Ouch is right.....guess I'd need to see blow ups - were the surfaces gently tooled to remove the usual ticks and nicks one sees on normal MS coins?
I guess now you can post it on Ebay, where in that holder it will garner about 2X melt or so, then some nefarious person will crack it out and post it next week on there as Gem BU+++
<< <i>Ouch is right.....guess I'd need to see blow ups - were the surfaces gently tooled to remove the usual ticks and nicks one sees on normal MS coins?
I guess now you can post it on Ebay, where in that holder it will garner about 2X melt or so, then some nefarious person will crack it out and post it next week on there as Gem BU+++ >>
Honestly, I don't know what's going on with this grade.
I was truly expecting an ms66+.
Oh well, wait six months and send it back in.
"Gold is money, and nothing else" (JP Morgan, 1912)
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
Well, I'd look at it pretty closely before sending it back through. If you can see tooling, it's probably not worth another set of grading fees. Obviously they saw something. The coin is what it is. OTOH, if it looks great to you, try again. Why not?
On the thread about the Ebay dealer who cracked the cleaned 1917 SLQ, one of the forum regulars posted his story on a high grade gold coin that came back tooled or altered by both PCGS and NGC, after originally being P-64 I think. An auction house later submitted the coin on his behalf, and came back NGC 66 (if I recall all the details correctly). So maybe they are just extra cautious when exceptional coins are submitted?? Good luck with it either way!
<< <i>Ouch is right.....guess I'd need to see blow ups - were the surfaces gently tooled to remove the usual ticks and nicks one sees on normal MS coins?
I guess now you can post it on Ebay, where in that holder it will garner about 2X melt or so, then some nefarious person will crack it out and post it next week on there as Gem BU+++ >>
Honestly, I don't know what's going on with this grade.
I was truly expecting an ms66+.
Oh well, wait six months and send it back in. >>
Why wait six months? At 25,000 coins graded every week your Walker is in PCGS rearview mirror and long since recognized- probably within days.
Wow, this coin fooled the crap out of me. Looks better than most PCGS 66 coins from the image. I think the alleged tooling is a little smoothing of the high points on Ms. Liberty's knees! Very often, Walkers have a rough spot there due to poor striking pressure, and I suppose there is a temptation to smooth it out illicitly. Let me know if I'm right!
The tooling appears to be right in the middle of the coin. Two major marks that were smoothed over..... Easily spotted by graders when the coin is swirled around under a intense light.
I'd call PCGS to understand more. The coin fooled a lot of people, so lets learn from it.
<< <i>The tooling appears to be right in the middle of the coin. Two major marks that were smoothed over..... Easily spotted by graders when the coin is swirled around under a intense light.
I'd call PCGS. >>
Agree with the above. Swirling an Unc. coin around under a light source makes it easier to spot surface flaws; flaws that would jump out at you which may not appear on a two dimensional image.
This, unfortunately, is another example of if you pay far less for a coin than you think it is worth, there is usually a reason for it.
"Vou invadir o Nordeste, "Seu cabra da peste, "Sou Mangueira......."
<< <i>On the thread about the Ebay dealer who cracked the cleaned 1917 SLQ, one of the forum regulars posted his story on a high grade gold coin that came back tooled or altered by both PCGS and NGC, after originally being P-64 I think. An auction house later submitted the coin on his behalf, and came back NGC 66 (if I recall all the details correctly). So maybe they are just extra cautious when exceptional coins are submitted?? Good luck with it either way! >>
The PCGS MS64 $10 Lib was my coin. Upon cracking it out it went PCGS - alt surfaces, NGC - alt surfaces, NGC MS66. It's certainly quite possible this Walker gets a 66 grade on a future submission. Is it possible that some of the skirt or drapery lines were "strengthened?" Usually when a TPG suggests "tooling" it should be pretty obvious. At least on the altered surfaces, it's often a matter of opinion. I showed that gold coin to 3 top notch gold dealers (2 who had been PCGS graders in their past) and none of them could identify what the problem was with the coin....other than the TPG's no graded it twice. One grading event doesn't necessarily identify what a coin is. And sometimes, even 4 grading events doesn't do it.......
<< <i>Is it possible that some of the skirt or drapery lines were "strengthened? >>
I have been looking to the right of the hips/under the left arm since this started. Something just seems off. I think there are some differences. Will look more.
<< <i>Is it possible that some of the skirt or drapery lines were "strengthened? >>
I have been looking to the right of the hips/under the left arm since this started. Something just seems off.
