Should an Auction Company describe a "Flaw". On a Major Rarity in auction ?
STEWARTBLAYNUMIS
Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭
There is the Finest looking 1864 "L" Proof Indian Cent graded PCGS PR 65 R/B in the Heritage auction tonight. I wanted it badly until a friend noticed a major facial scratch on this coin only visible when the coin was tilted between 12 and 6 o'clock. It is not visible when tilting the coin from 3 o'clock to 9 o'clock. It also has a CAC sticker. It is almost Full Red!
This scratch is not mentioned in the auction description. Very interesting situation
What do you think ?
Stewart Blay
0
Comments
LINK??
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
.
.
.
linky-poo
.
.
.
.
Are you trying to keep me from bidding?? Is it really there??
edited to add, I see now that this mark under the ear is not a dig but a die line.
<< <i>.
.
.
.
linky-poo
.
.
.
. >>
THANKS!
The "SCRATCH" is from the chin to the Die Pair #2 die line.
Stewart
<< <i>The "SCRATCH" is from the chin to the Die Pair #2 die line.
Stewart >>
Is that 'scratch' on the coin or on the holder?
The coin is what the coin is. It is obviously rare and very seldom available to purchase and own. You apparently desired to own it. So you need to make a decision. Do you really WANT to own it? My perception is that MONEY & value count very highly with you. So I'd ask you again. Do you really WANT to own it? If the answer is "yes" then pay whatever you need to to get it. You may not get another chance. If the answer is "no" then walk away and don't worry whether the auction house describes a "scratch" that you can see ONLY if it is tipped a certain way. JMHO. Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
Yes, this is a beautiful coin. And sure, it has a scratch. Pretty major bummer for me, but not for all. I doubt PCGS missed it when they graded it, which likely explains the grade.
This is an unfortunate situation. As this is a major rarity, and of considerable interest to many deep pocketed individuals (and me, too!) it's easy to understand the conflict of interest, as disclosure of a scratch in an auction catalogue might tend to sway prospective bidders from even considering the coin. It's like a case of "better to beg forgiveness than to ask permission".
Look, I see this a lot when being shown coins. It seems that nowadays, it's status quo for a dealer (even a trusted one) to let the buyer find the problems, rather than disclose them up front. So again it would seem appropriate to emphasise scrutiny prior to making any real commitment.
Yet the opportunity to own what is otherwise a beautiful gem example of this important piece cannot be ignored. Make a pros and cons list and weight the entries. You may decide that eye appeal is more important than the scratch.
Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes
That being said...I will likely never be a bidder in such an auction, so feel free to disregard everything I've said.
<< <i>The "SCRATCH" is from the chin to the Die Pair #2 die line.
Stewart >>
To me, from the "slab" picture, that scratch looks like it's on the slab and not the coin.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>There is the Finest looking 1864 "L" Proof Indian Cent graded PCGS PR 65 R/B in the Heritage auction tonight. I wanted it badly until a friend noticed a major facial scratch on this coin only visible when the coin was tilted between 12 and 6 o'clock. It is not visible when tilting the coin from 3 o'clock to 9 o'clock. It also has a CAC sticker. It is almost Full Red!
This scratch is not mentioned in the auction description. Very interesting situation
What do you think ?
Stewart Blay >>
No, the market grade takes any flaws into account. Only a 70 is perfect.
<< <i>
<< <i>The "SCRATCH" is from the chin to the Die Pair #2 die line.
Stewart >>
To me, from the "slab" picture, that scratch looks like it's on the slab and not the coin. >>
Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes
<< <i>Amazing to me all you guys that seem to think it's a slab scratch and not on the coin. Stewart said his friend saw it on the coin, and in-hand, it's oh-so-easy to tell the difference. >>
Which always makes me wonder how many high dollar sight-unseen bidders there really are out there bidding on images.
(other than get the highest price for the client)
I is fully upto the bidder to know what they are bidding on.
<< <i>I don't think it is very kosher to come on here and descibe a flaw on a coin that is about to go up for auction. >>
Agree. Perhaps he wants to buy this coin and discourage any competition to get it cheaper.
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
Sean Reynolds
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
<< <i>I don't think it is very kosher to come on here and descibe a flaw on a coin that is about to go up for auction. >>
If someone does this for the purpose of obtaining an item at a cheaper price himself, it is considered fraud, and a consignor can sue for
damages for not receiving full fair market value. Auction houses have a low tolerance of this activity as well, as they make less commission
and have unhappy consignors.
<< <i>1870-S $10 VF20 PCGS. The 1870-S is a scarce issue with a mintage of just 8,000 pieces. Charming orange-gold patina coats the surfaces. Several very old, light scrapes in the left obverse field are barely worthy of mention. Population: 7 in 20, 40 finer (6/09).(Registry values: N1793) (#8659) >>
They DID mention the old scrapes and I was NOT upset as the consignor as it was explained by Heritage and out in the open. It did not hurt the final proceeds, in my opinion.
