I am quite impressed actually ...
Boom
Posts: 10,165 ✭
Last night I was making my usual rounds on the net and happened upon a PCGS certified Key which also happened to be CAC stickered,
that had gone UNSOLD, for pretty obvious reasons.
NO - I will NOT post a picture of the coin out of respect for both our host and Mr. Albanese with whom I had the honor of speaking.
It DOES NOT need to be publicly shown again. By now it no longer should be viewable if the company in play here is on the ball because
they have been notified of the problem and should have removed the pictures as it is my understanding that they are sending it in, to
the correct personnel - who will deal with it.
The original post was done away with however I take no exception to the fact that it was nor does Mr. Albanese (CAC) or PCGS for my
bringing it to their collective attention. Though PCGS certified and CAC approved "Key", it went unsold and we came to the same conclusion
why.
See, this is one of those coins that is dipped, quickly submitted and makes it's way past everyone only to later "turn" in the holder!
The few that DID see it agreed that it indeed is very unsightly which probably could have avoided had the dipper/ submitter taken the
final yet most critical last step .... by taking the time to neutralize the acid in the dip.
As it stands the coin is an eyesore and in need of proper "assistance". Though the thread has been poofed, Good has now come from it
because both PCGS and JA are aware of the fact that there IS a problem. As such, the coin is now en route to the proper personnel for
evaluation and thereby Officially OFF THE MARKET!
This is one time that everything appears will work out, for the betterment of Numismatics AND the Names of both endorsers.
I am glad that the thread served it's purpose.
Thank you JA, HRH, et al for attending to this.
that had gone UNSOLD, for pretty obvious reasons.
NO - I will NOT post a picture of the coin out of respect for both our host and Mr. Albanese with whom I had the honor of speaking.
It DOES NOT need to be publicly shown again. By now it no longer should be viewable if the company in play here is on the ball because
they have been notified of the problem and should have removed the pictures as it is my understanding that they are sending it in, to
the correct personnel - who will deal with it.
The original post was done away with however I take no exception to the fact that it was nor does Mr. Albanese (CAC) or PCGS for my
bringing it to their collective attention. Though PCGS certified and CAC approved "Key", it went unsold and we came to the same conclusion
why.
See, this is one of those coins that is dipped, quickly submitted and makes it's way past everyone only to later "turn" in the holder!
The few that DID see it agreed that it indeed is very unsightly which probably could have avoided had the dipper/ submitter taken the
final yet most critical last step .... by taking the time to neutralize the acid in the dip.
As it stands the coin is an eyesore and in need of proper "assistance". Though the thread has been poofed, Good has now come from it
because both PCGS and JA are aware of the fact that there IS a problem. As such, the coin is now en route to the proper personnel for
evaluation and thereby Officially OFF THE MARKET!
This is one time that everything appears will work out, for the betterment of Numismatics AND the Names of both endorsers.
I am glad that the thread served it's purpose.
Thank you JA, HRH, et al for attending to this.
0
Comments
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
BOOM starts another **POOF** thread!
<< <i>Last night I was making my usual rounds on the net and happened upon a PCGS certified Key which also happened to be CAC stickered,
that had gone UNSOLD, for pretty obvious reasons.
NO - I will NOT post a picture of the coin out of respect for both our host and Mr. Albanese with whom I had the honor of speaking.
It DOES NOT need to be publicly shown again. By now it no longer should be viewable if the company in play here is on the ball because
they have been notified of the problem and should have removed the pictures as it is my understanding that they are sending it in, to
the correct personnel - who will deal with it.
The original post was done away with however I take no exception to the fact that it was nor does Mr. Albanese (CAC) or PCGS for my
bringing it to their collective attention. Though PCGS certified and CAC approved "Key", it went unsold and we came to the same conclusion
why.
See, this is one of those coins that is dipped, quickly submitted and makes it's way past everyone only to later "turn" in the holder!
The few that DID see it agreed that it indeed is very unsightly which probably could have avoided had the dipper/ submitter taken the
final yet most critical last step .... by taking the time to neutralize the acid in the dip.
As it stands the coin is an eyesore and in need of proper "assistance". Though the thread has been poofed, Good has now come from it
because both PCGS and JA are aware of the fact that there IS a problem. As such, the coin is now en route to the proper personnel for
evaluation and thereby Officially OFF THE MARKET!
This is one time that everything appears will work out, for the betterment of Numismatics AND the Names of both endorsers.
I am glad that the thread served it's purpose.
