DAVID HALL - Please Address this Customer Service Issue
supercoin
Posts: 2,323 ✭
David,
I'm not one to publicly air dirty laundry, but I've exhausted other avenues, and since you seem to be lurking here lately (and your Private Messages are disabled)...
For several years now, various Ike dealers and enthusiasts have been trying to get PCGS to attribute the three 1972 Ike varieties. PCGS is (rightfully) conservative when it comes to attributing varieties, and as it was explained to me, didn't want to do anything that might "create" an artificial market.
Finally, on 8/9/2002, after increasing evidence of the varieties being listed in major trade publications, Rick Montgomery felt the case had been made for the legitimacy of the varieties and the market acceptance of them, and agreed to attribute them.
And in fact after that time, the varieties were listed in the 2003 Red Book, the "holy grail" of market acceptance. There is no longer any question that PCGS should attribute them. PCGS is behind the curve on this one.
But... back to the point: In my phone conversation with Rick on 8/9/2002, he agreed to attribute them, it was simply a matter of getting the details worked out, such as a new PCGS coin number assigned. This was great news and I awaited his instructions so I could submit a pile of coins that I had waiting.
I sent him a follow-up e-mail that same day, including a copy of the attribution info that I had put together for him and previously sent (and that he had misplaced, along with 3 actual examples of the coins that I had sent him).
I didn't hear back from Rick and sent another e-mail following up on 9/6/2002, along with a voice message. And again on 9/13/2002. And again at least two other times (don't have exact dates), including attempts by Fax. No reply to any of them, he just ignored me.
Then, Rick left, turmoil ensued, and the new customer-friendly David Hall era was ushered in on the message boards. And in fact I replied to one of your "welcome" posts with this same issue, but didn't get any response.
Undeterred, I gave you a few weeks to settle in and sent you an e-mail outlining my struggles to date. I did that on 12/12/2002. And again on 1/5/2003. And again on 1/23/2003. No response to any.
On the off-chance that your e-mail had changed, I contacted Charlie by both e-mail and phone message on 2/14/2003. Charlie is often cited here as being very responsive to customer service issues, a rarity among PCGS employees. I asked him to forward my concerns to you.
Again, no response, from him or you.
So, at this point I have been waiting for nearly SEVEN months, with all attempts at contact being ignored -- e-mail, phone, fax -- everything but carrier pigeon. Not even the simple courtesy of "guess what, we changed our mind, get lost". I've been left in limbo.
I'm not your biggest customer, but I'm not your smallest either. I have submitted thousands of coins over the years. But regardless of customer size, I hope you will agree this is abysmal customer service.
And I hope you will agree to immediately follow through with attributing these, and give me a direct contact for doing so -- perhaps Miles Standish who I have worked with in the past -- and to expedite it so I don't suffer any additional long turnaround after a 7 month delay.
Or, at the least... tell me to get lost so I can move on.
Thanks for your attention.
I'm not one to publicly air dirty laundry, but I've exhausted other avenues, and since you seem to be lurking here lately (and your Private Messages are disabled)...
For several years now, various Ike dealers and enthusiasts have been trying to get PCGS to attribute the three 1972 Ike varieties. PCGS is (rightfully) conservative when it comes to attributing varieties, and as it was explained to me, didn't want to do anything that might "create" an artificial market.
Finally, on 8/9/2002, after increasing evidence of the varieties being listed in major trade publications, Rick Montgomery felt the case had been made for the legitimacy of the varieties and the market acceptance of them, and agreed to attribute them.
And in fact after that time, the varieties were listed in the 2003 Red Book, the "holy grail" of market acceptance. There is no longer any question that PCGS should attribute them. PCGS is behind the curve on this one.
But... back to the point: In my phone conversation with Rick on 8/9/2002, he agreed to attribute them, it was simply a matter of getting the details worked out, such as a new PCGS coin number assigned. This was great news and I awaited his instructions so I could submit a pile of coins that I had waiting.
I sent him a follow-up e-mail that same day, including a copy of the attribution info that I had put together for him and previously sent (and that he had misplaced, along with 3 actual examples of the coins that I had sent him).
I didn't hear back from Rick and sent another e-mail following up on 9/6/2002, along with a voice message. And again on 9/13/2002. And again at least two other times (don't have exact dates), including attempts by Fax. No reply to any of them, he just ignored me.
Then, Rick left, turmoil ensued, and the new customer-friendly David Hall era was ushered in on the message boards. And in fact I replied to one of your "welcome" posts with this same issue, but didn't get any response.
Undeterred, I gave you a few weeks to settle in and sent you an e-mail outlining my struggles to date. I did that on 12/12/2002. And again on 1/5/2003. And again on 1/23/2003. No response to any.
On the off-chance that your e-mail had changed, I contacted Charlie by both e-mail and phone message on 2/14/2003. Charlie is often cited here as being very responsive to customer service issues, a rarity among PCGS employees. I asked him to forward my concerns to you.
