Got my dnc morgan back from pcgs. With a tag.
Placid
Posts: 11,299 ✭✭✭
What does it mean? Is there a way to "fix" the coin?
0
Comments
Thumbing/hazing/waxing are forms of putting something on the surface of the coin to cover marks (usually hairlines). The easiest was is to rub the side of your nose with your thumb and then apply this grease to the coin. It will usually look OK for a short period of time and then change color.
As for where on your coin this is, I do not know. It looks OK to me.
Hard to tell from the scan...if it was whizzed, I'd figure ANACS would catch that. The cheek is a little dull on the scan...maybe that was thumbed, but it doesn't seem like enough marks to warrant thumbing.
86-P ?? If you're gonna crack it out, I'd just leave it raw. It's a nice looking coin.
I guess they are unable to see any flow lines. The thumbing/waxing/hazing or whatever they are attributing the designation to isn't evident in the scan.
I had a "raw" coin bagged for altered surfaces, but this is the first I've seen a coin in a NGC or ANACS (not netted) slab essentially get bagged. I do however have an ANACS slabbed Morgan (1886) that had to be the last possible coin struck (well maybe not) from whichever die it was struck from, that could possibly not cross at any grade. I have at times wondered if it were geniune, but I don't recall such a common date being counterfeited; and I hope that ANACS wouldn't miss something like that. Anyway, the surfaces on my coin are shabby, but I think it has to do with die state, not some other manipulation.
Why not inquire of ANACS regarding this? I think it is a great opportunity.
That is the one thing I wish PCGS would do, is give a better idea of what is wrong. They simply tag it with a few possible problems, and for someone like me, I can't figure which of the bunch is wrong.
K S
Excuse for what?
peacockcoins
K S
So a Collector would have to be pretty dumb to submit a coin TWICE when there was nothing wrong with it in the first place? Is that what PCGS is counting on?
PCGS must have a pretty low opinion of most of us to conspire that scheme.
Or, maybe PCGS is more clever than that and research who the submitter is, determining only then if it is of value to bodybag a problem free coin, knowing through their profile of the submitter he is likely to resubmit? Or, it's just random and every, say, tenth coin gets bounced back for no good reason?
OR- Maybe, JUST MAYBE, there is something wrong with the Morgan that PCGS caught (and ANACS missed)?
peacockcoins
Before I was a grader at NGC (and now that I am no longer one), I had/ have the luxury of simply passing on coins that I didn't/ don't like and which I felt/ feel had one or more problems.
One of the more difficult aspects of being a grader (for myself, at least) was being forced to state a specific reason why a coin should no-grade.
For example, a cleaned coin is often re-toned, as well. Do you call it "cleaned" or "re-toned"?
Many coins are altered by thumbing them. Do you call them "altered" or "thumbed"?
If the toning on a coin looks to be artificial, do you call it "artificial color/ toning" or "questionable color/ toning"?
There are a number of substances which are applied to coins in order to alter them and the term "altered surfaces" addresses them in general terms but many submitters want more specifics.
If a coin is corroded, do you call it "corrosion" or "environmental damage"?
If a coin is deemed to be a fake, do you call it "counterfeit" or "questionable authenticity"?
If a coin has been cleaned, do you call it "cleaned" or "wiped'"?
If a coin has been dipped and has toning residue/ stains, do you call it "dip residue" or "dip stained"? And so on.
These are often minor distinctions but represent a few of the things that graders must consider when assigning a no-grade to a coin. But believe me, it sure is a lot more difficult than looking at a coin, recognizing that it has a problem and simply moving on, without comment!
