<< <i>For now, a more accurate thread title would be something along the lines of " PCGS SUES COIN DOCTORS!" or " PCGS TAKES AIM AT COIN DOCTORS!" I hope that the eventual result ends up being " PCGS NAILS COIN DOCTORS!" >>
agreed. especially since names of defandants are being posted in the thread. I don't know any of the names mentioned, but it's important to remember that just because the PCGS Sniffer is calling out these dealers doesn't mean they have committed any crime... they still have their day in court first.
edited at add that it seems like some pretty cool technology though, will be interested to learn how it can differentiate between sniffing the bad stuff on a coin vs. sniffing out accepted "conservation" techniques like dipping coins.
>>
It would also be interesting "proving" that those who submitted the coins were the actual "doctors". To me it appears that there is lot's of latitude regarding "who did what to what" other than submitting a coin for grading. >>
I believe that it would be a violation of an authorized dealer's membership agreement to knowingly submit a coin that someone else had doctored. So, it's possible that a submitter could face problems with a grading company even if he was not the actual coin doctor.
Edited to add:
<< <i>www.coinlink.com has a copy on line
I also hope PCGS can get some criminal counts on those guys.
Its great to finally see names and action. I do not think these names can be repeated enough:
Al Rossman Eric Steinberg Rick Wesslink Silvano Digenova Greg Krill Robert Lehmann Does 1-10 >>
At this point, in a court of law, the named defendants are presumed innocent of any wrong doing.
<< <i>[It would also be interesting "proving" that those who submitted the coins were the actual "doctors". To me it appears that there is lot's of latitude regarding "who did what to what" other than submitting a coin for grading. >>
Good point, Lee. It does seem like it would be hard to prove...
<< <i>For now, a more accurate thread title would be something along the lines of " PCGS SUES COIN DOCTORS!" or " PCGS TAKES AIM AT COIN DOCTORS!" I hope that the eventual result ends up being " PCGS NAILS COIN DOCTORS!" >>
agreed. especially since names of defandants are being posted in the thread. I don't know any of the names mentioned, but it's important to remember that just because the PCGS Sniffer is calling out these dealers doesn't mean they have committed any crime... they still have their day in court first.
edited at add that it seems like some pretty cool technology though, will be interested to learn how it can differentiate between sniffing the bad stuff on a coin vs. sniffing out accepted "conservation" techniques like dipping coins.
>>
I wonder how the courts will differentiate between stripping away a layer of the coins surface thru dipping to enhance the grade/value
and moving the molecules of the coins surface around or adding to the coins surfaces to enhance the grade/value .
How a lawyer on one hand can argue it's o.k. to alter a coin one way , but on the other hand it is not o.k and criminal to do it another way
Lou, please explain? Thanks. Edited to add: I believe that the last name of the third person mentioned is incorrect.
Here's a picture of the first page of the original complaint, which is, of course, a public record. Apparently, DaveE has seen an amended complaint, but it's not up on PACER (at least not that I can see).
Edited to add: I just clicked on a couple links above . . . looks like I'm late as usual.
<< <i>Lou, please explain? Thanks. Edited to add: I believe that the last name of the third person mentioned is incorrect.
Here's a picture of the first page of the original complaint, which is, of course, a public record. Apparently, DaveE has seen an amended complaint, but it's not up on PACER (at least not that I can see).
>>
The amended copy shows the name Rick Wesslink, not Rick Westlake. I have heard of the former, but not the latter, which is part of the reason your post confused me.
Is this the same Eric Steinberg of Broward County Coins and Collectibles, Inc, or Silvano DiGenova, CEO of Tangible Asset Galleries, or Greg Krill of North Bay Rare Coin and Jewelry, or Robert Lehmann of The Reeded Edge? If so, Wow! Jim
Edited to add: I truly understand that anyone may be named in a lawsuit and all may be innocent of any wrongdoing until proved otherwise.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
Is this the same Eric Steinberg of Broward County Coins and Collectibles, Inc, or Silvano DiGenova, CEO of Tangible Asset Galleries, or Greg Krill of North Bay Rare Coin and Jewelry, or Robert Lehmann of The Reeded Edge? If so, Wow!