It would not have been a "downer" for Heritage to have made some kind of passing reference to the long bag marks which "limits the grade" or "accounts for the assigned grade."
Etc etc.
<< <i>Amazing to me all you guys that seem to think it's a slab scratch and not on the coin. Stewart said his friend saw it on the coin, and in-hand, it's oh-so-easy to tell the difference. >>
It's even more amazing that folks cannot express their opinions without someone whining about it.
It "sure" looks like its on the slab just like the one that runs through the tip of the nose and the run that runs from the C off of the coin.
The name is LEE!
This thread is just a ploy to get the coin cheaper imo, but i doubt Simpson reads these boards so all is well.
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
The scratch is clearly on the coin as I went back to lot viewing in New York a second time. I was going to bid $150,000 for the coin before I saw the scratch and then I adjusted my bid down to $100,000 after I saw the scratch. The coin has sold for $140,000 plus the juice.
There is still an investor/collector who owns at least 8 of these 1864 "l" proof Indian cents including one that is full red from the Norweb collection.
Stewart
<< <i>A stereo microscope is good for determining if a scratch is on the coin or slab, since the focus plane is different. Of course, you must have the slab in hand. >>
If you tilt the slab slightly and the scratch moves in relation to the coin's surface, the scratch is on the plastic.
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
color, or reflectivity as it goes over high and low spots. If it were on the coin you'd probably see some slight gaps in the line as it negotiated the terrain, much
like the one along the bust line that Sean mentioned.
But the scratch on the chin starts and ends at a high point of the coin (tip of chin to jaw line). It doesn't look like like it's floating over the coin either.
Fwiw the coin was seen by PCGS and verified by CAC. No reason to describe every defect on the coin. If that was the criteria then the list of defects on this coin,
including every spot, would be 50 items long. A hairline scratch like this in 1986-1990 would have been an automatic downgrade to MS64. That stance changed over
the next 10 yrs as very pretty coins formerly graded 64 only because of a single facial hairline started showing up in 65, 66, and then even 67 holders. This was a
shift from mostly technical grading to one where overall arm's length eye appeal started playing a huge role. No doubt PCGS netted this coin to 65 based on the fact
that the coin was mostly full red and was very choice otherwise. Calling this a 64 might be overcompensating. If a 40% RB PF65 coin with no scratch is worth X, what's
an 80% RED PF65 worth with an old and not so noticeable hairline scratch? Someone has to make that call when slabbing it.
roadrunner
BTW it would be equally unethical for the poster to bid on this coin after this public outing of the lot.
<< <i>It's even more amazing that folks cannot express their opinions without someone whining about it. >>
You're amazing, 19Lyds!
Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes
<< <i>In my opinion it is the duty of an auction house to properly describe every coin they sell, the best that they can - flaws and all. I'm also of the opinion that it's okay to talk about any coin's flaws at any time - regardless if it's before, during, or after an auction (or not even in an auction). Want to talk about an 1804 dollar? I can't see someone getting sued for doing so. Do graders get sued for their opionions? >>
That is a great opinion, and I agree with you.
Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes
As Roadrunner wrote, this sort of thing is now "market acceptable" to the powers that be to be assigned the grade on the holder. You either think the coin is acceptable for the grade or you don't. People who think the former might bid on the coin, people who don't pass.
We all make these kind of decisions all of the time. The only difference is that this coin has a higher price tag than most, that's all.
FWIW, I saw a coin on line that I liked that had a return privilege. It was a Capped Bust Quarter in a PC 4 holder, but I didn't see a single mark on the coin and the luster looked good. The dealer told me there was a vertical hairline scratch in the left obverse field which he didn't think looked bad, but did keep the coin out of a 5 holder. Upon inspection of the coin, the dealer was spot on and I bought it. If this was not disclosed to me, I would have returned it.
The difference was that I did not have a chance to inspect the coin beforehand but had an out with a return policy, while at the auction, this is not the case.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
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
<< <i>The scratch is clearly on the coin as I went back to lot viewing in New York a second time. I was going to bid $150,000 for the coin before I saw the scratch and then I adjusted my bid down to $100,000 after I saw the scratch. The coin has sold for $140,000 plus the juice.
There is still an investor/collector who owns at least 8 of these 1864 "l" proof Indian cents including one that is full red from the Norweb collection.
Stewart >>
That's good enough for me then.
The name is LEE!
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
<< <i>There is the Finest looking 1864 "L" Proof Indian Cent graded PCGS PR 65 R/B in the Heritage auction tonight. I wanted it badly until a friend noticed a major facial scratch on this coin only visible when the coin was tilted between 12 and 6 o'clock. It is not visible when tilting the coin from 3 o'clock to 9 o'clock. It also has a CAC sticker. It is almost Full Red!