Best, Eric >>
I just don't get who on earth would 'tool' a microcosm of this coins' surface on a coin that generally is worth $50??
Too many of us 'experts' get the result back from the all knowing PCGS (as tooled) and then we start seeing things on this coin where it was tooled (like we know!).
I know through personal experience (from grading diamonds for over 25 years) that being right and consistent (as a grader) is a very difficult task.
But you know, when I graded a diamond as 'chipped'...there was an obvious chip.
When I graded a diamond as 'laser drilled'....there was a laser drill hole visible.
What I'm trying to say is, if you're going to give a coin a detrimental grade, such as a 'genuine' grade, it should be evident to 9 out of 10 competent people.
"Gold is money, and nothing else" (JP Morgan, 1912)
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
it should be evident to 9 out of 10 competent people.
just my two-cents-----perhaps the above should be re-thought as it should be evident to 9 out of 10 competent graders which it probably is. I suspect that with a series such as Walkers that most every grader at PCGS/NGC has undoubtedly seen more coins than all of us, to the point where whatever the "tooling" is it was instantly noticed and agreed upon. hopefully you weren't hurt too bad in this deal, but I think it highlights why ICCS is competent grading Canadian coins but for US maybe not so good. also, it's another reminder to me that grading coins from online pictures is a crap-shoot at best.
<< <i> it should be evident to 9 out of 10 competent people.
just my two-cents-----perhaps the above should be re-thought as it should be evident to 9 out of 10 competent graders which it probably is. I suspect that with a series such as Walkers that most every grader at PCGS/NGC has undoubtedly seen more coins than all of us, to the point where whatever the "tooling" is it was instantly noticed and agreed upon. hopefully you weren't hurt too bad in this deal, but I think it highlights why ICCS is competent grading Canadian coins but for US maybe not so good. also, it's another reminder to me that grading coins from online pictures is a crap-shoot at best. >>
I knew someone was going to respond this exact way.
And I can totally understand it.
BUT....if you say 9 out of 10 competent graders, then the proof would be sending this coin in 10 times and 9 times it should be graded 'Damaged' every single time.
That, I think would not be the case.
"Gold is money, and nothing else" (JP Morgan, 1912)
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
<< <i> it should be evident to 9 out of 10 competent people.
just my two-cents-----perhaps the above should be re-thought as it should be evident to 9 out of 10 competent graders which it probably is. I suspect that with a series such as Walkers that most every grader at PCGS/NGC has undoubtedly seen more coins than all of us, to the point where whatever the "tooling" is it was instantly noticed and agreed upon. hopefully you weren't hurt too bad in this deal, but I think it highlights why ICCS is competent grading Canadian coins but for US maybe not so good. also, it's another reminder to me that grading coins from online pictures is a crap-shoot at best. >>
If this were really true than the gold coin of mine mentioned above would have come back altered surfaces at least 3 out of 4 times. In fact it was split 50-50. One would think that professional graders should be able to agree on what altered surfaces look like more than 50% of the time. Either the surfaces are altered OR they aren't. Shouldn't be a coin flip type of thing.
BUT....if you say 9 out of 10 competent graders, then the proof would be sending this coin in 10 times and 9 times it should be graded 'Damaged' every single time. no, not what I said if you read the reply, but it isn't anything worth debating.
If this were really true than the gold coin of mine I don't want to appear evasive, but I think you're comparing apples and oranges. and again, it isn't anything worth debating.
not wanting to sound harsh but I think from the entire contents of the thread that the OP initially thought he "cherrypicked" the coin and is now quite reasonably upset over the whole thing.
<< <i>BUT....if you say 9 out of 10 competent graders, then the proof would be sending this coin in 10 times and 9 times it should be graded 'Damaged' every single time. no, not what I said if you read the reply, but it isn't anything worth debating.
If this were really true than the gold coin of mine I don't want to appear evasive, but I think you're comparing apples and oranges. and again, it isn't anything worth debating.
not wanting to sound harsh but I think from the entire contents of the thread that the OP initially thought he "cherrypicked" the coin and is now quite reasonably upset over the whole thing. >>
I purchased the coin in an iccs ms66 holder for approx. $200.
In all honesty, I thought it would grade a 66+ or at the very least an ms66.
Losing $200 does not bother me one bit.
Having coins flip-flop graded between genuine and an MS (other, not this one) does bug me.
"Gold is money, and nothing else" (JP Morgan, 1912)
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
Liberty's left arm looks like it has lines etched into the surface around it and whatever it is holding (holly? oak?) to give it the impression of a stronger strike than it actually is.