But, it is a form of alteration, an attempt to cover up or obscure abrasions, imperfections etc. The major grading services grade some thumbed coins (perhaps lower than they otherwise would without the thumbing), if the graders feel that they can still get a decent look at the surfaces. At some point, however, the thumbing is simply too prevalent to allow for a good look at the coin's surface to determine its technical merits. That is when the "no-grade" comes into effect.
now if they saw the coin raw they could maybe do better but who knows?
now for me thumbing is to hide the marks on the cheek if that is waht it is an since i cant see the coin raw and in person we will never know!
let me give you an example of this that just happened within the last few weeks at pcgs
a friend submitted a super duper nice raw 10 dollar indian a common date it was 65 on the reverse and a super nice 63 with a scratch on the cheek that had been thumbed to try to hide this
the coin came back altered surfaces which it was thumbed!! soooooooooo my friend did a quick dip and removed all the evidence of thumbing the coin went back to pcgs where it got into a ms 63 holder which the coin is in fact a 64 on the obverse and a 65 reverse but now downgraded because of the scratch on the cheek but not retuned body bagged the quick dip removed the thumbing and also part two the coin turned out okie as the thumbing was removed and it just showed the scratch on the cheek the same!
if you are going to submit this coin you have to crack this coin and then see if it looks like a quick dip will help it and acetone will not help this coin a quick dip will in the usualy solution!
and if the coin comes out okie and that is a big if as i have not seen this coin in person but if it comes out okie revealing nothing else on the cheek or any more problems after the dip then you have got a good chance of pcgs slabbing the coin but at waht grade i do not know as i would need to see the coin to see waht the dip took off in the cheek area in other words waht someone was trying to hide so this thread is really not so easy to answer or even get a close answer to you let alone any satisfactory answetr without seeing the coin raw in question
and of course this is all subjective this grading thing so it could be entirely different situation with this coin if submitted multiple times but the fact remains this coin for me in my opinion needs to be sent in raw and before sent in raw needs to be addressed as per the above!
and also this coin is a silver coin whereas the coin my friend sent in was a lusterous problem free gold coin that was helped and not hurt by the dip your silver coin well is another story that is why this coin needs to be addressed sight seen and raw and is a much harder case then the gold coin example
sincerely michael
I don't have any dip solution or experience dipping so I will just sell this one and find a replacement for it.
i certaninly respect you for the frustration with this coin and the return by pcgs
i think pcgs is right on the money with this coin just from my observations with the scan!!!!!!!
but i think you are a really smart man and i think the idea of selling this coin and finding another is a really smart move on your part
for me i am on here to give my opinion to try to help others maybe i am wrong most of the time maybe i do not know waht i am talking about most of the time i do not know
i am sincere and with good intentions but the road to hell is paved with good intentions .......lol but be that as it may
but i think in this case again
you have made a really wise decsison!!
sincerely michael
<< <i>Why is it that you can remove evidence of "thumbing" with a quick dip, yet you can't remove a "fingerprint"? >>
The key is how long ago the thumbing occured. In thumbing the skin oils have filled the surface defects but nothing has happened to the coin. A quick bath with acetone and water removes the oils and salts leaving no evidence. If the thumbing is not removed, eventually the acids and salts begin to etch the pattern of the fingerprints INTO the surface of the metal of the coin. You may olso get selective toning dependant upon the thickness or absence of the skin oils. This allows the fingerprints to become visible. But now that the pattern has been etched into the coin, dipping may temporarily make the fingerprint disappear but the areas may retone at slightly different rates causing the fingerprint to reappear. This is probably one of the reasons thumbed coins are rejected. If PCGS removes the thumbing evidence the submitter gets mad because they "altered" his coin. If they don't and go ahead an slab it eventually the fingerprints show up and PCGS will be blamed for them or possibly even have to buy the coin under their grading guarantee. That is a no win situation for PCGS so they body bag it. The collector then decides that the best thing to do is sell it and buy a "good" one and the new owner starts the whole process all over again by resubmitting it. Now it is a winning situation for PCGS because they get paid over and over again to reject the same coin.
<< <i>...Maybe, JUST MAYBE, there is something wrong with the Morgan that PCGS caught (and ANACS missed)? >>
i could accept that, thought i doubt it. however, why the vague "altered surfaces ie: thumbing, hazing, waxing"? i agree w/ someone else's comment that something a bit more specific would actually be USEFUL.
bottom line is, can't tell a danged thing from the scan, but pcgs did nothing to help you out either.
K S