Looking at PR70 DCAM Kennedy halves in regards to pop figures

andy007 · February 15, 2003 3:50PM

While glancing through Heritage's Long Beach auction coins, I was curious about the pops on the modern Pr70 DCAM coins. I remember a post about the cert numbers and upon looking them up, they found large portions of an entire Pr70's estimated PCGS population all in one submission. I understand the big bulk submitters are going to get their PR69 DCAM's and several PR70 DCAM's to go along, but this 1992-S Silver PR70 DCAM Kennedy got my attention. I looked up the cert number in the PCGS database, and it was listed correctly, so I went back one number, another 1992-S PR70 DCAM Silver Kennedy, and on and on. There are 31 total, more than half of the PCGS pop shown of 58, all in a row(from PCGS cert#7706093-7706123.) Anyone have any thoughts on this, and would this effect your pricing of these coins? Many of the PCGS PR70 DCAM Kennedy's in the auction also have similar patterns.

egsantos · February 15, 2003 5:57PM

Looks like a big submission of a dealer.
By the number, 7.706.103 it's a recent event.
If someone follow the POP evolution will be possible identify the month.
The influence in the price is sensible if double the know POP in a short term.
I suppose that Russ will be aggregate some very important thoughts in this thread.

Edson

TAP444 · February 15, 2003 11:59PM

you should post this on the coin forum
more would see it
Tim

wondercoin · February 16, 2003 1:09AM

Andy: The coins were slabbed in late-1998 and early/mid 1999 (still at a time PCGS was not handing out many 70's). I will have another comment shortly. Wondercoin

wondercoin · February 16, 2003 1:28AM

Here is the history on the 1992 Silver Kennedy half in PCGS-PR70DCAM:

1. By July, 1998, PCGS had only graded 4 PR70's and 74 PR69's.

2. Then by October, 1998, PCGS graded 110 PR69 and 33 PR70 coins. Someone pulled upwards of 27 PR70 coins with only grading upwards of 36 PR69 coins.

3. Then, by July, 1999, PCGS had graded 230 PR69 and 57 PR70 coins. Someone pulled upwards of 30 PR70 coins with only grading upwards of 120 PR69 coins.

Andy - I am glad you brought this up, just so PCGS can review it and confirm that they are confident the PR70 grade is being "handed out" at all times in a "arms length" and fair and equitable manner.

Wondercoin

Steve · February 16, 2003 1:29AM

wondercoin, this is an old issue, although I don't think David Hall has been asked yet. I own a 1992 Lincoln in PCGS PR70DCAM with registration number 7707255. Look up all the numbers surrounding "255" and you will see the PR70's. If we are to believe that the assigned sequential numbers are issued is some sort of rational order (as mine were when I submitted a bunch of Lincolns for grading) then one submitter got a bunch of 70 graded coins back in 1997 and 1998. I would be interested in hearing the PCGS side of the story. Steve

wondercoin · February 16, 2003 1:35AM

Steve: Of course, anything going back to mid-1999 is an "old issue"

But, what I just posted still is relevant - because PCGS had stopped "handing out" the PR70 grade in 1999 and the "pop reports" tell the story of the ratio of PR69 vs. PR70 that was achieved IN 1999 on this dated Kennedy.

IMHO, THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT PCGS SHOULD CONSTANTLY CHECK AND DOUBLE CHECK TO ENSURE THE PR70 GRADE IS BEING "HANDED OUT" FAIRLY. I assume it was here. But, only PCGS knows who are getting them.

Wondercoin

TAP444 · February 16, 2003 2:14AM

But they should not know who they are giving them to, the graders are not
suppose to know who the submissions are from. What are the odds of so many
70's coming from one submission??I would like to know which big dealer had this
submission.Maybe David Hall would like to enlighten us, something about this
does not smell right to me, could someone link this to the coin forum. I am sure
thay would love to see this
Tim

wondercoin · February 16, 2003 2:38AM

"But they should not know who they are giving them to, the graders are not suppose to know who the submissions are from."

Tim: Of course, PCGS can AFTER THE FACT see who got what. Each serial number ties into a submission form, with the name of the submitter on it. This does not neccesarily have anything to do with the graders knowing anything.