Recognize any of those names below?
"The original founders/owners of PCGS are as follows (with their percentage of ownership)
David Hall/Van Simmons 50% Bruce Amspacher 10% Gordon Wrubel 10% John Dannreuther 10% Steve Cyrkin 10% silvano DiGenova 10%
<< <i>At this point, in a court of law, the named defendants are presumed innocent of any wrong doing >>
Exactly right. There are miles and miles between being indicted and being convicted. I recognize some of the names, and none of them is going to go down without a fight. It's going to get very interesting as this proceeds.
Except that no one has been charged or indicted, and no one will be convicted, at least not in these civil proceedings. We're not talking innocence or guilt; we're talking potential liability for monetary damages.
<< <i>Except that no one has been charged or indicted, and no one will be convicted, at least not in these civil proceedings. We're not talking innocence or guilt; we're talking potential liability for monetary damages. >>
My error with regard to misinterpretation of the law. But I stand by the rest of my statement.
<< <i>Except that no one has been charged or indicted, and no one will be convicted, at least not in these civil proceedings. We're not talking innocence or guilt; we're talking potential liability for monetary damages. >>
My error with regard to misinterpretation of the law. But I stand by the rest of my statement. >>
I guess I share some of the blame for that, as I provoked his response.
<< <i>At this point, in a court of law, the named defendants are presumed innocent of any wrong doing >>
Exactly right. There are miles and miles between being indicted and being convicted. I recognize some of the names, and none of them is going to go down without a fight. It's going to get very interesting as this proceeds.
john >>
Even if PCGS doesn't win, these coin doctors will at least be exposed.
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
It will be interesting to see how far they get with RICO.
Can't only the government bring that charge against known criminal gangs? Would that mean anyone of us could go to jail just for talking to these folks?
It will be interesting to see how steps forward as an expert witness for each side.
Yes, these creatures are innocent until proven quilty. These are some claims:
•1885 $5 gold piece, originally submitted to PCGS on Dec 16, 2009 by Steinberg on behalf of Defendant Rossman. Foreign substance added to coin’s surface to cover marks.
•1879 $4 Stella gold piece, Originally submitted by Heritage on May 8, 2008. Resubmitted on August 28, 2009 by DiGenova after having been laser treated to remove lines. PCGS refused to grade the coin.
I do not know how to do a link. The entire suit is on coinlink.com.
Its seems there are many others listed too. You'd figure these guys would have to know who or what they are submitting?
<< <i>It will be interesting to see how far they get with RICO.
Can't only the government bring that charge against known criminal gangs? Would that mean anyone of us could go to jail just for talking to these folks?
It will be interesting to see how steps forward as an expert witness for each side. >>
No, not just the government and not just against criminal gangs. And no, you couldn't go to jail just for "talking to these folks".
I knew that coin doctoring had infiltrated the marketplace at the very highest levels of the industry ,
and stated so in writing more then once on these boards .
You doubting Thomas's should not have to wait long for the proof you so loudly clamoured for .
This is indeed the " Big One " , and I can only hope it doesn't explode into suits and counter suits of "other" alleged improprieties within the closets
<< <i>It will be interesting to see how far they get with RICO.
Can't only the government bring that charge against known criminal gangs? Would that mean anyone of us could go to jail just for talking to these folks?
It will be interesting to see how steps forward as an expert witness for each side. >>
No, not just the government and not just against criminal gangs. And no, you couldn't go to jail just for "talking to these folks". >>
This move has important ramifications if successful
1. It will establish a legal precedent ,that doctoring coins in order to profit from such deceit ,is unlawful as well as the remedies to be determined by trial.