Thank you JA, HRH, et al for attending to this.
It seemed to me that the purpose of the last thread was to bash CAC.
merse
<< <i> I am glad that the thread served it's purpose. >>
I'm also glad CAC/PCGS has taken action on this coin. While judging a coin from pictures is always problematic, that one sure seemed to be a mistake.
However, recalling last night's posts... I'm not so sure that was your intent was to get the coin off the market in posting it, nor is there any reason to be inflammatory in your comments or exaggerate the truth to make a point. I hope that your success in this instance will not be taken as an advocacy for such (IMO) sophomoric methods.
Regardless, I agree with you that "some good has come from it", and applaud your efforts to that end.
Respectfully...Mike
Turned in the slab probably due to being dipped prior to being slabbed. This is the problem with slabbing dipped coins, if the surfaces have not been rinsed properly they become very reactive. And how do you know whether it was rinsed properly or not? You can't. And I'm not even sure this may not occur even if the coins surfaces were stabilized before encapsulation.
john
Honestly, its sad that we have to have a company like Cac, that is suppose to weed these dreck garbage coins out from the good ones. How does a doctored coin get this type of sticker?
My opinion of Cac has changed over night because of that coin. Flame me if you will, but it shows that dipped is ok even though its the most common doctoring going on in this hobby.
I hold PCGS to a different standard. They did good by going after this coin. I dont think they should have poofed the thread, or images though. Why sweep this under the rug? It only shows Cac in a bad light, not PCGS. Also, couldnt that thread have been a good education to EVERY collector?
Dipping is doctoring.
<< <i>That thread was very interesting.
Honestly, its sad that we have to have a company like Cac, that is suppose to weed these dreck garbage coins out from the good ones. How does a doctored coin get this type of sticker?
My opinion of Cac has changed over night because of that coin. Flame me if you will, but it shows that dipped is ok even though its the most common doctoring going on in this hobby.
I hold PCGS to a different standard. They did good buy going after this coin. I dont think they should have poofed the thread, or images though. Why sweep this under the rug? It only shows Cac in a bad light, not PCGS. Also, couldnt that thread have been a good education to EVERY collector?
Dipping is doctoring. >>
The two top TPG's do it!!
<< <i>That thread was very interesting.
Honestly, its sad that we have to have a company like Cac, that is suppose to weed these dreck garbage coins out from the good ones. How does a doctored coin get this type of sticker?
My opinion of Cac has changed over night because of that coin. Flame me if you will, but it shows that dipped is ok even though its the most common doctoring going on in this hobby.
I hold PCGS to a different standard. They did good by going after this coin. I dont think they should have poofed the thread, or images though. Why sweep this under the rug? It only shows Cac in a bad light, not PCGS. Also, couldnt that thread have been a good education to EVERY collector?
Dipping is doctoring. >>
There are at least two problems with your post. The first is that it is not known if the coin turned before either PCGS or CAC evaluated it; though it is likely that it turned after both saw the coin. The second is that we also do not know who might be taking action to take the coin off the market; it might be PCGS or it might be CAC.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
<< <i>It seemed to me that the purpose of the last thread was to bash CAC. >>
I think his understanding is much clearer now if that was his original intent, which I don't think it was. My respect for CAC has increased greatly since it's inception. I just have the one issue, and I think it may continue to bite them in the butt, if the percentage of dipped coins that turn ugly in the slabs exceed a certain amount.
<< <i>That thread was very interesting.
Honestly, its sad that we have to have a company like Cac, that is suppose to weed these dreck garbage coins out from the good ones. How does a doctored coin get this type of sticker?
My opinion of Cac has changed over night because of that coin. Flame me if you will, but it shows that dipped is ok even though its the most common doctoring going on in this hobby.
I hold PCGS to a different standard. They did good buy going after this coin. I dont think they should have poofed the thread, or images though. Why sweep this under the rug? It only shows Cac in a bad light, not PCGS. Also, couldnt that thread have been a good education to EVERY collector?
Dipping is doctoring. >>
While you are certainly entitled to your viewpoint, it is worth noting that the hobby at large does not share your opinion. That's not to say that dipping isn't doctoring -- because I agree with you that it is -- but rather that your stance on this issue flies in the face of numismatics as it is today.
And to be honest, it doesn't paste PCGS or CAC in a bad light at all. For all we know (and jhdfla suggested above), there's nothing to say the coin didn't turn in the holder (and after being slabbed). Unfortunately, it happens every day (and part of the value of the TPGs and CAC is to help mitigate this risk). To assign blame to PCGS or CAC for something like this with only a picture is not a conclusion I would be willing to draw -- and they are providing precisely the service we are paying them for!
