The 1964(p) Kennedy in PCGS-MS68 Isn't "Real"?

wondercoin

We have spoken before about what it takes to remove a coin from the PCGS pop report. If a dealer tosses out a tag or loses it, it really comes down to the dealer's word on what occured. Also, clearly bogus SMS coins posing as regular issues (like MS69FS regular issue 1994 or 1997 nickels) on the pop report should be removed - PCGS just exposed themselves to additional liability by procratinating IMHO and I hope PCGS starts to make it a top priority to address these coins.

Well, here is why I believe the 1964(p) Kennedy in MS68 (showing on the pop report) needs to be removed. I will be emailing this thread to Richard Green, who is striving for a perfect PCGS MS Kennedy collection and there is no reason his goal should be thwarted by an erroneous listing in the pop report.

THE ALLEGED FACTS:

1. Many, many years ago, Jesse Lipka bought a hoard of the 1964 SMS coins raw in an auction. Thereafter, he started to submit them for grading.

2. When Jesse first started submitting the coins, Rick Montgomery at PCGS would not label them as SMS - ONLY REGULAR ISSUE. Hence, the 1964 Kennedy was graded PCGS-MS68!! According to Jesse, this coin was then sold to Jay Parino. I believe Jesse is also under the impression this coin became an NGC-MS69 SPECIMEN STRIKE - BUT, IT IS EASY ENOUGH FOR PCGS TO CALL JAY PARINO AND CONFIRM THIS POINT. This is why the coin did not get changed over to an SMS coin once Rick Montgomery determined it was better to label these coins SMS and give them separate PCGS numbers.

There you have it - actually a very simple explanation as to why the Pop Report shows a 1964 in MS68. Assuming Jay Parino tossed the insert tag, changing the pop report would be based upon the statements of a couple reputable dealers - indeed CU does a ton of business with Jesse (who is now running a Currency grading company).

If Richard Green and/or PCGS want to "run" with this further, I assume they will discover this PCGS-MS68 pop report coin is now the NGC-MS69 SPECIMEN coin. IMHO, the coin was always SMS and the pop report should be changed so that committed numismatists like R. Green can continue with their goal of building the "perfect" set.

And, as I have mentioned before, in the wild, longshot, chance the MS68 does exist in the pop report, someone can always come forward later and prove it does - no harm at all to that collector. In a decade of working with Rick M on cleaning up the pop report, there was a single example of someone proving their coin existed - they were not unhappy at all about the situation or the intentions behind the original action of removing the coin.

Wondercoin

braddick

Mitch- You are 100% correct about the coin and the pedigree. I know those facts to be so as
I saw the coin in the PCGS holder and then in the NGC holder (next Long Beach show) about a dozen years ago.
Now, there was even a front page write up on Coin World (or Numismatic News) about the new
"NGC Specimen69" Kennedy.
Your facts are straight and there is NO valid reason why the POP report shouldn't be corrected allowing true Kennedy fans to gain a step closer to a REAL and top set.

TWQG

Wondercoin-
The pop reports should now be considered garbage. A potentially invaluable tool has been irreversibly squandered by PCGS. The example you give is one of many glaring inconsistencies which render it useless.

gmarguli

While I don't think it is impossible for a business strike 1964 Kennedy to grade MS68, the fact that so many people who have followed Kennedys have never actually seen one, this coin should be removed from the pop reports until it is confirmed.

The "other MS68" was removed a year or two ago. It turned out to be a no doubt about it proof.

cointime

Sean,
We can't just lay down on this topic. I for one also believe it is out of control, but it doesn't mean we can't help to police it as Mitch is trying to do.


Greg,
I remember the coin you are talking about. Everyone spotted it on e-bay and could clearly tell even with the B & W photo. This picture was from the actual e-bay auction and I saved this picture on 06/27/2002, so it hasn't been that long ago.

Mitch,
With these obvious type o's I would think David Hall would be all over this. This might have been an excellent topic for the Q & A forum (just to ensure a written responce from "The Management").


Ken

DMWJR

THAT was well said, except the part about the pop reports being worthless. If you have information like this, you can judge for yourself whether a coin exists out there or not, and nobody believes there are 3 out there, now do they? We wouldn't know if that was true or not if we didn't have the current, although mangled pop report.

