<< <i>One of my favorite coins was a, yeah, this is funny, 83-CC in PCGS 63 DMPL. It had the sharpest strike on the > hair and the eagle. The cameo was so white it looked like virgin snow and the mirrors were like the shiny side of tin-foil. >>
Maybe you would have received a "*" star at NGC! Sorry, i just had to say it.....
Andy
We are finite beings, limited in all our powers, and, hence, our conclusions are not only relative, but they should ever be held subject to correction. Positive assurance is unattainable. The dogmatist is the only one who claims to possess absolute certainty.
if you've read my posting you'll see that i've been in touch with them. i last spoke with annabell on monday around 5 edt and i'm just doing what they've requested. as VAM points out, blue sheet and greysheet only go to 65DMPL. bummer. most likely, as i said above, they(rick montgomery)want to look at the coin in hand. believe me, i'm not trying to drag this out or making things up as we go along here.
<< <i>Both scans show small ticks near a huge hit right in front of the portrait, a white smudge over the head, cameo in the field under Liberty's neck that looks like goiter or maybe the Dr. slipped when painting the cameo on, and a big flat spot over the ear you could land an airplane on. 4 world class collectors & dealers have owned it, and regarded it highly but sold it cheap but. Legend staked their credentials on it and said 99% of you dealers & collectors don't know what you're talking about.............Hmmm...Rick wanting it back sounds like a setup, might end back up in a 66 or 67 holder. >>
Dog, please accept my deepest apologies.I see you didn`t flame keets.And I do want to THANK YOU for telling me how GOITERS are created.I`ll sell my vam book on ebay and ask you for assistance from now on.
A dealer once asked me if I noticed any three-legged buffalos on the bourse,to which I replied,"...no,but I saw alot of two-legged jackasses..."
Since I am not a major dealer or collect DMPL's any more, I have no right to make comments on this coin. But having collected them since the 70's, I would never pay 66 money for that coin. Dog has already pointed out why that isn't a 66 coin. The ear strike bothers me. This is not a deeply struck CC, and not having the coin in my hand I can't tell what is going on with the neck and field left of the mouth. If it does end up in a 66 slab again, and by the way this would not surprise me, it's simply because of market economics. DMPL's seem to be in great demand and the coin market is very strong. Every time this happens more coins get upgraded. Dealers submit and resubmit to meet the demand.
I have very few personal rules about what I purchase. I set price levels, i.e. what I am willing to pay for a coin without asking for advice from a knowlegeable disinterested party. I didn't comment on the coin when it was originally posted in here, because of the difficulty in grading DMPL's, that is why I posted the 63 and asked for comments. Grades ranged from 64-67. It's a PCI 63 wanting to be a 64. Here is how I know this, I have bought and sold many 62's,63's and 64's. I used to pull them out of the boxes and line up the same grades in rows to compare them and guess what PCGS was very consistent, all and I mean all of them whether they were graded correctly or not looked the same to me in each grade. This is a good way to learn how to grade DMPL's, in fact I think it is the only way. The PCI was bought cheaply and ended up in the 64 row even though the slab says 63.
Now, you don't need the coin in PCGS's hands to decide upon a pricing method to distinguish between an MS65 DMDL and an MS66 DMPL in value in the generic sense. Whether they use eBay, Heritage Value Index, or a sheet, all you gotta do is look at the paper and say X minus Y equals Z. And, they will value a coin on grade review ONLY in the generic sense, unless your coin is something truly unique.
I'm sorry but the more you write the less I believe the details of the story. PCGS regrades the coin on grade review, lowers the grade, never arranges to compensate you and sends the coin back to you in a lower grade slab with no money or offer to compensate. It all a big disorganized mess because the boss is on vacation..... Hmmmm.....
With all due respect, it sounds like you cracked the coin and submitted it RAW, made before and after scans of the coin, and PCGS has graciously agreed to compare the coin with the scans to decide if compensation is in order solely as a courtesy. I guess I'm getting cranky but your story is gaining too many elements to be credible. This explanation would give meaning to your early posts. Otherwise, why complain? If the coin was truly lowered on grade review, you get to keep the coin AND get some cash- not a bad spot.
Oh, the heck with it. I accept your story. I just wanna stop feeling compelled to talk about Anna .....
jamesfsm, your conspiracy theorizing is on overdrive.
The fact that PCGS sent it back to him without a check is far from the most disorganized thing PCGS has ever done. And Rick Montgomery is in fact on vacation right now. It's reasonable that Rick would want to verify it before his company shells out a stack of cash.