Wondercoin

TAP444 · February 16, 2003 2:51AM

Mitch,
but if you believe all the pr they release they don't care who
got what, everyone is treated the same regardless so why
would they bother to maintain these records
TIm

tgilliams · February 16, 2003 2:54AM

Could this be a result of "High Volume" dealer getting a helping hand from Mr. Hall. Mathimatically, the odds of a run of coins all grading PR70DCAM would be close to the odds of winning the Lottery!! Looks like he did win "The PCGS Coin Lottery".

We have heard rumblings throughout the past fews years of "Insider Grading". I'm not an attorney, but I do believe I would have a very difficult time defending such an anomoly on the part of PCGS.

Recently I was introduced to a PCGS Dealer by a fellow long time collector. He told me that this dealer many times had challanged the grade received on coins that he submitted on behalf his customers and after a call or two the coins were resubmitted and the grade he had "recommended" was recognized.

I visited with this dealer and he affirmed that in most cases he was able to secure the higher grade. I personally, was not a witness to any calls to PCGS, but doesn't it make you wonder.

Or could this be just dealer "puffing"? But I have a super 1976 NGC Washington, far superior to the same grade PCGS 1976 Washington I own. I may just spend a couple of extra bucks and let him crack it out and submit to PCGS. Looking forward to owning a 1976 PR70DCAM Washington.

These Kennedy submissions may have been completely above board-benefit of doubt. But I think Mr. Hall should review these submissions and "clear the air"- if he can....... Would love to hear him comment on the "odds" that something like this could happen.

What a story for Numismatic News and Coin World!!!

wondercoin · February 16, 2003 3:11AM

"Mitch, but if you believe all the pr they release they don't care who
got what, everyone is treated the same regardless so why
would they bother to maintain these records
TIm"

Tim: First off - I reserve judgment on this issue until all the facts are known. So, please don't state what "I believe".

Having said that - the records must be maintained for many reasons. For example, what if one of these PR70 coins has nicks all over it and should have never been sold to the public. PCGS needs to know who the submitter is to possibly come back at the submitter for releasing the coin into the marketplace. There are other valid reasons as well.

Wondercoin

TAP444 · February 16, 2003 3:16AM

SORRY MITCH,
I should have said if a person where to believe the recent pr
TIm
with the IF being the big word here

wondercoin · February 16, 2003 3:22AM

Tim: Thanks for that correction. I care about this issue as much as anyone. I CONSTANTLY try to keep the management at PCGS informed of "irregularities" to the point they are frankly probably getting tired of me "bothering" them with it. While my personal interest with "moderns" is far more directed at Mint State examples, I care very much that the "Proof" side of things is being dealt with in a "kosher" manner, as I believe it will reflect on the entire modern market.

It is perfectly reasonable to expect that PCGS will conduct "random" and periodic checks to reassure that the PR70 modern market is evolving as expected

Wondercoin

Monstavet · February 16, 2003 4:25AM

What happened is simple...a bulk submitter wrote PR70DCAM as the minimum grade on his submission form! So, PCGS simply accomadated his request. Don't you guys know that to get the grade you want, you just write in the grade for them? This strategy will only work if you are submitting a minimum of 10,000 coins per year.

wondercoin · February 16, 2003 5:05AM

Monsta: While I know you are kidding, other less experienced collectors might not. This is why I firmly believe PCGS must avoid EVEN THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY. This is even more imporant due to the fact that its sister company, DHRC, is basically right down the hall. If DHRC has PR70 coins for sale, they must be obtained in an "arms length" manner from suppliers who slab them in a 100% "arms length" manner. DH should be vigilant to ensure both mega large dealers, smaller dealers, collectors down to the guy that submits 5 coins per year get the same "fair shake" at obtaining the coveted PR70 coins.

I AM NOT SAYING THE CU OPERATION IS NOT WORKING 100% IN THIS MANNER -FOR ALL I KNOW IT IS. I am only saying important senior management like DH should perform random searches and audits to be 100% sure everything is "kosher", especially in light of the POTENTIAL for conflict.

