David Lawrence Blog on PCGS Lawsuit...

MrEureka

Just came across this.

SanctionII

I like the article.

To the extent it is possible, a definition of what is a "doctored coin" is needed. My preference would be to have the hobby/industry itself create a definition that strikes a fair balance between the wants and needs of all of the different segments of the hobby/industry. One that is capable of being understood and that is capable of being applied evenly and efficiently to all coins to come up with an answer to the question "Is this coin doctored or not" for each coin.

The above would be preferable to having the local, state or national government [via court decisions from trial and/or appellate courts; via legislation; and/or via regulations/orders issued by the executive branch] get involved in regulating the hobby/industry.

AuroraBorealis

Thanks for the Link...

AB

DennisH

Bravo DLRC!

jhdfla

Just came up on my ongoing google news alert. I am all in favor of an industry wide standard to go by insofar as to what exactly constitutes doctoring, what is acceptable, and what is not. Not many people would argue the case in favor of the "metal movers" or re-engraving and "rebuilding". That much is certain. Some other gray areas really do need to be addressed though, as stated in the article by DLRC.

John

ArizonaJack

Excellent, thanks Andy !

Coinosaurus

I am stunned that DLRC got a blog out before another well-known dealer

Edited to add: Whoops, my bad, read it all here.

dorancoins

BaseballAbs

I agree that PCGS needs to write up something if they have not already. letting people know where the line is between conservation and coin doctoring. We all know what is okay and what isn't for the most part, but there can be a few gray areas i agree. If they write it up and post it for all to see then they can more easily prosecute. At least we can know where the lines are and where PCGS stands.

TwoSides2aCoin

"I make money the old fashioned way. I get up every day and go to work... on coins."


That's probably not a good slogan for a coin shop, is it ?

Steve27

"I would like to see PCGS take the next step of defining what is legitimate conservation versus doctoring. Perhaps a consortium of industry leaders like PCGS, NGC, CAC and PNG could work together to create such a document. It’s not clear that PCGS is interested in doing so, but I hope they would consider such a move to unify the marketplace."

I can't seem to locate my copy, but PCGS and a group of other TPGs put out a pamphlet a number of years ago on coin conservation which including dipping and other similar practices.

johnny9434

way cool posting. thanks

Lakesammman

we putt our money where our mouth is

As an avid golfer, I can relate.

Thanks for the link - good read.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

PawPaul

"DGS grades far more conservatively than any other grading service "


...far more ? wow

Analyst

JHDFLA <<I am all in favor of an industry wide standard to go by insofar as to what exactly constitutes doctoring, what is acceptable, and what is not. Not many people would argue the case in favor of the "metal movers" or re-engraving and "rebuilding". That much is certain. Some other gray areas really do need to be addressed though, as stated in the article by DLRC.>>

Steve27 <<"I would like to see PCGS take the next step of defining what is legitimate conservation versus doctoring.>>

John Feigenbaum <<So, if lasering, re-engraving and rebuilding are obviously wrong and (perhaps) criminal acts (see paragraph #47), the bigger question is what is the low-watermark standard for coin doctoring? Is adding any foreign substance to the surface of a coin to conceal damage of any kind (hairlines, gouges, etc) going to be considered “doctoring”?>> Yes, obviously, the adding of foreign substances to “conceal damage” is doctoring. This is not a debatable point.

Did you guys really read the text of the lawsuit? There is a definition of coin doctoring. Evidently, the definition in the text has been in the PCGS dealer-submitter contract for many years. Suggestions that there is no accepted definition benefit the coin doctors. Of course, no definition will ever be perfect and not all coin doctoring is preventable. Even so, we should all embrace the PCGS definition, for the time being. I am certain that it is very much consistent with definitions that have been put forth by ethical dealers and knowledgeable collectors in private conversations, for decades. This definition is repeated and the fraudulent aspects of coin doctoring are discussed in my analysis of this lawsuit, for which there is a link just below.

My Analysis of the PCGS Lawsuit Against Alleged Coin Doctors

New Weekly Column on Coin Rarities & Related Topics

Complaint filed by CU-PCGS

Natural Toning, Dipping and Coin Doctoring, Part 1

Natural Toning, Dipping and Coin Doctoring, Part 3

PCGS Message Board Thread about Collecting Naturally Toned Coins Articles

mozin

Do we even know if any major coin dealer, or auction house, is a subject in this lawsuit?