Here's a proof coin that ANACS designated as "PR58 PL"

dan1ecu

PR58 PL

Do you think the PL designation is to distinguish it from other circulated proofs that don't have mirrored surfaces?

Dan

techeff

The designation is valid and should be used by all grading companies. Would a proof coin no longer be proof because it has been circulated? NO!

coinguy1

<< <i>Would a proof coin no longer be proof because it has been circulated? NO! >>

It would of course still be a Proof. But, I don't think that was the point of the post. I believe the PL designation (on a Proof coin) is usually going to be redundant and unnecessary.

techeff

My bad... I didn't realize the coin was PR.

ziggy29

What is Heritage smoking? Here's their description of the coin:

Although designated by ANACS as "PR58 Prooflike" we believe this coin to be a proof.

Umm...Heritage? The "PR" designation in the ANACS grade WOULD mean they too think it's a "Proof," would it not?

LanLord

Sounds like ANACS and Heritage have been using the same drugs. And too many of them at that

techeff

I can understand if the coin were MS, but designating a PR coin PL is just silly.

tjkillian

PR means Proof
PL means it is Proof-like.

Either it is a proof or it is a business strike that has properties of a proof coin.

It is an oxymoron.

Tom

flaminio

<< <i>PR means Proof
PL means it is Proof-like.

Either it is a proof or it is a business strike that has properties of a proof coin.

It is an oxymoron. >>

Clearly, it's an error on the slab. Someone mistyped it. PF XX PL makes no sense.

K6AZ

I agree, it's an input error. Either it's a PF58 (most likely) or an AU58 PL.

keets

my impression after a quick glance is mislabeling and it was meant to be AU58 PL.

al h.