POLICING THE POP REPORT!

wondercoin · February 28, 2002 2:03PM

I try to keep a careful eye on the "pops" of coins in sets I routinely buy and sell coins in. Like Mint State Washington Quarters and Franklin Halves. When I see problems with the pop report, I alert the grading companies. There have been many pops changed based upon my "alerts". Everyone should do the same.

Like today when the PCGS "pop" on the 1932(p) quarter in PCGS-MS67 went from 1 to 2 and the pop on the 1936(d) quarter went from 5 to 6. I knew these mistakes were going to happen on these key date coins a couple days ago and I alerted Gail to the problem (I even alerted Bill Walser the other day that his MS66 1936(d) in his Registry set was going to show as an MS67 and needed to be fixed at PCGS, which he concurred). I will not report here exactly how these errors in the pop report happened; suffice it to say that policy at PCGS will need to be strictly enforced to ensure this problem does not happen again. I also trust the miskakes will be addressed and promptly corrected by PCGS. Frankly, if I didn't keep a careful eye on these quarters, these improper pops may have stood for a long, long time to come (possibly forever) on (2) of the key date coins in the set.

And, then there is the issue of that 1953(s) Frankin Half in PCGS-MS66FBL. I have been supplied very strong information that the coin is still a pop -1- coin. I will alert Rick M. to this issue in the near future as well, as that key date coin should have its correct pop reflected as well. IMHO, expect to see that pop drop back to -1- in the near future.

Anyone else have crystal clear information on mistakes in the pop report that need to be corrected. If so, I can see what I can do to get them corrected at the same time I fix these other problems

Wondercoin.

dragon · February 28, 2002 2:41PM

hmmmm......

braddick · February 28, 2002 2:54PM

Mitch, I'd love to know how you do it- know that a pop is wrong on a coin, but regardless, here's my "please fix" pop error: The 1964 Kennedy in MS68. The pop on this is off by two! One is in an NGC holder as a Specimen69 (unless it's been crossed back into a PCGS SMS69) and the other is really a proof coin (PR68) that has been entered into the database as a MS68. it was actually offered on eBay last summer than quickly withdrawn when the seller realized their error. The scan in the auction was obviously that of a PROOF coin.
Also, the MS69 1982-D (I think) Kennedy in MS69 is REALLY a Washington commemorative half, accidently listed under the Kennedies.

keithdagen · February 28, 2002 3:09PM

I can vouch with Pat on seeing the proof Kennedy in a MS-68 slab. It was almost a full CAM to boot. Seller withdrew rapidly before anyone got a bid around. I think that the MS-69 he refers to has been fixed already though, but you never know.

Keith

itsnotjustme · February 28, 2002 3:10PM

I know of a 1966 MS67 Roosevelt (Pop 22) that should be SMS67 (pop 200). I will be sending this one back personally, so no need for you to engage on it.

wondercoin · February 28, 2002 4:09PM

Pat and Keith: I will bring those coins to Rick's attention as well. I agree with you guys on those.

The SMS coins have been a problem in the past. I asked Rick to simply remove the obvious MS68/69 regular issue coins that were really SMS coins about a year ago and he did. In the -1- rare case that a 1965 dime was really a regular issue, the owner simply proved it to Rick (or is in the process of doing so). Hence, this is a "win-win" situation no matter how you look at it. Wondercoin.

merz2 · February 28, 2002 6:40PM

Mitch
I agree the pop reports must be kept as up to date as possible.We all know the effect the low pop coin reports have on prices realized.It is to our benefit as well as the gradeing companies.

wondercoin · March 1, 2002 1:07AM

I've already received an email from Rick M. asking me for the serial numbers of the Wash Quarters so that he can remove them from the pop report. Does anyone have serial numbers for any of those Kennedy halves mentioned?

Wondercoin

TomB · March 1, 2002 1:56AM

I also noticed the PF68 Kennedy in an MS68 holder on ebay and may have saved the image, I'll look for it. Also, the NGC Specimen 69 has not been crossed as far as I know. I know the owner of this coin and will ask for an image of it in its current slab.

Typetone · March 1, 2002 2:22AM

Mitch:

I believe that one of the two 1976D Type 1 IKEs in MS67 is an incorrectly labeled Type 2. Tad would have the details on that. Problem is that the fellow who bought it (presumably for a type 2 price) possibly doesn't really want to resubmit it for correction.

Greg

Refrema · March 1, 2002 2:27AM

I am concerned that the population reports are already so bad, that they will never be able to be fixed.

Look at some of the coins where there is a high grade with a low population 10 to 20, and the grade just below it has hundreds or even more than a thousand coins. How many of those hundreds, are coins that were cracked out, and resubmitted gambling on getting that higher grade?