2. It puts on notice to all future coin doctors that the risks have gone up on such practices.
3. It will disrupt the small organized group of influential people that are indulged in such practices and , give it cover as well as the dealers that frequently and knowingly use such services to profit at the expense of collectors as well as TPGs.
I believe this effort is the greatest move forward for the coin hobby in the past 100 years. Way to go PCGS and all who are involved in protecting the security of the coins we collect.
Really strange how some of the people who push to make graded coins some of the best in the world end up attempting and in some cases succeeding in putting trashed coins up to make a buck. I realize some of these coins go without detection and everyone oooos and aaaaahhs at them and some collectors know and don’t care if the coins have been doctored but GEEES where are these people’s integrity? I hope they get what’s due. I’d rather be half a millionaire and honest about what I’m selling than a multi millionaire selling trash and having a lawsuit to answer thousands of customers why I found it necessary to rip them off. It’s really disgusting to see dealers at this level doing this kind of activity.
"May the silver waves that bear you heavenward be filled with love’s whisperings"
"A dog breaks your heart only one time and that is when they pass on". Unknown
<< <i>Really strange how some of the people who push to make graded coins some of the best in the world end up attempting and in some cases succeeding in putting trashed coins up to make a buck. I realize some of these coins go without detection and everyone oooos and aaaaahhs at them and some collectors know and don’t care if the coins have been doctored but GEEES where are these people’s integrity? I hope they get what’s due. I’d rather be half a millionaire and honest about what I’m selling than a multi millionaire selling trash and having a lawsuit to answer thousands of customers why I found it necessary to rip them off. It’s really disgusting to see dealers at this level doing this kind of activity. >>
If someone did those things, then I agree with you. But as of now, they have merely been named in a complaint.
<< <i>Yes, these creatures are innocent until proven quilty. These are some claims:
•1885 $5 gold piece, originally submitted to PCGS on Dec 16, 2009 by Steinberg on behalf of Defendant Rossman. Foreign substance added to coin’s surface to cover marks.
•1879 $4 Stella gold piece, Originally submitted by Heritage on May 8, 2008. Resubmitted on August 28, 2009 by DiGenova after having been laser treated to remove lines. PCGS refused to grade the coin.
I do not know how to do a link. The entire suit is on coinlink.com.
Its seems there are many others listed too. You'd figure these guys would have to know who or what they are submitting? >>
Here is some more!! 1926-D 25C, originally submitted to PCGS on March 23, 2001 through Liberty Coins. Re-purchased in September 23, 2008 under PCGS Guarantee. Liverty’s head artificially enhanced.
1810 $10 gold piece, originally submitted to PCGS on November 29, 2006 through Defendant Steinberg. Re-purchased in June 2009 for $1800 under PCGS Guarantee. Foreign substance added to coin’s surface to cover marks.
1881 $2.5 gold piece, originally submitted to PCGS on Dec 16, 2009 by Steinberg on behalf of Defendant Rossman, held by PCGS pending trial in this action. Lines on coin’s surface lasered off.
1885 $5 gold piece, originally submitted to PCGS on Dec 16, 2009 by Steinberg on behalf of Defendant Rossman. Foreign substance added to coin’s surface to cover marks.
1879 $4 Stella gold piece, Originally submitted by Heritage on May 8, 2008. Resubmitted on August 28, 2009 by DiGenova after having been laser treated to remove lines. PCGS refused to grade the coin.
1918-D Mecury 10C, orginially submitted to PCGS on May 17, 2001 by Defendant Digenova’s company, Tangible Assets. Re-purchased in April 27, 2010 for $90,000 under PCGS Guarantee. Crossbands on dime had been rebuilt.
1833 Bust 50C, originally submitted on April 8, 2004 by Superior Galleries. Re-purchased in June 22, 2008 for $8,500 under PCGS Guarantee.
1928-D Standing Liberty 25C, originally submitted on May 30, 2001 by Digenova’s company, Tangible Assets. Re-purchased in March 2005 for $4,650 under PCGS Guarantee. Liberty’s Head was rebuilt to appear “full”.