<< <i>Liberty's left arm looks like it has lines etched into the surface around it and whatever it is holding (holly? oak?) to give it the impression of a stronger strike than it actually is. >>
Who's seriously going to do this to (at the time) a $50 coin??
"Gold is money, and nothing else" (JP Morgan, 1912)
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
Code 98 covers the following, nothing on your coin jumps out...dunno
Damage | Close
Any form of metal movement, either intentional or accidental. Damage may include excessive or heavy rim dings and bruises, deliberate surface damage such as graffiti, attempts to remove spots, etc. The severity and extent of the damage affects whether it will get a “No Grade” decision. Whizzing is the use of a high-speed, rotating wheel to buff the surfaces of a coin, which actually moves the metal on the surface and leaves ridges on many of the devices.
The following damage descriptions are some of the more common that may be indicated on your 98 graded insert. 1. Graffiti (significant distracting etchings- occasionally net graded on early coins) 2. Planchet streak removed (usually found on gold coins) 3. Spot(s) removed (leaving some form of damage that is evident) 4. Surfaces tooled (major metal movement- whizzing, lasering, tooling) 5. Machine damage (either: counting machine or coin wrapping machine) 6. Rim damage (either: rim gouge or test cut) 7. Surface damage (either: large gouge/scrape, drill or chop mark) 8. Mount removed (located on either the edge or surface of coin)
<< <i>Liberty's left arm looks like it has lines etched into the surface around it and whatever it is holding (holly? oak?) to give it the impression of a stronger strike than it actually is. >>
Who's seriously going to do this to (at the time) a $50 coin?? >>
Those who know how to re-engrave don't learn the art overnight. Likely a practice piece. You need to hold the coin at a very unusual angle with the greatest light reflection you can stand but yet can see through that high contrast of light to view all the shatter marks and any deformalities the coin might have.
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
<< <i>Try again. I once cracked 66 merc, sent it, got 64. Cracked again and got 67. So, what is the real grade? >>
See, that's just my point.
Previously, I've said how difficult it is to grade over the years consistently and accurately.
I've also said all graders on any coin should be allowed a variance of 1 grade (anybody that disagrees with this should grade or appraise for a living).
So in your case, receiving the ms66 and ms67 grades are totally acceptable to me.
BUT......receiving the ms64 grade is total incompetence on the graders' part.....no excuses.
"Gold is money, and nothing else" (JP Morgan, 1912)
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
I once bought a raw gorgeous toned Morgan that when I first looked at it I knew it was an easy 65.
Well here's the sequence of 'sending it in'...
first time......ms62
2nd time...ms64
3rd time....bodybagged for AT.
4th time....ms65 Yippee!!!!!!!!
Note....Not all of the above submissions was with the same company. >>
When I was working on a Two Cent Piece set I bought an 1869 NGC MS64RB.
Sent to PCGS for cross with a minimum grade of MS63RB. Didn't cross. Cracked out, submitted again, bodybag for altered surfaces. Submitted again, graded MS65BN.
I once bought a raw gorgeous toned Morgan that when I first looked at it I knew it was an easy 65.
Well here's the sequence of 'sending it in'...
first time......ms62
2nd time...ms64
3rd time....bodybagged for AT.
4th time....ms65 Yippee!!!!!!!!
Note....Not all of the above submissions was with the same company. >>
When I was working on a Two Cent Piece set I bought an 1869 NGC MS64RB.
Sent to PCGS for cross with a minimum grade of MS63RB. Didn't cross. Cracked out, submitted again, bodybag for altered surfaces. Submitted again, graded MS65BN.
All within a timeframe of about six weeks. >>
For different reasons, I find myself both encouraged and discouraged to hear this (although not surprising).
"Gold is money, and nothing else" (JP Morgan, 1912)
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
<< <i>Grade just received from PCGS........Unc details (for tooling) >>
I'd say I'm speechless, but as the same thing happened to me recently, I know your pain. I'm done resubmitting - it'll get cracked out and placed in my Wayte Raymond album for 10 years ... Maybe the Florida humidity and heat in my bank vault will give it color to "trompe- l'oeil " on a future resubmission. It worked on my Dimes... It should work on a few questionables.
Mike Hayes ~~~~~~~~~~~~ Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
Comments
<< <i>Grade just received from PCGS........Unc details (for tooling)
Ouch....that one hurt
Coin Club Benefit auctions ..... View the Lots
I guess now you can post it on Ebay, where in that holder it will garner about 2X melt or so, then some nefarious person will crack it out and post it
next week on there as Gem BU+++
i'd love to see large high-res images of this baby
.