As usual, my comments are designed to make CU even a better company that it is

Wondercoin

Russ · February 16, 2003 5:07AM

<< Of course, PCGS can AFTER THE FACT see who got what. >>

They can also, at any stage in the process simply punch in one's submitter number and see every invoice that is in for that submitter, and the coins listed on each. The only question is; how restricted is that access?

<< the odds of a run of coins all grading PR70DCAM would be close to the odds of winning the Lottery!! >>

The word infinitesimal comes to mind. Personally, I think it smells a little funny.

Russ, NCNE

MadMarty · February 16, 2003 5:45AM

I had asked PCGS about bulk submitting, I was told:
If I had over 200 coins with the same date and mint, I could do a bulk submission. You them tell PCGS I want only PR69DCAMs and above slabbed. They look at all the coins and slab the PR69DCAMs and the PR70DCAMs. All the rest are sent back to you not graded. I would bet that is how all the numbers are in a row. If someone submitted a bulk order of 5000 coins looking for 69s and 70s only. Back then, (when they were giving out PR70DCAMs) someone might score 15-30 PR70DCAM coins.

andy007 · February 16, 2003 7:08AM

Madmarty is correct that this is probably a bulk submission, but explain to me how they had a total of 21 1992-S Silver PR69 DCAM's (check cert#'s 7706072-7706092, all 92-S Silver Pr69 DCAM's) and scored 31 PR70 DCAM's. That one is hard to explain to me.

Another interesting thing I found while searching around these same cert numbers, which probably was a large submission, found that there is a run right before the 92-S Silver PR69 & PR70's of 1983 PR69 and PR70 DCAMS. The PR69's total 64, and run from cert#7705972-7706035. The PR70's total 36 and run from cert#7706036-7706071.

And as you would expect, you can go on and on and on, before the 83-S PR69 & PR70's are a whole batch of PR70 DCAM 1979-S Type 1's. If you go forward past the 92-S Silver group, you will find 93-S Silver PR69 & PR70's. Can anyone explain the seemingly hundreds of PR70's received all in one batch, with only a small amount of PR69's mixed in, which rules out the bulk submission and minimum slabbed grade in my opinion.

TomB · February 16, 2003 7:21AM

This is an excellent observation by andy007 and a very good thread all around. I agree with much of what wondercoin is writing about the PCGS process and also believe that MadMarty may very well be correct about the bulk submission. I had been thinking the same thing, that is, a single submitter puts in 500 or so coins and asks that only the PF69 or PF70 coins be encapsulated. In this way it might be possible that only those coins encapsulated actually get a PCGS certification number and the rest essentially go away as anonymous. I have no idea if it works this way as I am not a bulk submitter. The kinds of coins I deal with do not lend themselves to bulk submissions. However, it is odd that the PF69 and PF70 coins are sequential and not intermixed. That is a very tough sell to believe if one proposes no impropriety. If one asks supercoin I think he will be able to fill in some details on a run of PF70 Ikes that were essentially all from a single bulk submission. If memory serves correct, these Ikes are now being downgraded to PF69 in some cases.

wondercoin · February 16, 2003 7:32AM

Tom: I'll save Supercoin the trouble - roughly 30 or 31 out of 32 or so PR70DCAM Ikes ever graded PR70DCAM were all graded during a single month's pop report.

Now, when you consider that PCGS had stopped slabbing the PR70 grade by 1998 (for all practical purposes), the notion of these "bulk lots" yielding 30% or so PR70 coins as compared to PR69 coins is possibly beyond comprehesion. FYI, to the best of my recollection, my bulk lots since 1998 have averaged roughly a fraction of 1% PR70 coins and I have submitted thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of coins (and you can bet my interest in issues like these goes way beyond a notion of "sour grapes").

NOW BEAR IN MIND - YOU EITHER TRUST PCGS IS KEEPING A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD OR YOU DON'T. For example, PCGS could easily explain this as one of the greatest "eyes" in the business carefully screened "x" gazillion proof sets, selecting only the most incredible 100 proof kennedys of each date and these bulk coins were so incredible they warranted 1/4 -1/2 of the coins being deemed PR70. So, what can you say? AGAIN, YOU EITHER TRUST THE GRADING SERVICE OR YOU DON'T.

