Old PCGS holder?

flashbang

Link

I've heard of the old green PCGS holders, but this looks like someone just grabbed a serial number and typed it onto their own paper. Did PCGS ever have holders without notice of it being graded by PCGS? Better question, is this legal?

fcloud

Looks like an original holder to me.

Welcome to the boards.

chabot510

it is legit

Barberman55

Those are the 1st generation PCGS holders (Rattlers).

LindeDad

That is the first generation or so called "Rattler" many of the coins were loose in the holders given to the rattle.
Late again.
BTW

KentuckyJ

Yes, a very old 1st generation PCGS rattler.

Have fun! Enjoy

KJ

flashbang

Thanks for the replies, and thanks for the welcome. I wasnt trying to create any witchhunts if I worded it incorrectly (I think I did ). I've just seen enough different things shown on the boards to ask questions about what I dont have knowledge of.

Barberman55

<< <i>Thanks for the replies, and thanks for the welcome. I wasnt trying to create any witchhunts if I worded it incorrectly (I think I did ). I've just seen enough different things shown on the boards to ask questions about what I dont have knowledge of. >>




Don't worry about any witchhunt...........welcome aboard. These boards are a great source of information and can be a heck of alot of fun too.

robertpr

First generation holder, used from Feb. of 1986 through Sept. of 1989. Dot-matrix style printer used to print inserts on continuous feed paper, which was perforated. Paper torn at perforations and used as slab insert. Most experts agree the grading was slightly more conservative thus many coins in those old holders might grade a point higher today. Thus, coins in those first generation holders often trade at a premium.

Beware the counterfeits of these slabs. Link

BaronVonBaugh

majorbigtime

seems legit to me--so I'm hi bid

Coxe

It's a rattler, an original PCGS slab. As for the coin, the strike is not great for the date (usually more detail in the breast feathers but that might just be the toning in the image hiding them) and there are plenty of carbon spots. The reverse toning looks fun though.

robertpr

I think the strike is OK, and what you are seeing as carbon are actually flecks of toning. The cheek is remarkably clean for a 63. I think it would go 64 by today's standards, not that it would matter much pricewise.