Grades In (Part 2 of 2) .... I am speechless ...

TwoKopeiki · April 4, 2008 7:51AM

Ok, sorry.... I'm just flabbergasted by this batch...

After 49 business days, nonetheless...

I have never seen so many bodybags in my entire PCGS submitting history....

Ok, let me post the pictures of the coins, first... Then the grades...

These are the only ones I have photographed, I'll shoot the others when I receive them...

181X Early Guadalajara 8 Reales, overstruck on an earlier cast type, brockage :

1772 Mexico City 8 Reales, Inverted Assayer / MM :

1816 Chihuahua 8 Reales, struck over previous cast type :

1912 Caballito Peso (Ex: NGC 63) :

1915 Mexico 2 Centavos :

1934 Mexico 5 Centavos :

1814 Guadalajara 4 Reales :

1794 Lima 8 Reales :

So... Nice batch of coins, wouldn't you say?

Well, PCGS disagrees ...

50001 NO NUMBER WORLD US Cleaned (This is the early Guadalajara 8 Reales)
525774 1912 Peso MEXICO Cleaned (ex: NGC 63)
670105 1772-Mo FM 8 R Inverted FM MEXICO XF45
670167 1788-Mo FM 8 R MEXICO XF40
395331 1812-L JP 8 R PERU Cleaned
395332 1816-Ca RP 8 R KM-111.1 MEXICO Cleaned
551015 1794-L IJ 8 R PERU Cleaned (Ok, that one fits

)
164373 1814-Ga MR 4 R MEXICO VF30
525075 1915-Mo 2C 20mm MEXICO MS64BN
162262 1934-Mo 5C MEXICO MS64RB
162262 1934-Mo 5C MEXICO MS64RB

I'm going drinking. C-ya folks later

WWW · April 4, 2008 7:56AM

I do not understand the BB for that 1912 Caballito Peso (among others) at all.

ASUtodd · April 4, 2008 8:13AM

Regardles..... BEAUTIFUL COINS!! YOU SUCK!

Todd

coinkat · April 4, 2008 9:03AM

I am truly sorry to read the results posted here... while it is difficult to grade from an image, I guess I would like to see coins 1, 2 and 4 in hand.

TwoKopeiki · April 4, 2008 9:08AM

<< <i>I am truly sorry to read the results posted here... while it is difficult to grade from an image, I guess I would like to see coins 1, 2 and 4 in hand. >>

I agree about the images. I hope Josh (Civitas) stops-by this thread. He held the Caballito in his hands at Longbeach when it was still in NGC plastic. And the 1816 (6/5, actually, but I don't expect PCGS to know the subtle varieties for this series) was Josh's to begin with (as well as the Guadalajara 4R). That Chihuahua piece is one of the best War of Independence pieces I've seen.

coinkat · April 4, 2008 9:20AM

I did not mean to omit the 1816 6/5... while I do not claim to be an expert on these, your example is among the best I have seen and I do not think most collectors appreciate the real poor quality of this series.

TwoKopeiki · April 4, 2008 9:32AM

Thanks, Coinkat

Can you tell I'm a bit peeved tonight?

WWW · April 4, 2008 9:40AM

Can you tell I'm a bit peeved tonight?
Sounds like you need to go fishing. There is
a river up here where the Steelhead fishing
is absolutely fantastic right now. Come on!

coinkat · April 4, 2008 9:57AM

Disappointed? Yes... unfortunately, certain coins are very challenging to grade and about half your submission falls into that catagory.

We all have our disappointments... some of my disappointments seem to be alittle more black and white in terms of determining the most appropriate grade. Remember that grades are opinions. It is easier to have grading opinions about coins you see with great frequency... it is far more problematic to grade coins that are not submitted often or are not really well understood for reasons for become apparent by looking at the coin. What is the appropriate grade for the 1816 6/5? That is a though call and a grade is merely an opinion and some opinions are better than others...

I don't know what to say about the 1912 Peso...

I have a 1772 8R that was graded AU50 by NGC... My coin has a slightly weaker obverse strike, but is quite original and attractive... I like your coin too because the obverse looks terrific and usually the obverse will carry the grade and I would have though 50 was appropriate in this instance

As much as I like the first coin, I would just rather see it in hand before commenting...

Not all submissions go the way we think they should... as such, submitting coins again is a worthy consideration...

FilamCoins · April 4, 2008 10:06AM

Gosh, the Caballito is a little surprising. I don't remember thinking that coin was cleaned when I saw it, but then again, I wasn't looking closely since it was already in a NGC 63 holder. Are there thin hairlines under the toning when you rotate it under the light? Try doing that under different lighting. Is there a break in the luster or is the cartwheel in tact?? There are points on the obverse, like her face and knees, which look a little bald. Did that give the grader the impression that it was cleaned long ago and toned over?

dizzlecc · April 4, 2008 10:48AM

Bummer on the grades. They still look good raw.

There is some heavy clashing on the obverse of the 1794 8 Reales.

Doogy · April 4, 2008 11:19AM

I think you got hosed on the 1912 Peso, plain and simple.

Resplandor · April 4, 2008 11:32AM

Roman coinkat is so right :

<< <i>"Remember that grades are opinions. It is easier to have grading opinions about coins you see with great frequency... it is far more problematic to grade coins that are not submitted often or are not really well understood for reasons for become apparent by looking at the coin. >>

so cheer up and be assured you've got some very good looking coins there, I personally love the caballito and the early guadalajara 8 reales a whole lot.

Maybe it would be a good idea to send the caballito back to NGC with the before pics.