<< <i>Ouch is right.....guess I'd need to see blow ups - were the surfaces gently tooled to remove the usual ticks and nicks one sees on normal MS coins?
I guess now you can post it on Ebay, where in that holder it will garner about 2X melt or so, then some nefarious person will crack it out and post it
next week on there as Gem BU+++ >>
Honestly, I don't know what's going on with this grade.
I was truly expecting an ms66+.
Oh well, wait six months and send it back in.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
came back tooled or altered by both PCGS and NGC, after originally being P-64 I think. An auction house later submitted the coin on his behalf, and
came back NGC 66 (if I recall all the details correctly). So maybe they are just extra cautious when exceptional coins are submitted??
Good luck with it either way!
<< <i> So maybe they are just extra cautious when exceptional coins are submitted??
Good luck with it either way! >>
Bingo!!!!
I couldn't agree more.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
<< <i>
<< <i>Ouch is right.....guess I'd need to see blow ups - were the surfaces gently tooled to remove the usual ticks and nicks one sees on normal MS coins?
I guess now you can post it on Ebay, where in that holder it will garner about 2X melt or so, then some nefarious person will crack it out and post it
next week on there as Gem BU+++ >>
Honestly, I don't know what's going on with this grade.
I was truly expecting an ms66+.
Oh well, wait six months and send it back in. >>
Why wait six months?
At 25,000 coins graded every week your Walker is in PCGS rearview mirror and long since recognized- probably within days.
I'd send it in immediately.
peacockcoins
any obvious signs ?
<< <i>Why wait six months?
At 25,000 coins graded every week your Walker is in PCGS rearview mirror and long since recognized- probably within days.
I'd send it in immediately. >>
<< <i>Grade just received from PCGS........Unc details (for tooling)
Hint: Check the rim for a re-worked rim ding.
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
<< <i>
<< <i>Grade just received from PCGS........Unc details (for tooling)
Hint: Check the rim for a re-worked rim ding. >>
No, that's abrasion of the plastic flip.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
I'd call PCGS to understand more. The coin fooled a lot of people, so lets learn from it.
<< <i>The tooling appears to be right in the middle of the coin. Two major marks that were smoothed over..... Easily spotted by graders when the coin is swirled around under a intense light.
I'd call PCGS. >>
Agree with the above. Swirling an Unc. coin around under a light source makes it easier to spot surface flaws; flaws that would jump out at you which may not appear on a two dimensional image.
This, unfortunately, is another example of if you pay far less for a coin than you think it is worth, there is usually a reason for it.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
Many members on this forum that now it cannot fit in my signature. Please ask for entire list.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
<< <i>I would like to see a picture of the coin out of the holder. >>
here you are......(I increased the 'contrast' trying to highlight the marks on the coin)
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
<< <i>On the thread about the Ebay dealer who cracked the cleaned 1917 SLQ, one of the forum regulars posted his story on a high grade gold coin that
came back tooled or altered by both PCGS and NGC, after originally being P-64 I think. An auction house later submitted the coin on his behalf, and
came back NGC 66 (if I recall all the details correctly). So maybe they are just extra cautious when exceptional coins are submitted??
Good luck with it either way! >>
The PCGS MS64 $10 Lib was my coin. Upon cracking it out it went PCGS - alt surfaces, NGC - alt surfaces, NGC MS66. It's certainly quite possible this Walker gets a
66 grade on a future submission. Is it possible that some of the skirt or drapery lines were "strengthened?" Usually when a TPG suggests "tooling" it should be pretty obvious.
At least on the altered surfaces, it's often a matter of opinion. I showed that gold coin to 3 top notch gold dealers (2 who had been PCGS graders in their past) and none of them
could identify what the problem was with the coin....other than the TPG's no graded it twice. One grading event doesn't necessarily identify what a coin is. And sometimes, even
4 grading events doesn't do it.......
<< <i>Is it possible that some of the skirt or drapery lines were "strengthened? >>
I have been looking to the right of the hips/under the left arm since this started. Something just seems off. I think there are some differences. Will look more.
Best,
Eric
<< <i>
<< <i>Is it possible that some of the skirt or drapery lines were "strengthened? >>
I have been looking to the right of the hips/under the left arm since this started. Something just seems off.
Best,
Eric >>
I just don't get who on earth would 'tool' a microcosm of this coins' surface on a coin that generally is worth $50??