Further, Keets contacted me before he sent it for downgrade for advice on how to go about it, since he knew I had downgraded some coins in the past. At that time, he was convinced it was going to downgrade (and I agreed, with the caveat that I wasn't a Morgan expert), so he certainly wouldn't have cracked it out himself.
Given the sordid history of this matter, I should also mention when he asked for advice he didn't say anything about the circumstances of how he got it, and I didn't inquire. And have studiously avoided that part of it since.
so sorry you consider me to be a liar. i imagine i could post scans of my receipts from the submission but a paranoid mind would assume they are forgeries!!! short of that there isn't much i care to do.
through this whole ordeal, and i mean from the point of purchase until the right now, i have been in contact with various forum members seeking advice, counsel or just conversing about the matter. that's just the way i operate. some have posted in regards to this, all unsolicited from me. all the way back to spooly, whom i'd forgotten about, with regards to the fact that i was hesitant to keep the coin cause i didn't think it was grade and on up to others who i won't name when i was seeking advice about the grade guarantee policy. these PM's are all a matter of record in my PM history since i have deleted none. the same goes with my contact with PCGS. all documented. there's really no need for your suspicion.
i posted the scans not to bore the forum or drag the whole thing on. i said in a post in one of the original threads that i would post the reholdered scan and the amount of the check i receive as a matter of courtesy. i also believe that open discussion of a topic like this is helpfull since many are uninformed about the process (sic) and with the acknowledged fact that PCGS does indeed sometimes overgrade, it might help to understand how to go about getting the guarantee which they offer.
i do hope you'll take time to understand the whole matter and that you'll continue to ask questions in the spirit of enlightenment until you do.
al h.
OK, i figured out a way to assuage all the suspicious minds and it's so simple it ridiculous. access the submission number!!! it's 3037911. all the info you'll need is there. dates, grade and slab number. the only thing that won't show is that it was a grade guarantee submission. i hope this helps.
Everyone is saying how obviously this coin is not 66. But this coin was bought and sold by both Legend and Dragon as a 66. I do not doubt either of their expertise.
So is everyone else wrong? or is it possible that both Legend and Dragon made the same mistake on the same coin? or is this a situation where only 65 money was paid (buying the coin and not the holder).
If I missed the answer to my next question I aplologize but I would still be curious to find out if Legend and/or Dragon still believe this coin is a 66.
according to what dragon told me via PM and telephone call, he believes the coin to be "way better than the average MS66DMPL" and "without the mark in front of her face a shot at 67." legend has stood behind dragon's reputation, though she has added the disclaimer that with out seeing the coin in person she would with hold an opinion since it may have been damaged or fingerprinted during the re-slabbing. what i find more telling is that the coin was owned by at least 4 persons before me, and when i bought it i was the fourth owner within a year. considering the opinions that it's a PQ coin, it strains credulity that it's traded so often and at such a low price. also, consider that dragon stated in his post that he was selling duplicates which is really a silly thing when compared with the notion of this being such a top coin. i mean, who downgrades a collection, right?
one thing i do know---dealers will sell a coin sight UNSEEN at a lower price with no return privilege. this may/may not be what took place here. but it is a curious matter that the coin is talked of being so good yet sells where it sells. perhaps it's owners have all been caught in generous moments!!
Given the recent circulation between resubmissions and reholdering, the coin now warrants a grade of AU-58+PQDMPL. Destined to become one of the "classics."
When we are planning for posterity, we ought to remember that virtue is not hereditary.
1) absolutely guaranteed that Legend did NOT sell the coin at a discount with no return priviledge - they do NOT operate that way. PQ Peace stated he was in line to buy the coin. So there were two experts interested enough in the coin to buy it - that tells me it's a nice coin and appropriately priced.
2) "better than the average" does not automatically mean PQ. I think you are inferring too much from that statement.
3) the coin certainly might be a 67 without the booger thingy - can't tell from a scan. The ultimate grade depends on how much is discounted for that mark. When it was graded first, one grade was discounted. When it was graded next. two grades were discounted. Obviously, experts can disagree over whether to discount one grade or two for the flaw.
4) when one owns a coin with a flaw for a while, one gets used to the flaw and focuses on the positive attributes of the coin that made one decide to buy it in the first place. But, when you first look at a coin, the eyes are drawn to any flaws. This fact can explain why a previous owner will think more highly of a coin with a flaw than a first time viewer.