Respectfully...Mike
<< <i> See, this is one of those coins that is dipped, quickly submitted and makes it's way past everyone only to later "turn" in the holder! >>
I sure wouldn't bet on that.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
CopperW
I have handled Thousands of PCGS certified Washington Quarters alone!
Besides such, I have also handled untolled numbers of other PCGS "type"
along with many other "certified" US coins. Most are quite solid because I
make it a point to really scrutinize them, in hand. (aka - Cherrypicking)
I vividly recall the very first time I encountered a PCGS certified coin that
had "turned" quite a very unsightly mess. It was totally devoid of luster and
there was a milky substance within the holder. Thankfully, this has occurred
infrequently (can count on 1 hand) and Yes, PCGS did make good on them
each & every time.
Unfortunately, such coins DO make their way past graders.
It's bound to happen, particularly bearing in mind the speed at which most
coins are graded. Time IS a factor and with this in mind, yes, such coins
COULD make their way past CAC. Obviously, the coin I pointed out is such
a coin.
Such coins definitely need to be taken from the Marketplace.
I've no axe to grind with CAC and certainly NOT with PCGS, so don't be so
quick to be judgemental based on what you THINK my purpose is.
Good point.
But, does that make it not doctoring a coin?
<<There are at least two problems with your post. The first is that it is not known if the coin turned before either PCGS or CAC evaluated it; though it is likely that it turned after both saw the coin. The second is that we also do not know who might be taking action to take the coin off the market; it might be PCGS or it might be CAC. >>
Also good points. These two questions are at the heart and soul of this particular coin I guess.
<<While you are certainly entitled to your viewpoint, it is worth noting that the hobby at large does not share your opinion. That's not to say that dipping isn't doctoring -- because I agree with you that it is -- but rather that your stance on this issue flies in the face of numismatics as it is today.
And to be honest, it doesn't paste PCGS or CAC in a bad light at all. For all we know (and jhdfla suggested above), there's nothing to say the coin didn't turn in the holder (and after being slabbed). Unfortunately, it happens every day (and part of the value of the TPGs and CAC is to help mitigate this risk). To assign blame to PCGS or CAC for something like this with only a picture is not a conclusion I would be willing to draw -- and they are providing precisely the service we are paying them for!
Respectfully...Mike>>
Some good points also Mike. I realize I may be in the minority here on this issue, but thats just how I feel.
I hope this thread doesnt go poof, alot of very intelligent posts have been made and I find this discussion very useful.
Thanks to everyone.
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Dipping ain't doctoring.
World Collection
British Collection
German States Collection
<< <i>Just wanted to add...
Dipping ain't doctoring. >>
Well, in this case at least the "doctor" was a quack... the patient died.
john
How you figure this?
Dipping is altering the surface of a coin. That is doctoring no matter what way you spin it. Doing anything to change the surface of a coin is doctoring. Maybe not profit driven, but its still doctoring.
I'm unconditionally opposed to the former, and generally opposed to the latter, although I tend to agree with
Becoka's earlier comment that if a coin is truly an eyesore, a dip may be forgivable.
debate whether or not "dipping" IS or IS NOT "doctoring" or altering
coin surfaces, that you please consider opening a new, separate
thread and NOT to derail this one.
Thank you kindly.
Respectfully,
BOOM ~
Back on topic now...
<< <i>Gentlemen - with all due respect I ask that should you wish to
debate whether or not "dipping" IS or IS NOT "doctoring" or altering
coin surfaces, that you please consider opening a new, separate
thread and NOT to derail this one.
Thank you kindly.
Respectfully,
BOOM ~
This is a stick-up. I am Hijacking this here thread. AT'ing coin doctoring, dipping is coin nursing.
merse
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
<< <i>I pledge to not dip Boom. >>
What if he is wearing his best ballgown and asks nicely?
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
Hey now!
<< <i>
<< <i>I pledge to not dip Boom. >>
What if he is wearing his best ballgown and asks nicely?
POTD!
<< <i>
<< <i>I pledge to not dip Boom. >>
What if he is wearing his best ballgown and asks nicely?
Must have lipstick, or all bets are off.
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
The coin that is the subject of my posts is currently on the way here, to me.
I'll photograph it and post when I have it in my possession.
If JA wishes to further expound on the matter, he will.
Until then ...