1904 $20 gold piece, originally submitted April 1998 by Krill. Re-purchased December 2007 for $1,250 under PCGS Guarantee. Foreign substance applied.
1926-D Standing Liberty 25c originally submitted in July 2001 by Lehmann. Re-purchased in June 2007 for $7,500 under PCGS Guarantee. Liberty’s head rebuilt.
1919-S Mercury dim originally submitted on August 13, 2001 by Lehmann. Re-purchased in September 2009 for $4,887. Crossbans on dime had been rebuilt.
1918-S quarter orginally submitted in April 2001 by Dan Ratner. Re-purchased in February 2007 for $3500. Liberty’s heat rebuilt.
I think items like this is what the case will be built on. Coins submitted then submitted again with changes.
1879 $4 Stella gold piece, Originally submitted by Heritage on May 8, 2008. Resubmitted on August 28, 2009 by DiGenova after having been laser treated to remove lines. PCGS refused to grade the coin.
Do we have a list of the companies that the accused are part of?
Even if this case ultimately gets thrown out I feel that it will, initially, be a great deterrant for future submission of Doctored coins. However, if this case does get thrown out is CU subject to counter suit for libel/slander?
Finally- Does this really act a deterrant for those people who just add color, cook coins, or otherwise just mess with the over all color/appearance of a coin ? It appears that the people who are being "charged" are adding metal, lasering, etc etc etc-
This seems like a bit of a longshot to me but I love the idea of it... I think it is aggressive and cutting edge- Now, if we can just get CU to get aggressive with counterfeit coins-
When coins are submitted, does the submitter sign a statement stating the coins haven't been messed with? If not, I believe this lawsuit has no merit. It's PCGS' nob to certify coins and recognize doctoring. If they don't have the expertise to do it, or it's not possible to recognize coins that later "turn," perhaps they shouldn't offer their guarantee. Perhaps the goal of the suit is for PCGS to be the "deep pockets bully" and it that way, they probably will succeed.
<< <i>When coins are submitted, does the submitter sign a statement stating the coins haven't been messed with? If not, I believe this lawsuit has no merit. It's PCGS' nob to certify coins and recognize doctoring. If they don't have the expertise to do it, or it's not possible to recognize coins that later "turn," perhaps they shouldn't offer their guarantee. Perhaps the goal of the suit is for PCGS to be the "deep pockets bully" and it that way, they probably will succeed. >>
I thought in the complaint they quote the terms to submitting coins that has a clause as you mention.
<< <i>Even if this case ultimately gets thrown out I feel that it will, initially, be a great deterrant for future submission of Doctored coins. However, if this case does get thrown out is CU subject to counter suit for libel/slander?
Finally- Does this really act a deterrant for those people who just add color, cook coins, or otherwise just mess with the over all color/appearance of a coin ? It appears that the people who are being "charged" are adding metal, lasering, etc etc etc-
This seems like a bit of a longshot to me but I love the idea of it... I think it is aggressive and cutting edge- Now, if we can just get CU to get aggressive with counterfeit coins-
John >>
John, it's not confined to "adding metal, lasering, etc etc etc-". The complaint includes a number of coins listed, to which "foreign substance" is alleged to have been added.
Comments
"Inspiration exists, but it has to find you working" Pablo Picasso
I also hope PCGS can get some criminal counts on those guys.
Its great to finally see names and action. I do not think these names can be repeated enough:
Al Rossman
Eric Steinberg
Rick Wesslink
Silvano Digenova
Greg Krill
Robert Lehmann
Does 1-10
Kudos to PCGS for stepping up. No more excuses about being sued by coin doctors for revealing names.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>For now, a more accurate thread title would be something along the lines of " PCGS SUES COIN DOCTORS!" or " PCGS TAKES AIM AT COIN DOCTORS!" I hope that the eventual result ends up being " PCGS NAILS COIN DOCTORS!" >>
agreed. especially since names of defandants are being posted in the thread. I don't know any of the names mentioned, but it's important to remember that just because the PCGS Sniffer is calling out these dealers doesn't mean they have committed any crime... they still have their day in court first.
edited at add that it seems like some pretty cool technology though, will be interested to learn how it can differentiate between sniffing the bad stuff on a coin vs. sniffing out accepted "conservation" techniques like dipping coins.