5) there is no Santa Claus in numismatics. If a solid for the grade coin goes for $3,000-3,500 then what quality should one expect at under $2,000? A tweener - a coin that can be graded either way depending upon the whim of the graders at the time. And that's what it is...
points three and four, you assume too much. the reality, the known, is that the coin is now headed south. being it's current owner and having it at this moment in my left hand as i type, i can tell you IMHO that graded on marks and strike it would sooner be a 64 than a 67. the 66 was a blatant overgrade which was probably a result of market influence at the time it was assigned, market grading if you will. but alas, no need to debate it's grade or the motivation behind it's sellers wanting to sell so quickly. i would never pretend to know their thought processes. i can only go on their actions.
point five, if i follow your previous line of thinking i arrive at some point where i would need to consider a PQ 65 price. logic would dictate that this would be at or near your inferred lowend 66 price. at some point there is a transition. as i stated earlier, the coin looks good as a PQ 65, much better than the market graded 66.
a point well stated and better said by someone else besides myself. you make clear the previously muddied request for the coin to be returned for an evaluation by rick m.
That's a good point on the PQ market value. Maybe if Rick and you can't agree on the price of a PQ MS65, he'll just buy the coin outright. Then he'll send it to NGC for a * rating and resale.
Ah, that ties two contentious threads together nicely!
Beautifully done! Now if only the coin was TONED, had been SNIPED from a ACCUCRAP dealer on EBAY, I wouldn't have had to have been quite so NEGATIVE about the whole thing!
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
1. I like Keets (have done a little business with him problem free) and have never done any business with Dragon but have always been impressed with his overall postings.
2. I know of a major "crackout" dealer who is highly regarded in the industry as having one of the "best eyes" in the business. In a recent submission batch, his "upgrade to downgrade" ratio was approx. 9/1 -9 DOWNGRADES PER 1 UPGRADE!! With no disrespect intended, a blind man could have done better on that particular batch. That isolated batch of coins proves nothing to me - I justed mentioned it because it shows that many coins are subject to a "bad day at the grading booth".
3. My point is simple. Don't judge everything on the results of a single submission to a major grading company. The fact this particular Morgan regraded MS65DMPL on one occasion means only that -next week it could be an MS66DMPL or, on a miserable day an MS64DMPL
But, the life these numerous threads have taken seems to infer that this is unusual or newsworthy activity. In fact, it is as unusual as the common cold.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
What you say is true for crackouts. However, for a downgrade -- especially one where PCGS may be liable for a couple grand -- they'd have to be pretty convinced it didn't deserve the grade.
If it was a borderline coin they'd keep it in the current holder and save their dough. Hasn't that been your experience?
"If it was a borderline coin they'd keep it in the current holder and save their dough. Hasn't that been your experience"
Supercoin: It appears your comment assumes a less than "arms length" treatment of the guaranteed regrade process, whereby PCGS assures the public that its graders have no idea of the circumstances surrounding the submission of the regarded (and crackedout) coin. This very situation involving the Morgan lends support to the notion that the process is conducted entirely on the "up and up" at PCGS.
As for my own experience, the lions share of returned coins to PCGS by me to date have been PR70DCAM coins where the issue of grade could not be questioned by any "reasonable man". I don't recall running into the "borderline" PR69 coin hiding out in a PR70DCAM holder and PCGS has always been fair with me on those problem coins.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
Nice subtle use of the English language there. I doubt if it "looks ok" in the current holder that they'd downgrade it, and I thought you had recounted a similar experience a while back on the boards regarding an MS quarter.
But to be clear -- my experience with PCGS downgrading coins has also always been satisfactory -- in no way did they try to weasel out of their guarantee. Even when I had a coin where the problem likely occcured after slabbing (i.e. dip job gone bad).
For an expensive coin, that's very cheap insurance, and a benefit that's often overlooked by people who decry slabs.
I've been told of "round table" meetings when a downgrade is going to cost a lot of money. I don't know if it is true, but considering the source seemed to be <cough> close <cough> to PCGS I believe it is.
In no way should my comments be construed as assuming less than an "arms length" treatment of the guaranteed regrade process!
Seriously, I could care less what their process is as long as I'm happy with the end result. And for me they've shelled out $100's for coins they made less than $10 grading, with very little hassle. Two thumbs up from me in that regard.