This scratch is not mentioned in the auction description. Very interesting situation
What do you think ?
Stewart Blay >>
This is one of the major flaws with Heritage auctions. They do not mention most problems unless the coin is in a "genuine" or net grade holder. It's the reason why I can't bid unless I see the coin, or I hire someone to look at the coin. It's really kind of foolish on Heritage's part, but I guess people bid any way so why should my opinion matter?
<< <i>The scratch from that goes from the field across the nose looks like it floats over the coin (ie on the plastic). This line doesn't change it's texture,
color, or reflectivity as it goes over high and low spots. If it were on the coin you'd probably see some slight gaps in the line as it negotiated the terrain, much
like the one along the bust line that Sean mentioned.
But the scratch on the chin starts and ends at a high point of the coin (tip of chin to jaw line). It doesn't look like like it's floating over the coin either.
Fwiw the coin was seen by PCGS and verified by CAC. No reason to describe every defect on the coin. If that was the criteria then the list of defects on this coin,
including every spot, would be 50 items long. A hairline scratch like this in 1986-1990 would have been an automatic downgrade to MS64. That stance changed over
the next 10 yrs as very pretty coins formerly graded 64 only because of a single facial hairline started showing up in 65, 66, and then even 67 holders. This was a
shift from mostly technical grading to one where overall arm's length eye appeal started playing a huge role. No doubt PCGS netted this coin to 65 based on the fact
that the coin was mostly full red and was very choice otherwise. Calling this a 64 might be overcompensating. If a 40% RB PF65 coin with no scratch is worth X, what's
an 80% RED PF65 worth with an old and not so noticeable hairline scratch? Someone has to make that call when slabbing it.
roadrunner >>
No, I would not attribute this to "technical grading." I'd call it "grade-flation." We saw this over a decade ago with modern Proof coins. In my case I had to buy coins in PR-66 or more likely 67 holders to get what I would call a Gem or even Choice Proof. I found the PR-65 graded coins to be consistently disappointing. For a number of years it seemed that the older, pre 1936 Proofs were not subjected to this lax grading, but in recent years I’ve seen there too. I’ve been very disappointed with what I’ve seen in Proof Barber coinage over the past two or three years.
It’s interesting that CAC would endorse this, but perhaps that tells you something.
I’ve probably said enough to get me in trouble, but it’s an observation I’ve made in recent years.
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
From the first day of TPG grading to the first official US coin auction ever held, it has never been required that all faults be described. While that may occur in a perfect dream world, it is certainly not the norm in today's world regardless of what is being sold (used cars, antiques, art, guns, homes, etc.). Imagine having to list every defect on your used car before you can list it for sale? On my old 1997 Lincoln I'd probably have 500 line items. Even on my new car with 36,000 miles I could easily list 100 flaws. I've mentioned a number of times here that I once employed this tactic when selling a PCGS VG 1795 in an ogh via the BST. The potential buyer asked what was "wrong" with it and I proceeded to list about 3 dozen items including every mark on the coin. Needless to say they ran like heck once they read the description. I ended up selling the coin to a major national retailer who didn't need to see a list of "known to seller" defects in order to buy the coin. If we did this for selling homes the list would probably have 1,000 items or more. And if you couldn't come up with 1,000 "flaws" in your home, you have never looked at it close enough. One could probably find an easy 100 flaws in a brand new home. No, it's not Heritage's job to educate every bidder in the world on how to be a savvy consumer so that the consignor and Heritage can take home less money. The responsibility lies with the buyer to determine what the coin is worth to them since each one of us assess each "flaw" with a different level of concern. No one can do that for us.
roadrunner
<< <i>while the question about where an auction houses loylities lay(with the buyer or consigner) and how honest is too honest when it starts to hurt the person who is paying you to maxamize the sale price. I fell this thread is in very poor taste as the OP makes disparaging remarks about an active auction that he is planning on bidding on. This is wrong just about any may you cut it >>
It depends upon how bad the problem is that was missed. If it is minor in nature, you comment has merrit. BUT I can remember auctions where expert reviewers found major problems like alterations that caused a lot to be withdrawn before it was put up for sale. Had those problems not be noted by those experts the coin would have been sold to an unsuspecting buyer. There are no absolute rules for this.
<< <i>
Gee could you make it any bigger!!
BST Transactions: DonnyJf, MrOrganic, Justanothercoinaddict, Fivecents, Slq, Jdimmick,
Robb, Tee135, Ibzman350, Mercfan, Outhaul, Erickso1, Cugamongacoins, Indiananationals, Wayne Herndon
Negative BST Transactions: