Why can't PCGS just correct the error in their database?
barberkeys
Posts: 4,156 ✭✭✭✭✭
I collect silver commems in CAC'd rattlers. A couple of weeks ago I purchased a very nice Cleveland in 65 and when I tried to put it in my registry set, I was surprised to find that my Cleveland's slab number is listed as a 1926 $2.50 Sesquicentennial in PCGS's database.
I called customer service and talked to a couple of very nice people who after checking with their supervisor told me that they would pay for all costs to have my coin sent in for reslabbing. I explained that my collection is rattlers, and reslabbing won't solve the problem. I asked if someone could just correct the data entry error so my rattler could be entered into my collection. Ultimately, I was told that this is not possible.
There is not any dispute that my Cleveland is in a valid rattler. It was sold (and pictured) in a Stacks auction in June 2023. It is also listed in CAC's database with the slab number on my slab.
I'm hoping this will get the attention of someone at PCGS with authority to take steps to correct what seems to me to be a simple problem.
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
Comments
Like all things...it takes time and someone for this task to be delegated to. Nice commem btw!
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
Your issue with a 50 certification number rattler is not new. PCGS admitted many years ago (15-years ago?) on these boards that there was a data error for certification numbers in the 50 rattler range and that some coins would show up with incorrect details.
I would imagine that fixing the issue would be fairly simple on the part of PCGS, but that they see no compelling reason to spend the funds needed to do so since very few coins were affected. However, if their database is fragmented with various timeframes not in complete sync with one another then it might be tougher to track down and correct the problem. Regardless, this issue has been known within PCGS for over a decade, and perhaps much longer, yet no solution has been found on their end other than re-slabbing coins.
By the way, nice Cleveland.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
I've been down that road and argued with several of their customer service reps about this exact same issue with a coin i bought not showing up with a valid cert. I was told that it couldnt be fixed in the database, because that cert # was corrupted, and you couldnt just delete the cert and recreate it.
I ended up letting them reslab mine since it was in a modern holder and it didnt matter, but good luck, i hope you have better success than I did.
It may not actually be possible. I am sure they have done database upgrades in the years since and those records are probably read only.
Perhaps they could slab the slab thereby giving you a number that will load up to your Registry set. Just a thought.
Leo 🙂
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
All things considered, I'd keep the coin in its current holder and not worry about it.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
On the side, I like to collect certification errors. But I also like to have my coins in the registries. I have had similar experience with PCGS - they won't make a change without re-slabbing. On the NGC side, I've had mixed experience - I have gotten them to change a couple in their database without re-slabbing, but more recently they haven't been willing to do that.
Regardless, it simply cannot be so difficult to update records in a database... I think they want to eliminate the errors that have gotten out, and offer the free new slab as incentive to that end.
Collector of Liberty Seated Half Dimes, including die pairs and die states
What about his registry set? Buy another?
He owns the coin, as is, even if he can't include it in his posted set. I'd much rather own the coin in its current holder than have it reholdered, just to be able to list it in an-on-line set.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
If they start "correcting" the database without updating the physical slab, they just create more out of sync data points.
Somebody will be back here saying "I have this coin, the slab says 123456 but the database says 7654432"
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
Yes, but their records and online presentation thereof should be able to include the fact that the physical slab says something different.
Collector of Liberty Seated Half Dimes, including die pairs and die states
Problem is you would have had to leave space and fields in the database for that supposedly rare occurance.
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
Three of the TPGS I worked at in the past used computers. Some don't appear to be designed by the numismatists who actually us them. If PCGS has had this problem before as others have written, and CS tells you they cannot fix the problem, I don't think they are liars do you? At one place I worked at, we had a corrupted file that dropped dozens of coins. The ONLY solution (you were offered it) was to reholder the coin with a different number.
I wonder if PCGS could issue a "dummy" number for a 65 CAC rattler coin so you could list your coin as is.
Not in the dbase either…
I’ve had one that I bought through Stacks and they had to call their person at PCGS who fixed it.
There are instances of duplicate serial numbers in rattlers. I wonder if the other coin is a rattler.
The number of numismatists who are also database professionals is very small. The complexity of identity fields, foreign keys, cascade delete, various join relationships, and the like often makes what seems to be simple to actually be very complex. It's especially bad when multiple "point" systems for different purposes are then brought together.
We don't say "New Release: now slower and with more bugs" for nothing.
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")