Nobody turns in old labels for that coin to be removed from the population report. So for every coin cracked out, the numbers are WRONG.

A couple weeks ago, several members expressed the opinion that far more than 50% of the coins have been submitted more than once, therefore more than 50% of the population report is WRONG.

Bob

wondercoin · March 1, 2002 2:49AM

"I am concerned that the population reports are already so bad, that they will never be able to be fixed."

Got to start somewhere.

Wondercoin

Dennisl · March 1, 2002 2:57AM

The 1976D Type I Ike Pop is really 1 not 2. The Pop report originally showed a Pop of 3. I purchased two of the 3 coins and both of them were Type II coins labeled as Type I. I returned both coins to the dealers that sold them to me. One dealer turned the coin in to PCGS for the correct designation to be added. The other dealer resold the coin knowing it was incorrectly labeled. I have the certificate numbers for both coins. When I check these certificate numbers now, one says Type I and the other is now correctly labeled as a Type II. If you need the cert #s, Mitch, PM me and I will give them to you.

Thanks Dennis

wondercoin · March 1, 2002 3:14AM

"If you need the cert #s, Mitch, PM me and I will give them to you. "

Dennis: Yes, thanks. Please send those to me as well with information on which coin wasn't changed.

IMHO, "cleaning up the pop report" really isn't as hard as one might imagine if you start with these basic objectives and realizations:

1. You are never going to "clean up" undergrade coin issues as that will only be accomplished by collectors and dealers returning tags of cracked out coins.

2. The goal of "cleaning up" the finest known grade is the real target anyway, as these coins, in a sense, dictate, to some extent, what the undergrade coins command anyway, pricing on finest known coins is somewhat linked to existing pop figures and these finest known coins are what most collectors / dealers seek to obtain.

Yes, I admit we'll never know the "true pop" of the 1881(s) Morgan in PCGS-MS66, but it sure would be nice to try to get the pop information on the MS68/69 coins as close to accurate as possible. Same with modern coins - the primary target is really "alleged" finest known coins.

Wondercoin

gmarguli · March 1, 2002 3:25AM

As long as PCGS won't pay for the return of the inserts, the Population Report will never be anywhere near accurate. As long as people will pay money for an inaccurate Population Report from PCGS, PCGS will never pay for the inserts.

I'd guess the Populations for the 1965-1967 MS Kennedy halves are way off. I've seen quite a few SMS coins in regular MS slabs. Based on the amount I've seen, I would guess that at least 25% of the regular MS coins are really SMS coins.

washvarieties · March 1, 2002 12:25PM

WOW FBL 2 1932 P in ms67 how is that
Here is a list of ones I've wanted with some other possibles:
1957 4-r-v various grades of ms
1936 ddr(beak) au50, 58. Looks like i have 2 diif dies
1936 ?-0-v shows on date, nice on motto ms63 heavy toning
1943d ?-o-iv(actually a class 1+11 on liberty), au55
1941 12-r-vi(extr strong, super rare!) au-58(wddr-002)
1942 ?-r-iv(unlisted doubled beak),bu
1942d 2-r-iv au55(dble beak, wings, arrows, wreath), au55
1943 9-0-1 au58(wddo014)
1943 13-0-1, ms63(wddo-015)
1943d 1-r-v, nicely toned bu
1944 8-0-vi, au581944d 3-r-iv, au55(lower 1/2 dbled N, us of a doubled like cl ll),
1945 1-r-v eds(act. cl 1)au55
1945 7-0-v(strong liberty, lt. dat, des in.) ms65( wddo-006 looks better than photo)
1945d ?-0-v similar to above but sl. stronger, xf(stronger than wddo-oo1)
1946 7-0-ll-Vl ms64(Extreme on date, liberty, motto-not die3)
1946 ?-0-l(stronger than 1943 die9) ms63
1946d 1-0-V ms64(strong liberty, des init.)
1947 ?-0-Vl ms63(extr at date, motto, moderate at liberty)
1942 2-r-V anacs61, 63
1943 11-0-1 segs45
Many of these peices are the discovery pieces from when Geoff and I were working on the book. They have the numbers he assigned to them at that time. I have several hundred more but these would be the more obvious ones
just when you think

WANTED a 1943 Washington (11-O-I) in BU

itsnotjustme · March 1, 2002 3:32PM

Mitch,
Maybe you can hit them up about the 2002-P Sac also. I'm pretty sure it was MS67 the other day, today it's an MS66. CoinWorld may look into this one!

POLICING THE POP REPORT!

Comments