Too many of us 'experts' get the result back from the all knowing PCGS (as tooled) and then we start seeing things on this coin where it was tooled (like we know!).
I know through personal experience (from grading diamonds for over 25 years) that being right and consistent (as a grader) is a very difficult task.
But you know, when I graded a diamond as 'chipped'...there was an obvious chip.
When I graded a diamond as 'laser drilled'....there was a laser drill hole visible.
What I'm trying to say is, if you're going to give a coin a detrimental grade, such as a 'genuine' grade, it should be evident to 9 out of 10 competent people.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
just my two-cents-----perhaps the above should be re-thought as it should be evident to 9 out of 10 competent graders which it probably is. I suspect that with a series such as Walkers that most every grader at PCGS/NGC has undoubtedly seen more coins than all of us, to the point where whatever the "tooling" is it was instantly noticed and agreed upon. hopefully you weren't hurt too bad in this deal, but I think it highlights why ICCS is competent grading Canadian coins but for US maybe not so good. also, it's another reminder to me that grading coins from online pictures is a crap-shoot at best.
<< <i> it should be evident to 9 out of 10 competent people.
just my two-cents-----perhaps the above should be re-thought as it should be evident to 9 out of 10 competent graders which it probably is. I suspect that with a series such as Walkers that most every grader at PCGS/NGC has undoubtedly seen more coins than all of us, to the point where whatever the "tooling" is it was instantly noticed and agreed upon. hopefully you weren't hurt too bad in this deal, but I think it highlights why ICCS is competent grading Canadian coins but for US maybe not so good. also, it's another reminder to me that grading coins from online pictures is a crap-shoot at best. >>
I knew someone was going to respond this exact way.
And I can totally understand it.
BUT....if you say 9 out of 10 competent graders, then the proof would be sending this coin in 10 times and 9 times it should be graded 'Damaged' every single time.
That, I think would not be the case.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
<< <i> it should be evident to 9 out of 10 competent people.
just my two-cents-----perhaps the above should be re-thought as it should be evident to 9 out of 10 competent graders which it probably is. I suspect that with a series such as Walkers that most every grader at PCGS/NGC has undoubtedly seen more coins than all of us, to the point where whatever the "tooling" is it was instantly noticed and agreed upon. hopefully you weren't hurt too bad in this deal, but I think it highlights why ICCS is competent grading Canadian coins but for US maybe not so good. also, it's another reminder to me that grading coins from online pictures is a crap-shoot at best. >>
If this were really true than the gold coin of mine mentioned above would have come back altered surfaces at least 3 out of 4 times. In fact it was split 50-50. One would think that professional graders should be able to agree on what altered surfaces look like more than 50% of the time. Either the surfaces are altered OR they aren't. Shouldn't be a coin flip type of thing.
Thanks RR
Eric
no, not what I said if you read the reply, but it isn't anything worth debating.
If this were really true than the gold coin of mine
I don't want to appear evasive, but I think you're comparing apples and oranges. and again, it isn't anything worth debating.
not wanting to sound harsh but I think from the entire contents of the thread that the OP initially thought he "cherrypicked" the coin and is now quite reasonably upset over the whole thing.
<< <i>BUT....if you say 9 out of 10 competent graders, then the proof would be sending this coin in 10 times and 9 times it should be graded 'Damaged' every single time.
no, not what I said if you read the reply, but it isn't anything worth debating.
If this were really true than the gold coin of mine
I don't want to appear evasive, but I think you're comparing apples and oranges. and again, it isn't anything worth debating.
not wanting to sound harsh but I think from the entire contents of the thread that the OP initially thought he "cherrypicked" the coin and is now quite reasonably upset over the whole thing. >>
I purchased the coin in an iccs ms66 holder for approx. $200.
In all honesty, I thought it would grade a 66+ or at the very least an ms66.
Losing $200 does not bother me one bit.
Having coins flip-flop graded between genuine and an MS (other, not this one) does bug me.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
to give it the impression of a stronger strike than it actually is.
<< <i>Send it in again. >>
I just love that classic response.
I once bought a raw gorgeous toned Morgan that when I first looked at it I knew it was an easy 65.
Well here's the sequence of 'sending it in'...
first time......ms62
2nd time...ms64
3rd time....bodybagged for AT.
4th time....ms65 Yippee!!!!!!!!
Note....Not all of the above submissions was with the same company.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
<< <i>Liberty's left arm looks like it has lines etched into the surface around it and whatever it is holding (holly? oak?)
to give it the impression of a stronger strike than it actually is. >>
Who's seriously going to do this to (at the time) a $50 coin??
