Someone took a big hit on this 1860 $2.5

GoldenEyeNumismatics

NGC 61
PCGS Gen

lkeigwin

That's the crack-out game. It happens.

A $2k lesson in numismatics.
Lance.

coinkid855

I don't think it should have been graded in the first place with that giant gouge of a scratch. PCGS obviously bagged it for that (code 95).




-Paul

AUandAG

How did it ever get in that NGC holder? Huge scratch on the reverse with obvious
damage in that area.

bob

tightbudget

That original grade was a gift from NGC. It's definitely too bad about that scratch though because it's otherwise a nice coin.

OnlyGoldIsMoney

There was no way that coin was going to cross to PCGS in a no problem holder with that scratch. I remember seeing that coin at this month's ANA in its PCGS Genuine holder.

Too many gold coins in NGC 61 come back in PCGS AU holders. To me there was too much risk and too little possible reward in buying that coin in the first place.

keyman64

Ouch!

TorinoCobra71

NGC CLEARLY missed the boat on this one and PCGS got it right.

BillJones

<< <i>That original grade was a gift from NGC. It's definitely too bad about that scratch though because it's otherwise a nice coin. >>



Yes, I agree. It's hard to understand why anyone who has any idea about how to grade coins would be fooling around with a crack-out on this piece.

steveben

here's another that i think might be a similar situation. check out the rim damage on this one:

ebay link

Halfhunter06

I keep on saying it and people dont listen. When you have a nice coin in an old holder DONT BREAK IT OUT TO RESUBMIT!!!!

In the old holder it catches the eye at shows, when its in a new holder it can easily be looked over.

CaptHenway

Any chance that somebody deliberately got it put into a more appropriate holder?

PerryHall

<< <i>Any chance that somebody deliberately got it put into a more appropriate holder? >>



Small chance. Didn't TDN get a couple of overgraded coins reholdered with their proper grades?

OnlyGoldIsMoney

The owner of that coin may have been looking at the population report when pondering a crackout.

PCGS has slabbed only 19 examples of the 1860 $2.50 Old Reverse in all grades.

CoinCrazyPA

<< <i>

<< <i>That original grade was a gift from NGC. It's definitely too bad about that scratch though because it's otherwise a nice coin. >>



Yes, I agree. It's hard to understand why anyone who has any idea about how to grade coins would be fooling around with a crack-out on this piece. >>



I agree paid top of the range and expected to do better with it in a PCGS holder, made no sense to begin with.

Elcontador

There's something looking like a spot which on any other metal, would scream "environmental damage" as well. Just wait. Someone will resubmit this coin fifteen times and a few graders will have a bad day, and it will get re-holdered. It's not like I haven't seen that sort of thing happen before.

roadrunner

Probably a nice 63 coin if not for the scratch. Who can say when the owner cracked it out? They may have just assumed that an old holder would mean at least the same
grade. Or maybe it was unsaleable in an old unstickered NGC holder. There has been a gradual shift in grading perceptions on these older NGC holders. In the past they were
given the benefit of the doubt. Today it seems many are more fearful of them, in many cases assuming they are technically less than the assigned grade.

roadrunner

crypto79

I feel the pain of the staple scratch, Should have never been cracked.