Again, no response, from him or you.
So, at this point I have been waiting for nearly SEVEN months, with all attempts at contact being ignored -- e-mail, phone, fax -- everything but carrier pigeon. Not even the simple courtesy of "guess what, we changed our mind, get lost". I've been left in limbo.
I'm not your biggest customer, but I'm not your smallest either. I have submitted thousands of coins over the years. But regardless of customer size, I hope you will agree this is abysmal customer service.
And I hope you will agree to immediately follow through with attributing these, and give me a direct contact for doing so -- perhaps Miles Standish who I have worked with in the past -- and to expedite it so I don't suffer any additional long turnaround after a 7 month delay.
Or, at the least... tell me to get lost so I can move on.
Thanks for your attention.
0
Comments
Greg
Please don't allow this request to get lost in the shuffle. It's valid and worthy of PCGS's consideration.
peacockcoins
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Why the wait. Seems like a very easy way to make a few extra bucks. I would resubmit all my 72-P's as would many other collectors.
Maybe that is the right approach...sell them on the fact that's it's just good business.
Hopefully PCGS will figure this out.
Also, when are the price guides goign to change. I'll pay double for some of the low pop MS67 clads, and the price guide is supposed to be high retail. I don;t think so
Ike Specialist
Finest Toned Ike I've Ever Seen, been looking since 1986
No good deed will go unpunished.
Free Money Search
So from one standpoint, PCGS "owes" it to Ike collectors to show the series a little respect. The 1972 varieties are much more significant to the Ike series than many relatively minor varieties recognized in other series.
From a business standpoint, I think it's in PCGS' best interest from a longer-term view. Obviously moderns in general have a lot more potential for PCGS revenue growth than classics, so PCGS should be doing what it can to ensure it keeps the leadership it enjoys in the modern category.
And again, showing some respect for one of the premier modern series would be a good step towards keeping those enthusiasts happy.
This attribution is a simple thing, long overdue, and really, what is PCGS' downside?
Lets do it. It needs to be done!
-Dave
1976 Type 1 and Type 2
- Intentional change in both obverse and reverse master hubs.
1972 Type 1 and Type 3
- Intentional change in reverse master hubs.
1972 Type 2
- Experimental or accidental use of one hi-relief reverse die normally used for 1972-S.
The 1972 types came about when better die steel was introduced, allowing the use of the originally-intended higher-relief reverse with these big tough clad planchets. 1972 is the toughest of all Ike dates to find in gem condition, with the majority of those being Type 3. Both the Type 1 and Type 3 were minted in the many millions. The Type 2 was minted with only one die (estimated mintage less than 100,000) and is one of the few Ikes to command a premium even in lower grades. Attribution info on these is found in this thread I posted a while back.
After that, the most interesting (to me) Ike variety is the 1971-S "peg leg" variety in both proof and uncirculated. The lower serif on the R in LIBERTY is missing. This is readily found in proof, but quite scarce in uncirculated, with high-grade (MS66) specimens virtually unknown.
Beyond that, there are roughly a gazillion other known minor varieties when you get into doubled dies, but most are not visible with the naked eye. Many of these are documented in the ambitiously titled The Authoritative Reference on Eisenhower Dollars by Wexler et al.
The series is still not well-researched, so there is also the real potential of newly discovered varieties, such as a 1972-D "peg leg" reported here a while back.
Why the rush??
Tbig
As to having bigger fish to fry: (1) there would be no conflict if they had addressed this 7 months ago when they said they would, and (2) just today Mr. Hall announced four new initiatives with far more sweeping consequences than this relatively trivial one.
That's why the rush.
I see your point.
I think they are seeing a lot of change. I think if they are purposely trying not to do it without explanation, this is a bad move. Maybe something is going on behind the curtain that is bigger than it seems. The "artificial market" creation does not seem right, after all would not PCGS benefit from this financially?
I hope it works out for you.
Tbig
The Lincoln cent store:
http://www.lincolncent.com
My numismatic art work:
http://www.cdaughtrey.com
USAF veteran, 1986-1996 :: support our troops - the American way.
Does the word crusade ring a bell?
My posts viewed
since 8/1/6
I know Mr. Hall has seen this thread tonight because it was just a couple posts above another thread to which he replied. He could not possibly have missed it. And I see that he is currently working his way through the Q&A posts where I also posted.
So I will have my answer by morning one way or another, it remains only to be seen whether it will be a direct answer or one of omission. Fingers crossed.
And he answered Q&A posts over several hours as well without addressing mine there (while finding time to address important issues such as how many armadilloes BJ has).
So, it's obvious (as it probably should have been from about the second e-mail that I originally sent) that I am being purposely ignored.
This after being a long-time customer, a long-time PCGS supporter here and elsewhere, and having done my part on numerous occasions to help correct PCGS problem coins and mistakes at my own expense.
I guess it's customer appreciation day.