It would also be interesting "proving" that those who submitted the coins were the actual "doctors".
To me it appears that there is lot's of latitude regarding "who did what to what" other than submitting a coin for grading. >>
I believe that it would be a violation of an authorized dealer's membership agreement to knowingly submit a coin that someone else had doctored. So, it's possible that a submitter could face problems with a grading company even if he was not the actual coin doctor.
Edited to add:
<< <i>www.coinlink.com has a copy on line
I also hope PCGS can get some criminal counts on those guys.
Its great to finally see names and action. I do not think these names can be repeated enough:
Al Rossman
Eric Steinberg
Rick Wesslink
Silvano Digenova
Greg Krill
Robert Lehmann
Does 1-10 >>
At this point, in a court of law, the named defendants are presumed innocent of any wrong doing.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
<< <i>[It would also be interesting "proving" that those who submitted the coins were the actual "doctors".
To me it appears that there is lot's of latitude regarding "who did what to what" other than submitting a coin for grading. >>
Good point, Lee. It does seem like it would be hard to prove...
<< <i>
<< <i>For now, a more accurate thread title would be something along the lines of " PCGS SUES COIN DOCTORS!" or " PCGS TAKES AIM AT COIN DOCTORS!" I hope that the eventual result ends up being " PCGS NAILS COIN DOCTORS!" >>
agreed. especially since names of defandants are being posted in the thread. I don't know any of the names mentioned, but it's important to remember that just because the PCGS Sniffer is calling out these dealers doesn't mean they have committed any crime... they still have their day in court first.
edited at add that it seems like some pretty cool technology though, will be interested to learn how it can differentiate between sniffing the bad stuff on a coin vs. sniffing out accepted "conservation" techniques like dipping coins.
I wonder how the courts will differentiate between stripping away a layer of the coins surface thru dipping to enhance the grade/value
and moving the molecules of the coins surface around or adding to the coins surfaces to enhance the grade/value .
How a lawyer on one hand can argue it's o.k. to alter a coin one way , but on the other hand it is not o.k and criminal to do it another way
will be very interesting to see played out .
Here's a picture of the first page of the original complaint, which is, of course, a public record. Apparently, DaveE has seen an amended complaint, but it's not up on PACER (at least not that I can see).
Edited to add: I just clicked on a couple links above . . . looks like I'm late as usual.
<< <i>IGWT. The action I saw was CV10-03602 SJO (MLGX) First amended
It named:
Al Rossman
Eric Steinberg
Rick Wesslink
Silvano Digenova
Greg Krill
Robert Lehmann
Does 1-10
I do not know any of these guys. Who are they? >>
According to the PNG Member Directory on the PNG website, Steinberg, Digenova, and Krill are PNG Member Dealers.
<< <i>Lou, please explain? Thanks. Edited to add: I believe that the last name of the third person mentioned is incorrect.
Here's a picture of the first page of the original complaint, which is, of course, a public record. Apparently, DaveE has seen an amended complaint, but it's not up on PACER (at least not that I can see).
The amended copy shows the name Rick Wesslink, not Rick Westlake. I have heard of the former, but not the latter, which is part of the reason your post confused me.
100% Positive BST transactions
If so, Wow!
Jim
Edited to add: I truly understand that anyone may be named in a lawsuit and all may be innocent of any wrongdoing until proved otherwise.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
Recognize any of those names below?
"The original founders/owners of PCGS are as follows (with their percentage of ownership)
David Hall/Van Simmons 50%
Bruce Amspacher 10%
Gordon Wrubel 10%
John Dannreuther 10%
Steve Cyrkin 10%
silvano DiGenova 10%
Those are the founders of PCGS.