In fact, I saw a Matte Proof Lincoln sell on e-bay last year. It was labeled as a 09 VDB in 64. THERE WAS NO VDB on the reverse of the coin. That coin, while not at the "top" of the grade, is part of a very valuable set of information about a true numismatic rarity, of which coins are very rare in 64 and up. The seller sold the coin on EBay and did advertise that it was NOT a VDB and was mislabeled on the holder. Another collector bought it for big money (IMHO) opinion because he liked having an "error" slab. It would be very easy to remove that number from the pop database, even though the buyer and seller both did the wrong thing in that instance.

Just the opinion of a redneck penny collector.

wondercoin

I exchanged some emails with Richard Green this weekend. He is also convinced the 1964(p) in MS68 is an erroneous entry in the pop report. In fact, he also believes the 2001(P) in MS69 is a mistake (harder to prove). I hope Richard "runs with this" and convinces PCGS to remove the 1964 from the Pop Report. If you go to MS Kennedys and view the Green collection, you will see one heck of a "near perfect" PCGS collection Wondercoin

Whitewashqtr

Mitch

I believe you have set a clear example of a coin that can be tracked if PCGS would take the time to do so. If after their investigation PCGS can verify that this is the case, then it should be removed.

I am still against removing coins from the pop report without the proper investigation. Since without further investigation an erroneous pop 1 coin being removed (in this case the MS68), could erroneously alter the price of the top pop MS67.

I am not doubting your passage about the Kennedy, but use it only as an example. But, if these are the same dealers that want to police this, then its just irresponsible to NOT send in the tags. Wouldn't you agree.

WWQ

braddick

Mitch- I don't believe the MS69 is an error as I was offered that coin in a private email not too long ago.

wondercoin

I believe PCGS should incentivize dealers and collectors to turn in tags - nothing grand - perhaps a free regular submission with each 15 tags returned. It costs PCGS nothing, but would show a great deal of commitment towards cleaning up the pop report IMHO.

Pat- I agree that a 2001(p) Kennedy in MS69 is doable. Your experience bolsters the fact the coin is real. What a "hostage" coin Wondercoin

dbldie55

PCGS doesn't seem to be in any hurry to remove coins from the pops when the inserts are returned. Been waiting for 7 weeks to see if it happens, nothing yet. I did bring this up in the Q & A section and DH said he would look into it. Maybe some of these returned inserts get "lost".

They used to pay for returned inserts, but no longer do.

gmarguli

In addition to removing all those "bad coins", I'd like to see them add all those real coins to their pop that are missing. There have been several forum members, including myself, that have PCGS coins that aren't listed in the pop report.

Dabigkahuna

Mitch,

I think its great that your trying to get PCGS to address this problem with the phantom coin(s). I am wondering if there isn't something that can be done to keep such a scenario from happening again? I don't have a clue what it would be though.

This sounds like the weak link in using the population reports for trying value a coin yet it's used daily for just that. Incentives haven't seemed to worked. Unless someone like yourself who is familar with a certain coin and can trace its pedigre then I don't see how the average person would even know that a situation like that existed. A dirty little secret maybe?

This bothers me a lot more than if PCGS is getting tighter or looser with grading. I handed over all my PCGS and NGC tags at the FUN show. Im sorry I missed you there. I hope you will be back out next year?


Larry

wondercoin

Larry: I would hope to be out at FUN next year - indeed, my 11 year old, Justin, is already trying to confirm our reservations (he loved Universal Studios which we did 2 days while out there -WITH NO LINES!!) He went on the Men In Black Ride like 5 times in a one hour period and the wait time for Jurrasic Park was 2 minutes - try doing that at peak season!!

Larry - I am not sure this is any "dirty secret" - I would love to see the grading services commit more resources to clean up the pop report. In the series I collect, Wash quarters, I am aware of several NGC-MS68 coins that were crossed into PCGS-MS67 holders a few years ago without tags going back to NGC. At that time, the NGC-MS68 coin might have been worth around $1000 and the PCGS-MS67 coin might have been worth $500-$1000, so if you were building a set, it made some sense to accept the cross at the lower grade. Today, that same NGC-MS68 coin might be worth $7,500-$12,500 or more and the PCGS-MS67 coin $1000-$2000 (give or take). It is certainly good information to know which coins these are I know dealers also feel that without any meaningful incentive from PCGS, they have no interest in assisting PCGS with turning back the tags. YES, MANY TAGS ARE HANDED BACK TO PCGS FROM DEALERS/COLLECTORS WHO BELIEVE IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. But, many more are not.

Wouldn't it be great to make April the "turn in the tags month" and offer folks a token free regular submission with each "X" number of tags turned in. Seriously, that is what I would do if I were in charge of the pop report Wondercoin