Here are various ways this issue could have been resolved...
EXCELLENT:
I'm sorry it has taken so long to address this issue. I did get your previous messages but frankly just never found time to respond to them. I know that's no excuse but I now intend to do my best to make it up to you.
Please send your coins to my attention and I will personally ensure that they are attributed as soon as possible, even if I have to encapsulate them myself. We will attribute your coins for free as partial compensation for your inconvenience.
We also have apparently lost the coins that you sent Rick as examples, so let me know their value and I will reimburse you.
Thank you for your continued support of PCGS and I look forward to receiving your coins.
GOOD:
(Same as above without free attribution.)
MARGINAL:
I'm sorry it has taken so long to address this issue. We should have addressed it months ago, but at this time we have too many other issues to deal with and unfortunately we cannot deal with it now.
Please bring this issue to my attention again in a few months when things will hopefully have settled down.
POOR:
we decided not to do this, send your coins to anacs
UTTERLY UNACCEPTABLE:
(Real life example already shown.)
The ANACS Population report shows that there was more interest in the design changes made in 1982 due to the steps than 1972 as there were only 3 Breen-2773 certified and only one Breen-2778. There were 75 coins certified for the 1982 breen #'s.
Checking the 3/02 pops for the 1972 P and D Ikes and I'm imagining the following Breen #'s 5748- 36 certified, 5749- 138 certified and 5750- 48 certified are all referring to the modifications made to the Ike dollar. The ANACS pop show no Breen #'s for the 72-D, which seems odd.
I don't have the Breen catalog to check for changes made to the other denominations but I can say there are no Breen #'s certified on the cent, dime, quarter and half for that year.
My guess is the modifications made to the Ike dollars were made to the lettering and reverse design. Perhaps someone could post some pics to show the differences in the design changes. Maybe this will help your crusade for support in this matter.
As for the Jefferson nickels, I believe there is a hidden variety waiting to be collected in the 1982-S Type 2 (reverse of 1981-S) proof in 5 full steps.
Hopefully I have been of some help.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Tad has the best documentation on the changes, but basically, there were three distinct reverse for the 1972-P Ike Dollar. This first reverse was the same as the 1971 Ikes, and the third was the same as the 1973 Ikes. The second reverse was used on proof Ikes and the silver clad Ikes, and was probably a mistake. The Type 2 1972 is considered the key of the series, as they tend to be very hard to find in high grades. The three reverses can be easily seen by looking at the 1971-1973 silver clad MS Ike dollars. There are subtle changes to the reliefs, which are pretty easy to see when looking at the shape of the earth.
As Keith mentions the changes are only on the reverse. The entire reverse is completely different between the Type 1 (low relief) and Type 3 (high relief). The Type 2 is also high-relief with more subtle differences between it and the Type 3.
Attribution info showing close-ups of the Earth can be seen in this old thread.
likely to be sooner than later. In any case the creme (and perhaps this
thread) will always rise To The Top.
I can see the changes. I have several MS and PF Ikes. But they're not with me right now.
I'll check them and provide more photo's but it won't be anytime soon. I doubt if I have the type 2.
I don't know if your pics are from EDS examples. You should post your pics with this thread though.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Towards that end I followed up on a forum member's suggestion and was able to reach someone by phone at PCGS today to whom I explained the situation and who assured me that I had "reached the top" and will bring up the whole matter with David.
So, we'll see. I hope to have positive news to report soon.
Maybe it went something like this:
Secretary: Mr. Hall, supercoin has a question about attributing Ikes.
DH: Supercoin, why is that name familiar?
Secretary: He was the one who sent in a bunch of PR70s for downgrade, including an Ike.
DH: That little pisser cost us a bundle. Couldn't he have just stuck the coins in his Set Registry Set like everyone else?
Secretary: What should I do?
DH: Screw it. Ignore him. I already spent the Ikes he sent us on a pack of smokes.
Secretary: Will do.
So I have updgraded the 1972 Ike Attribution Advisory Level to "cautiously optimistic".
They are looking for my coins and attribution info now, and I already volunteered to send more coins if necessary. If I do and they lose those too, I'm getting "Chump" tattoed on my butt!
The only concern David had was that it wasn't an "imaginary" variety, i.e. one that is barely discernible. I don't anticipate any problem there.
In addition, since the time that PCGS/Rick originally agreed to attribute them, they have been listed in the 2003 Red Book. So that should remove all doubt of market acceptance.
Anyway I will be sending new attribution info and coins. Will keep you posted, but it's looking good!
NEVER LET HIPPO MOUTH OVERLOAD HUMMINGBIRD BUTT!!!
WORK HARDER!!!!
Millions on WELFARE depend on you!
Pennies make dollars, and dollars make slabs!
....inflation must be kicking in again this dollar says spend by Dec. 31 2004!
Erik
I've left Sandy a couple voice messages but have yet to hear back. I'm hoping I'm not back on "ignore" status.