I know, because I was there.
hrh"
Link to thread with HRH post
peacockcoins
<< <i>What a terrible day for RYK to swear off he forums for the summer! >>
I just made the same comment in his "Out of the 'Loupe'" thread. Great minds!
<< <i>At this point, in a court of law, the named defendants are presumed innocent of any wrong doing >>
Exactly right. There are miles and miles between being indicted and being convicted. I recognize some of the names, and none of them is going to go down without a fight. It's going to get very interesting as this proceeds.
john
<< <i>
According to the PNG Member Directory on the PNG website, Steinberg, Digenova, and Krill are PNG Member Dealers. >>
Text
Positive BST Transactions (buyers and sellers): wondercoin, blu62vette, BAJJERFAN, privatecoin, blu62vette, AlanLastufka, privatecoin
#1 1951 Bowman Los Angeles Rams Team Set
#2 1980 Topps Los Angeles Rams Team Set
#8 (and climbing) 1972 Topps Los Angeles Rams Team Set
<< <i>Except that no one has been charged or indicted, and no one will be convicted, at least not in these civil proceedings. We're not talking innocence or guilt; we're talking potential liability for monetary damages. >>
My error with regard to misinterpretation of the law. But I stand by the rest of my statement.
<< <i>
<< <i>Except that no one has been charged or indicted, and no one will be convicted, at least not in these civil proceedings. We're not talking innocence or guilt; we're talking potential liability for monetary damages. >>
My error with regard to misinterpretation of the law. But I stand by the rest of my statement. >>
I guess I share some of the blame for that, as I provoked his response.
Positive BST Transactions (buyers and sellers): wondercoin, blu62vette, BAJJERFAN, privatecoin, blu62vette, AlanLastufka, privatecoin
#1 1951 Bowman Los Angeles Rams Team Set
#2 1980 Topps Los Angeles Rams Team Set
#8 (and climbing) 1972 Topps Los Angeles Rams Team Set
<< <i>
<< <i>At this point, in a court of law, the named defendants are presumed innocent of any wrong doing >>
Exactly right. There are miles and miles between being indicted and being convicted. I recognize some of the names, and none of them is going to go down without a fight. It's going to get very interesting as this proceeds.
john >>
Even if PCGS doesn't win, these coin doctors will at least be exposed.
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
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Can't only the government bring that charge against known criminal gangs? Would that mean anyone of us could go to jail just for talking to these folks?
It will be interesting to see how steps forward as an expert witness for each side.
•1885 $5 gold piece, originally submitted to PCGS on Dec 16, 2009 by Steinberg on behalf of Defendant Rossman. Foreign substance added to coin’s surface to cover marks.
•1879 $4 Stella gold piece, Originally submitted by Heritage on May 8, 2008. Resubmitted on August 28, 2009 by DiGenova after having been laser treated to remove lines. PCGS refused to grade the coin.
I do not know how to do a link. The entire suit is on coinlink.com.
Its seems there are many others listed too. You'd figure these guys would have to know who or what they are submitting?
<< <i>It will be interesting to see how far they get with RICO.
Can't only the government bring that charge against known criminal gangs? Would that mean anyone of us could go to jail just for talking to these folks?
It will be interesting to see how steps forward as an expert witness for each side. >>
No, not just the government and not just against criminal gangs. And no, you couldn't go to jail just for "talking to these folks".
<< <i> You'd figure these guys would have to know who or what they are submitting? >>
That's what seems like the tricky part. How can you prove that someone knows something?
and stated so in writing more then once on these boards .
You doubting Thomas's should not have to wait long for the proof you so loudly clamoured for .
This is indeed the " Big One " , and I can only hope it doesn't explode into suits and counter suits of "other" alleged improprieties within the closets
of the inner sanctums of the PCGS grading rooms .