I've never tried to downgrade an NGC coin, so I have no opinion on them, other than if I was collecting expensive Red copper, it would all be in PCGS holders.
as per your last post, this coin was technically graded wrong and was attractive whereas now it's technically graded right and still attractive. one thing i'll say is that it is eye appealing. the general reaction has always been ----WOW!! that's a nice coin, but...........
i sure hope they don't need to do no round table deal on this. if that be the case, i will hereby call on his cladishness to come to my aid, along with all ye dabblers on the dark side.
A couple of thoughts, and I don't mean to step on any one's toes here. In reading this read more than once I didn't perceive that many people thought that this was an unusual occurence. But to say that this coin could grade 64 one day and 66 on another is ludicrous. The graders pushed an obvious 65 into a low end 66. I see that the coin dealers are claiming that this is a possible 66. This quite frankly irritates me a little. If you are going to sell high end modern coins based on what the slabs says it is and defend its value primarily based on that grade, and now try to convince me that on any given day that particular coin has a three grade range, I would never feel comfortable buying a coin from you . Sounds like too much of a game to me. Of course if grading standards change it might be a 68 some day . One last thought and this irritates me too, there a lot of dealers out there that know a whole lot less about what a coin is, it's grade than I do. Let's face it, if that coin was 66 they would have kept it there, so as not to have to pony up. Why is that concept so difficult to grasp?
But Mike.....It's a thin line between high end 65 and low end 66. Now he's sending it back for a reevaluation. They'll review it and decide it's a low end MS66 after all instead of a high end MS65,and reslab it as such. Problem solved.
Somehow, one would think after 85 responses, everything possible to say, has been said.
It might be nice to see what PCGS decides to do, then we can have another 85 responses to deal with that developement. Ladies and germs, it is really time to move on a bit , to other world shaking developements. Perhaps we could discuss why the sun shines in the daytime , when we really need its light at night.
Bear, If this thread has taken a life of its own, so be it. Obviously board members continue to post because the need exists. Debate is healthy and educational. If YOU feel it has gone on too long then don't visit this thread, or, delete it from your subscription list. I, for one, will not be swayed by a milque toast request to move on because there obviously is more debate remaining and I am learning something. No disrespect to you, but I think it easier for you to move on to what you deem are more pressing matters than you to request that the members who still maintain an interest in this subject do so.
Comments
Where are 66 dmpls listed in the bluesheet?
<< <i>One of my favorite coins was a, yeah, this is funny, 83-CC in PCGS 63 DMPL. It had the sharpest strike on the > hair and the eagle. The cameo was so white it looked like virgin snow and the mirrors were like the shiny side of tin-foil. >>
Maybe you would have received a "*" star at NGC! Sorry, i just had to say it.....
Andy
First POTD 9/19/05!!
if you've read my posting you'll see that i've been in touch with them. i last spoke with annabell on monday around 5 edt and i'm just doing what they've requested. as VAM points out, blue sheet and greysheet only go to 65DMPL. bummer. most likely, as i said above, they(rick montgomery)want to look at the coin in hand. believe me, i'm not trying to drag this out or making things up as we go along here.
al h.
<< <i>Both scans show small ticks near a huge hit right in front of the portrait, a white smudge over the head, cameo in the field under Liberty's neck that looks like goiter or maybe the Dr. slipped when painting the cameo on, and a big flat spot over the ear you could land an airplane on. 4 world class collectors & dealers have owned it, and regarded it highly but sold it cheap but. Legend staked their credentials on it and said 99% of you dealers & collectors don't know what you're talking about.............Hmmm...Rick wanting it back sounds like a setup, might end back up in a 66 or 67 holder.
Dog, please accept my deepest apologies.I see you didn`t flame keets.And I do want to THANK YOU for telling me how GOITERS are created.I`ll sell my vam book on ebay and ask you for assistance from now on.
Stop, your killing me
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
I have very few personal rules about what I purchase. I set price levels, i.e. what I am willing to pay for a coin without asking for advice from a knowlegeable disinterested party. I didn't comment on the coin when it was originally posted in here, because of the difficulty in grading DMPL's, that is why I posted the 63 and asked for comments. Grades ranged from 64-67. It's a PCI 63 wanting to be a 64. Here is how I know this, I have bought and sold many 62's,63's and 64's. I used to pull them out of the boxes and line up the same grades in rows to compare them and guess what PCGS was very consistent, all and I mean all of them whether they were graded correctly or not looked the same to me in each grade. This is a good way to learn how to grade DMPL's, in fact I think it is the only way. The PCI was bought cheaply and ended up in the 64 row even though the slab says 63.
