thanks to everyone who has weighed in on this thread.

davewesen

PCGS does not attribute RPM-002

20cPR

@davewesen - yup, understand that (re: RPM-002). Two of the five are RPM-001, one is a "I have no idea" and the other two are likely RPM-002. As I said in my intro - I expected to get 2/5. No issues with the RPM-002 not receiving the attribution, although others have them attributed.