<< <i>
<< <i>It will be interesting to see how far they get with RICO.
Can't only the government bring that charge against known criminal gangs? Would that mean anyone of us could go to jail just for talking to these folks?
It will be interesting to see how steps forward as an expert witness for each side. >>
No, not just the government and not just against criminal gangs. And no, you couldn't go to jail just for "talking to these folks". >>
Thanks. Guess I watched "Goodfellas" too much
Hopefully this well help out a lot in the long run.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
1. It will establish a legal precedent ,that doctoring coins
in order to profit from such deceit ,is unlawful as well as the
remedies to be determined by trial.
2. It puts on notice to all future coin doctors that the risks
have gone up on such practices.
3. It will disrupt the small organized group of influential people
that are indulged in such practices and , give it cover as well as
the dealers that frequently and knowingly use such services to
profit at the expense of collectors as well as TPGs.
I believe this effort is the greatest move forward for the coin hobby
in the past 100 years. Way to go PCGS and all who are involved in
protecting the security of the coins we collect.
Camelot
"A dog breaks your heart only one time and that is when they pass on". Unknown
bob
<< <i>Really strange how some of the people who push to make graded coins some of the best in the world end up attempting and in some cases succeeding in putting trashed coins up to make a buck. I realize some of these coins go without detection and everyone oooos and aaaaahhs at them and some collectors know and don’t care if the coins have been doctored but GEEES where are these people’s integrity? I hope they get what’s due. I’d rather be half a millionaire and honest about what I’m selling than a multi millionaire selling trash and having a lawsuit to answer thousands of customers why I found it necessary to rip them off. It’s really disgusting to see dealers at this level doing this kind of activity. >>
If someone did those things, then I agree with you. But as of now, they have merely been named in a complaint.
<< <i>Yes, these creatures are innocent until proven quilty. These are some claims:
•1885 $5 gold piece, originally submitted to PCGS on Dec 16, 2009 by Steinberg on behalf of Defendant Rossman. Foreign substance added to coin’s surface to cover marks.
•1879 $4 Stella gold piece, Originally submitted by Heritage on May 8, 2008. Resubmitted on August 28, 2009 by DiGenova after having been laser treated to remove lines. PCGS refused to grade the coin.
I do not know how to do a link. The entire suit is on coinlink.com.
Its seems there are many others listed too. You'd figure these guys would have to know who or what they are submitting? >>
Here is some more!!
1926-D 25C, originally submitted to PCGS on March 23, 2001 through Liberty Coins. Re-purchased in September 23, 2008 under PCGS Guarantee. Liverty’s head artificially enhanced.
1810 $10 gold piece, originally submitted to PCGS on November 29, 2006 through Defendant Steinberg. Re-purchased in June 2009 for $1800 under PCGS Guarantee. Foreign substance added to coin’s surface to cover marks.
1881 $2.5 gold piece, originally submitted to PCGS on Dec 16, 2009 by Steinberg on behalf of Defendant Rossman, held by PCGS pending trial in this action. Lines on coin’s surface lasered off.
1885 $5 gold piece, originally submitted to PCGS on Dec 16, 2009 by Steinberg on behalf of Defendant Rossman. Foreign substance added to coin’s surface to cover marks.
1879 $4 Stella gold piece, Originally submitted by Heritage on May 8, 2008. Resubmitted on August 28, 2009 by DiGenova after having been laser treated to remove lines. PCGS refused to grade the coin.
1918-D Mecury 10C, orginially submitted to PCGS on May 17, 2001 by Defendant Digenova’s company, Tangible Assets. Re-purchased in April 27, 2010 for $90,000 under PCGS Guarantee. Crossbands on dime had been rebuilt.
1833 Bust 50C, originally submitted on April 8, 2004 by Superior Galleries. Re-purchased in June 22, 2008 for $8,500 under PCGS Guarantee.