I can only think of one line:"Buy the coin, not the holder"
Proof Dime Registry Set
I'm sorry but the more you write the less I believe the details of the story. PCGS regrades the coin on grade review, lowers the grade, never arranges to compensate you and sends the coin back to you in a lower grade slab with no money or offer to compensate. It all a big disorganized mess because the boss is on vacation..... Hmmmm.....
With all due respect, it sounds like you cracked the coin and submitted it RAW, made before and after scans of the coin, and PCGS has graciously agreed to compare the coin with the scans to decide if compensation is in order solely as a courtesy. I guess I'm getting cranky but your story is gaining too many elements to be credible. This explanation would give meaning to your early posts. Otherwise, why complain? If the coin was truly lowered on grade review, you get to keep the coin AND get some cash- not a bad spot.
Oh, the heck with it. I accept your story. I just wanna stop feeling compelled to talk about Anna .....
The fact that PCGS sent it back to him without a check is far from the most disorganized thing PCGS has ever done. And Rick Montgomery is in fact on vacation right now. It's reasonable that Rick would want to verify it before his company shells out a stack of cash.
Further, Keets contacted me before he sent it for downgrade for advice on how to go about it, since he knew I had downgraded some coins in the past. At that time, he was convinced it was going to downgrade (and I agreed, with the caveat that I wasn't a Morgan expert), so he certainly wouldn't have cracked it out himself.
Given the sordid history of this matter, I should also mention when he asked for advice he didn't say anything about the circumstances of how he got it, and I didn't inquire. And have studiously avoided that part of it since.
so sorry you consider me to be a liar. i imagine i could post scans of my receipts from the submission but a paranoid mind would assume they are forgeries!!! short of that there isn't much i care to do.
through this whole ordeal, and i mean from the point of purchase until the right now, i have been in contact with various forum members seeking advice, counsel or just conversing about the matter. that's just the way i operate. some have posted in regards to this, all unsolicited from me. all the way back to spooly, whom i'd forgotten about, with regards to the fact that i was hesitant to keep the coin cause i didn't think it was grade and on up to others who i won't name when i was seeking advice about the grade guarantee policy. these PM's are all a matter of record in my PM history since i have deleted none. the same goes with my contact with PCGS. all documented. there's really no need for your suspicion.
i posted the scans not to bore the forum or drag the whole thing on. i said in a post in one of the original threads that i would post the reholdered scan and the amount of the check i receive as a matter of courtesy. i also believe that open discussion of a topic like this is helpfull since many are uninformed about the process (sic) and with the acknowledged fact that PCGS does indeed sometimes overgrade, it might help to understand how to go about getting the guarantee which they offer.
i do hope you'll take time to understand the whole matter and that you'll continue to ask questions in the spirit of enlightenment until you do.
al h.
OK, i figured out a way to assuage all the suspicious minds and it's so simple it ridiculous. access the submission number!!! it's 3037911. all the info you'll need is there. dates, grade and slab number. the only thing that won't show is that it was a grade guarantee submission. i hope this helps.
Everyone is saying how obviously this coin is not 66. But this coin was bought and sold by both Legend and Dragon as a 66. I do not doubt either of their expertise.
So is everyone else wrong? or is it possible that both Legend and Dragon made the same mistake on the same coin? or is this a situation where only 65 money was paid (buying the coin and not the holder).
If I missed the answer to my next question I aplologize but I would still be curious to find out if Legend and/or Dragon still believe this coin is a 66.
Joe
one thing i do know---dealers will sell a coin sight UNSEEN at a lower price with no return privilege. this may/may not be what took place here. but it is a curious matter that the coin is talked of being so good yet sells where it sells. perhaps it's owners have all been caught in generous moments!!
al h.
When we are planning for posterity, we ought to remember that virtue is not hereditary.
Thomas Paine
2) "better than the average" does not automatically mean PQ. I think you are inferring too much from that statement.
3) the coin certainly might be a 67 without the booger thingy - can't tell from a scan. The ultimate grade depends on how much is discounted for that mark. When it was graded first, one grade was discounted. When it was graded next. two grades were discounted. Obviously, experts can disagree over whether to discount one grade or two for the flaw.
4) when one owns a coin with a flaw for a while, one gets used to the flaw and focuses on the positive attributes of the coin that made one decide to buy it in the first place. But, when you first look at a coin, the eyes are drawn to any flaws. This fact can explain why a previous owner will think more highly of a coin with a flaw than a first time viewer.