I am trying very hard to trust that the handing out of PR70's is being done in a fair and equitable manner. I continue to bring things like this to DH's attention (and before that to RM's attention), so he can see the effort being made to trust PCGS. But, again, PCGS must be vigilent to ensure PR70's are handed out fairly and equitably, especially in light of their sister company's role in being a market leader for the retail sale of PR70 PCGS coins. Yes - that role is tied into all this, as CU must avoid EVEN THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IMHO.

Wondercoin

dbldie55 · February 16, 2003 7:32AM

The 69's and 70's would be numbered sequentially. (not intermixed). This certainly looks like a bulk submission. Similar to the fact nearly every Proof 70 Ike came from one submission. Did the submitter only submit PQ coins, which explains the number of 70's? Can't tell from just looking at certificate numbers.

coinguy1 · February 16, 2003 8:21AM

My best guess is that MadMarty got it right when he said:

<< I had asked PCGS about bulk submitting, I was told
If I had over 200 coins with the same date and mint, I could do a bulk submission. You them tell PCGS I want only PR69DCAMs and above slabbed. They look at all the coins and slab the PR69DCAMs and the PR70DCAMs. All the rest are sent back to you not graded. I would bet that is how all the numbers are in a row. If someone submitted a bulk order of 5000 coins looking for 69s and 70s only. Back then, (when they were giving out PR70DCAMs) someone might score 15-30 PR70DCAM coins >>

Bear · February 16, 2003 8:30AM

Gee, If I knew then , what I know now, I could have been rich.

Russ · February 16, 2003 8:57AM

<< In this way it might be possible that only those coins encapsulated actually get a PCGS certification number and the rest essentially go away as anonymous. >>

Actually, even those that don't get graded on a bulk submission do, indeed, get a certification number.

Go here and punch in submission #3015610. You will need to enter the zip code of 92652. This was a bulk submission done by Mike DeFalco. Note that every one of the "no grade" coins has a certification number.

Kind of reduces the odds that these runs of high grades would occur without a break in the sequence.

Russ, NCNE

wayneherndon · February 16, 2003 9:30AM

I have sent in a number of bulk submissions. The "no grade" coins (i.e., those below my specified minimum grade) never received a certification number for any of my bulk submissions. Moreover, in each case the they were grouped by grade (within the date) and slabbed consequetively. I have had this happen with both MS and PR submissions. Thus, I am not surprised at all to see a run of any grade (even 70s during the right time frame). However, I am a bit surprised at the ratio of 69s to 70s. The best I ever personally saw was around 7 to 8 percent 70s on a bulk submission of proofs. Usually, it was more like 2 to 4 percent.

WH

wayneherndon · February 16, 2003 9:36AM

Russ,

I believe that submission you linked is not a bulk submission (at least not in the terms I'm talking about). Given the number and type of coins listed, it does not meet PCGS requirements for a "bulk" submission. I suspect it is a regular submission, in which case, yes, each coin does get its own certification number (and is returned in an individual flip as opposed to bulk returns which come back in tubes). It is different on a regular submission because every coin is a paid submission. On a bulk submission, that is not necessarily the case.

In any event, line 77 was expensive!

WH

Russ · February 16, 2003 9:47AM

Wayne,

You might be right. I've never done one, so I have no personal knowledge of how they work. But according to Mike, that was a bulk submission. To quote him from this thread:

<< then I decided to submitt the balance of the coins as a bulk deal with minimum grades noted on the invoice >>

Maybe he negotiated some kind of deal outside the normal parameters? I don't know.

Russ, NCNE

Typetone · February 16, 2003 11:21AM

I don't have a clue about whether all the 70DCAM grades are above board or not. Here are my observations. One, based on the info provided, I do not like what I see. Two, there are plenty of 70DCAMs out there that really don't seem like 70s. Three, there are plenty of 69s out there that seem perfect. What should a collector do? If you like modern proofs buy beautiful 69DCAMS. Most are not too expensive, and are very beautiful. If for whatever reason you do want to buy a 70DCAM, make sure you know what you are doing, and that the coin really is a 70. Also, for most of us, submitting our own coins to try to make a 70 is a waste of time, money, and eyesight!!

Greg

Looking at PR70 DCAM Kennedy halves in regards to pop figures

Comments