1928-D Standing Liberty 25C, originally submitted on May 30, 2001 by Digenova’s company, Tangible Assets. Re-purchased in March 2005 for $4,650 under PCGS Guarantee. Liberty’s Head was rebuilt to appear “full”.
1904 $20 gold piece, originally submitted April 1998 by Krill. Re-purchased December 2007 for $1,250 under PCGS Guarantee. Foreign substance applied.
1926-D Standing Liberty 25c originally submitted in July 2001 by Lehmann. Re-purchased in June 2007 for $7,500 under PCGS Guarantee. Liberty’s head rebuilt.
1919-S Mercury dim originally submitted on August 13, 2001 by Lehmann. Re-purchased in September 2009 for $4,887. Crossbans on dime had been rebuilt.
1918-S quarter orginally submitted in April 2001 by Dan Ratner. Re-purchased in February 2007 for $3500. Liberty’s heat rebuilt.
Brother ain't that the truth!!!!
WS
<< <i>Is that the Sylvano DiGenova who used to run Superior Coin Galleries and is now at Tangible Asset Galleries? >>
I was thinking the same thing.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Think regular red-white-blue NFS paper roll
The paper touched edge on to the coin
where it touched, the coin turned bluish-gray.
I've never seen that color on any other pres or sac dollar before or after
Will it be sniffed AT?
seems NT to me. just an odd colored end roll toner.
is acceptable to use acetone on a coin?
How about 90% Isopropyl alcohol?
Mineral oil soaks?
Last question, Goo-Gone on a cruddy Lincoln?
Please say these are OK or I am in trouble...
1879 $4 Stella gold piece, Originally submitted by Heritage on May 8, 2008. Resubmitted on August 28, 2009 by DiGenova after having been laser treated to remove lines. PCGS refused to grade the coin.
Do we have a list of the companies that the accused are part of?
Finally- Does this really act a deterrant for those people who just add color, cook coins, or otherwise just mess with the over all color/appearance of a coin ? It appears that the people who are being "charged" are adding metal, lasering, etc etc etc-
This seems like a bit of a longshot to me but I love the idea of it... I think it is aggressive and cutting edge- Now, if we can just get CU to get aggressive with counterfeit coins-
John
<< <i>When coins are submitted, does the submitter sign a statement stating the coins haven't been messed with? If not, I believe this lawsuit has no merit. It's PCGS' nob to certify coins and recognize doctoring. If they don't have the expertise to do it, or it's not possible to recognize coins that later "turn," perhaps they shouldn't offer their guarantee. Perhaps the goal of the suit is for PCGS to be the "deep pockets bully" and it that way, they probably will succeed. >>
I thought in the complaint they quote the terms to submitting coins that has a clause as you mention.
<< <i>Even if this case ultimately gets thrown out I feel that it will, initially, be a great deterrant for future submission of Doctored coins. However, if this case does get thrown out is CU subject to counter suit for libel/slander?
Finally- Does this really act a deterrant for those people who just add color, cook coins, or otherwise just mess with the over all color/appearance of a coin ? It appears that the people who are being "charged" are adding metal, lasering, etc etc etc-
This seems like a bit of a longshot to me but I love the idea of it... I think it is aggressive and cutting edge- Now, if we can just get CU to get aggressive with counterfeit coins-
John >>
John, it's not confined to "adding metal, lasering, etc etc etc-". The complaint includes a number of coins listed, to which "foreign substance" is alleged to have been added.
<< <i>Does anyone here know, or has anyone heard officially...say directly from PCGS, if it
is acceptable to use acetone on a coin?
How about 90% Isopropyl alcohol?
Mineral oil soaks?
Last question, Goo-Gone on a cruddy Lincoln?
Please say these are OK or I am in trouble...
i'd like to hear more...
but even DW has posted that it's not cleaning that's bad (think NCS), it's harsh cleaning.
still, I wonder what is going to get BB'd
My views on the subject are strangely conflicted, though not due to any sympathy for coin doctors. Longtime readers of my posts will figure it out.
Ed. S.
(EJS)