Cheer up!!!, we've all paid our dues...

coinkat · April 4, 2008 10:03PM

geeze... I need to start proof reading my comments... please strike "for" and insert "that" in front of become

sorry... I hope to do better next time

TwoKopeiki · April 6, 2008 12:44PM

With all the b#&^ng I forgot to mention that I'm pretty excited about the rest of the grades.

That 1915 2 Centavos had a mintage of under 500,000 pieces. These were minted in July of 1915 when General Zapata took temporary control of the Federal District that summer. He was forced to evacuate that area soon afterwards. His miniature bronze coins circulated only a short time, being declared illegal on October 19, 1916. Along with the reduced size 1 Centavo of 1915, these coins are considered "revolutionary issues" by some authorities, even though they are issues of the Mexico Federal mint.

I'm happy that the 4 Reales from Guadalajara slabbed, as well. I saw the only other PCGS-graded piece at FUN (F15, I believe).

TwoKopeiki · April 14, 2008 8:27AM

I was hoping this thread can die....

So, received my coins today and it looks like I'll be sending the 1772 "Inverted" 8R back to get it re-holdered.

Anyone wants to play "guess what's that thing rattling inside the slab on top of my coin" ?

ajaan · April 14, 2008 8:35AM

A scratch maker?

Looks like a piece of plastic from a slab.

Let us know if PCGS will pay for shipping both ways.

TwoKopeiki · April 14, 2008 8:37AM

I'm sure they'll make good. I'm going to call them tomorrow morning.

TwoKopeiki · April 14, 2008 8:48AM

Actually just talked to them. Going to send this one and another one (cross-over that was graded, but came back still in NGC plastic) back under "mechanical error". They're picking-up the tab for shipping 'em both back to me.

ajaan · April 14, 2008 8:50AM

You shouldn't have to pay for the cost of shipping the slab to them. It was their screwup. I would email Ron Guth.

MacCrimmon · April 14, 2008 9:12AM

<< <i>You shouldn't have to pay for the cost of shipping the slab to them. It was their screwup. I would email Ron Guth. >>

Quite frankly, this single issue is PCGS's biggest Customer Service shortcoming. A submitter should not even have to mention the refund of both postages for mechanical errors, it should be an automatic refund to the submitter.

TwoKopeiki · April 14, 2008 9:24AM

At this point I just want these re-holdered. I just hope it doesn't take 40+ business days this time around. And Don, I don't know mr. Guth, personally. I wouldn't feel comfortable e-mailing him about something like this.

ajaan · April 14, 2008 9:26AM

Have Dimitri do it. He's a personal friend.

coinkat · April 14, 2008 9:39AM

Sorry to read of the misfortune. While it is easy to understand and be sympathetic to errors, there is some sort of quality control and this seems to be something that I would think would have been caught before being sent.

MrEureka · April 14, 2008 11:27AM

Since I collect raw coins, perhaps I can take this cleaned POS off your hands?

TwoKopeiki · April 14, 2008 11:30AM

Andy, the sheer thought of you liking one of my coins makes me weak in the knees

TwoKopeiki · June 18, 2008 5:23AM

I realized that I haven't given an update for this batch.

I've forwarded the Caballito, 181X Guadalajara, 1816/5 Chihuahua and 1821/2 Guadalajara pieces to NGC for their opinion and received the following back:

1812 Caballito certified MS63 (The exact same grade as it was originally before I cracked it out of the NGC holder) *insert smack face icon here*

1821/2 Guadalajara came back as VF 20, but the overdate was not one of the varieties attributed by NGC.

181X Guadalajara came back bodybagged as "Illegible date". NCS didn't even encapsulate it...

1816/5 Chihuahua was encapsulated by NCS as "Counterstamped"... That one got me a bit stumped, since the two obverse counterstamps (on the left of the king's portrait a "T" indicating that the Royal Treasurer had received it and on the right, small crowned pillars of Hercules with a pomegranate between them, a symbol used by the Comptroller of the Real Hacienda to whom these pieces were turned over from the foundry room) were placed at the Mint after each piece had been checked for weight, with the lighter coins being discarded and the heavier filed down. In fact, you wouldn't be able to find an authentic Chihuahua piece from early years that do not display those either on the original coin, or the overstamped host coin in the later years. After a conversation with NGC, they agreed that it's an oversight and I'll be sending it back in to them once I am back from my vacation at the end of July.

coinsarefun · June 19, 2008 2:33AM

Awesome, stupendous, gorgeous coins

Who care about grades when you have that kind of beauty

Stefanie

sumnom · June 19, 2008 5:00AM

Fortunately, a round of subjective grading does not change the coins themselves. They are very impressive pieces.

CIVITAS · June 20, 2008 2:06AM

Roman, when it comes to world coins, what the services still don't understand could fill a warehouse. Should make you feel good that you know your series better than the "experts" though.

I do remember the Caballito, and I don't know why you cracked it in the first place but PCGS definitely dropped the ball on that one.

That Guadalajara 8R 181X is fantastic. But, not being able to read the date, I can understand why no one would put it in a holder.

7Jaguars · June 20, 2008 4:53AM

Uhh, many others can provide you with examples on difficulties with the major TPGs and foreign coins; as an example I once submitted a pattern half sovereign struck in silver and even though I had identified it in the submission came back as a sixpence....

Doogy · June 20, 2008 5:12AM

<< <i>Roman, when it comes to world coins, what the services still don't understand could fill a warehouse. Should make you feel good that you know your series better than the "experts" though.

I do remember the Caballito, and I don't know why you cracked it in the first place but PCGS definitely dropped the ball on that one.

That Guadalajara 8R 181X is fantastic. But, not being able to read the date, I can understand why no one would put it in a holder. >>

Bingo. the Caballito is a legit MS63 all day, any day that appears to be perfectly fine.

Grades In (Part 2 of 2) .... I am speechless ...

Comments