5) there is no Santa Claus in numismatics. If a solid for the grade coin goes for $3,000-3,500 then what quality should one expect at under $2,000? A tweener - a coin that can be graded either way depending upon the whim of the graders at the time. And that's what it is...
points three and four, you assume too much. the reality, the known, is that the coin is now headed south. being it's current owner and having it at this moment in my left hand as i type, i can tell you IMHO that graded on marks and strike it would sooner be a 64 than a 67. the 66 was a blatant overgrade which was probably a result of market influence at the time it was assigned, market grading if you will. but alas, no need to debate it's grade or the motivation behind it's sellers wanting to sell so quickly. i would never pretend to know their thought processes. i can only go on their actions.
point five, if i follow your previous line of thinking i arrive at some point where i would need to consider a PQ 65 price. logic would dictate that this would be at or near your inferred lowend 66 price. at some point there is a transition. as i stated earlier, the coin looks good as a PQ 65, much better than the market graded 66.
al h.
Now the problem is setting a price for a PQ PCGS coin. Quality is a continuum, but price is resistant to that continuum. Therein lies the problem!
al h.
Ah, that ties two contentious threads together nicely!
al h.
1. I like Keets (have done a little business with him problem free) and have never done any business with Dragon but have always been impressed with his overall postings.
2. I know of a major "crackout" dealer who is highly regarded in the industry as having one of the "best eyes" in the business. In a recent submission batch, his "upgrade to downgrade" ratio was approx. 9/1 -9 DOWNGRADES PER 1 UPGRADE!! With no disrespect intended, a blind man could have done better on that particular batch. That isolated batch of coins proves nothing to me - I justed mentioned it because it shows that many coins are subject to a "bad day at the grading booth".
3. My point is simple. Don't judge everything on the results of a single submission to a major grading company. The fact this particular Morgan regraded MS65DMPL on one occasion means only that -next week it could be an MS66DMPL or, on a miserable day an MS64DMPL
But, the life these numerous threads have taken seems to infer that this is unusual or newsworthy activity. In fact, it is as unusual as the common cold.
Wondercoin
If it was a borderline coin they'd keep it in the current holder and save their dough. Hasn't that been your experience?
Supercoin: It appears your comment assumes a less than "arms length" treatment of the guaranteed regrade process, whereby PCGS assures the public that its graders have no idea of the circumstances surrounding the submission of the regarded (and crackedout) coin. This very situation involving the Morgan lends support to the notion that the process is conducted entirely on the "up and up" at PCGS.
As for my own experience, the lions share of returned coins to PCGS by me to date have been PR70DCAM coins where the issue of grade could not be questioned by any "reasonable man". I don't recall running into the "borderline" PR69 coin hiding out in a PR70DCAM holder and PCGS has always been fair with me on those problem coins.
Wondercoin
But to be clear -- my experience with PCGS downgrading coins has also always been satisfactory -- in no way did they try to weasel out of their guarantee. Even when I had a coin where the problem likely occcured after slabbing (i.e. dip job gone bad).
For an expensive coin, that's very cheap insurance, and a benefit that's often overlooked by people who decry slabs.
peacockcoins
Seriously, I could care less what their process is as long as I'm happy with the end result. And for me they've shelled out $100's for coins they made less than $10 grading, with very little hassle. Two thumbs up from me in that regard.
I've never tried to downgrade an NGC coin, so I have no opinion on them, other than if I was collecting expensive Red copper, it would all be in PCGS holders.
as per your last post, this coin was technically graded wrong and was attractive whereas now it's technically graded right and still attractive. one thing i'll say is that it is eye appealing. the general reaction has always been ----WOW!! that's a nice coin, but...........
i sure hope they don't need to do no round table deal on this. if that be the case, i will hereby call on his cladishness to come to my aid, along with all ye dabblers on the dark side.
al h.
Now he's sending it back for a reevaluation.
They'll review it and decide it's a low end MS66 after all instead of a high end MS65,and reslab it as such.
Problem solved.
Ray
Not likely. In fact I'll put $100 behind my opinion, wanna bet? Might as well try to recoup some of my time reading this and related threads.
It might be nice to see what PCGS decides to do, then we can have another 85 responses to deal with that developement.
Ladies and germs, it is really time to move on a bit , to other world shaking developements. Perhaps we could discuss why the sun shines in the daytime , when we really need its light at night.
Camelot
al h.
Let the debate continue!
karlgoetzmedals.com
secessionistmedals.com