Do you thing PCGS will ever...

keoj

Do you thing PCGS will ever designate PL on business strikes (non-Morgan) coins? I just don't understand why they don't offer this designation yet.

keoj

AUandAG

Do you think that CAM and DCAM are the equivalent?

I suspect they are the same but just different denominations, 'eh?

bob

CarlWohlforth

I'd like to see the PL designation. Some of those seated coins really are PL. Some moderns that get the designation from other TPGs do seem questionable though.

Manorcourtman

I think they are missing the PL boat on classic gold coins. So many beautiful PL gold coins go unrecognized in PCGS holders. I have one going to NGC next week.

crypto79

<< <i>I think they are missing the PL boat on classic gold coins. So many beautiful PL gold coins go unrecognized in PCGS holders. I have one going to NGC next week. >>



I agree with this, one of my favorite coins I have ever owned was a deeply PL 20$ Lib, That said outside of Morgans and a few odds and ends I don't think they think there is enough true PL classic coin to justify the expense of updating their Registry system and they are probably right form a cost benefit ratio.

If I was them I would make it a non-point destination that could be considered for 10$ or what ever and if warranted imputed into the provenance field in their system/ label space. Only problem with that is what would be the point because if it was deeply PL you wouldn't need a label to tell you and if they start putting it on the label they then have to warranty it which would be a pain.

leothelyon

No, I don't thing so.

Bear

Where there is sufficient demand and a fair profit

to be made, It will happen. Everything in due time.

shish

I'm afraid I might not be around when this service begins. I've always wondered why our host is lagging so far behind the other grading companies regarding this service.

Bochiman

<< <i>Do you think that CAM and DCAM are the equivalent?

I suspect they are the same but just different denominations, 'eh?

bob >>



Correct me if I am wrong
but, PL is for business strikers (as the OP mentioned) and CAM/DCAM are for proof strikes....right?

So, I would say they are not equivalent due to the striking method.....a business strike can look PL but doesn't mean it is CAM/DCAM

MercLovin

I've found a few state quarters that would qualify as PL, by the strict definition of reflectivity in the fields, believe it or not.

keoj

Bochiman is correct.....PL is for business strike coins, CAM and DCAM are designations for the quality of strike for Proof coins. I have a couple of S mint coins that are extremely nice PL coins. It would wonderful if PCGS would add this designation at some point. Seeing a branch mint coin have mirrors is quite cool.

keoj

Caleb

<< <i>Bochiman is correct.....PL is for business strike coins, CAM and DCAM are designations for the quality of strike for Proof coins. I have a couple of S mint coins that are extremely nice PL coins. It would wonderful if PCGS would add this designation at some point. Seeing a branch mint coin have mirrors is quite cool.

keoj >>




Well ……. Not exactly true. The 1965 – 1967 Special Mint Sets are not proofs but if qualified do have the CAM or DCAM designation.

Bochiman

<< <i>

<< <i>Bochiman is correct.....PL is for business strike coins, CAM and DCAM are designations for the quality of strike for Proof coins. I have a couple of S mint coins that are extremely nice PL coins. It would wonderful if PCGS would add this designation at some point. Seeing a branch mint coin have mirrors is quite cool.

keoj >>




Well ……. Not exactly true. The 1965 – 1967 Special Mint Sets are not proofs but if qualified do have the CAM or DCAM designation. >>



You can always pull a gray area into things....those SMS replaced proof and mint sets...that's why they were called SPECIAL mint sets...and their method of striking was different from regular business strikes of those years, ..... right?

DennisH

"Ever" is an unlimited time frame. So yes, I think they will some day.

derryb

I thing not.