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
<< <i>
<< <i>Send it in again. >>
I just love that classic response.
I once bought a raw gorgeous toned Morgan that when I first looked at it I knew it was an easy 65.
Well here's the sequence of 'sending it in'...
first time......ms62
2nd time...ms64
3rd time....bodybagged for AT.
4th time....ms65 Yippee!!!!!!!!
Note....Not all of the above submissions was with the same company. >>
The caveat at the end pretty much makes this multiple submission data useless.
Damage | Close
Any form of metal movement, either intentional or accidental. Damage may include excessive or heavy rim dings and bruises, deliberate surface damage such as graffiti, attempts to remove spots, etc. The severity and extent of the damage affects whether it will get a “No Grade” decision. Whizzing is the use of a high-speed, rotating wheel to buff the surfaces of a coin, which actually moves the metal on the surface and leaves ridges on many of the devices.
The following damage descriptions are some of the more common that may be indicated on your 98 graded insert.
1. Graffiti (significant distracting etchings- occasionally net graded on early coins)
2. Planchet streak removed (usually found on gold coins)
3. Spot(s) removed (leaving some form of damage that is evident)
4. Surfaces tooled (major metal movement- whizzing, lasering, tooling)
5. Machine damage (either: counting machine or coin wrapping machine)
6. Rim damage (either: rim gouge or test cut)
7. Surface damage (either: large gouge/scrape, drill or chop mark)
8. Mount removed (located on either the edge or surface of coin)
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Send it in again. >>
I just love that classic response.
I once bought a raw gorgeous toned Morgan that when I first looked at it I knew it was an easy 65.
Well here's the sequence of 'sending it in'...
first time......ms62
2nd time...ms64
3rd time....bodybagged for AT.
4th time....ms65 Yippee!!!!!!!!
Note....Not all of the above submissions was with the same company. >>
The caveat at the end pretty much makes this multiple submission data useless. >>
Yes, I agree with you the fact there's more than one grading company in my example does greatly lessen my point.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
<< <i>
<< <i>Liberty's left arm looks like it has lines etched into the surface around it and whatever it is holding (holly? oak?)
to give it the impression of a stronger strike than it actually is. >>
Who's seriously going to do this to (at the time) a $50 coin?? >>
Those who know how to re-engrave don't learn the art overnight. Likely a practice piece. You need to hold the coin at a very unusual angle with the greatest light reflection you can stand but yet can see through that high contrast of light to view all the shatter marks and any deformalities the coin might have.
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
rainbowroosie April 1, 2003
<< <i>Try again. I once cracked 66 merc, sent it, got 64. Cracked again and got 67. So, what is the real grade? >>
See, that's just my point.
Previously, I've said how difficult it is to grade over the years consistently and accurately.
I've also said all graders on any coin should be allowed a variance of 1 grade (anybody that disagrees with this should grade or appraise for a living).
So in your case, receiving the ms66 and ms67 grades are totally acceptable to me.
BUT......receiving the ms64 grade is total incompetence on the graders' part.....no excuses.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
<< <i>
<< <i>Send it in again. >>
I just love that classic response.
I once bought a raw gorgeous toned Morgan that when I first looked at it I knew it was an easy 65.
Well here's the sequence of 'sending it in'...
first time......ms62
2nd time...ms64
3rd time....bodybagged for AT.
4th time....ms65 Yippee!!!!!!!!
Note....Not all of the above submissions was with the same company. >>
When I was working on a Two Cent Piece set I bought an 1869 NGC MS64RB.
Sent to PCGS for cross with a minimum grade of MS63RB. Didn't cross.
Cracked out, submitted again, bodybag for altered surfaces.
Submitted again, graded MS65BN.
All within a timeframe of about six weeks.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Send it in again. >>
I just love that classic response.
I once bought a raw gorgeous toned Morgan that when I first looked at it I knew it was an easy 65.
Well here's the sequence of 'sending it in'...
first time......ms62
2nd time...ms64
3rd time....bodybagged for AT.
4th time....ms65 Yippee!!!!!!!!
Note....Not all of the above submissions was with the same company. >>
When I was working on a Two Cent Piece set I bought an 1869 NGC MS64RB.
Sent to PCGS for cross with a minimum grade of MS63RB. Didn't cross.
Cracked out, submitted again, bodybag for altered surfaces.
Submitted again, graded MS65BN.
All within a timeframe of about six weeks. >>
For different reasons, I find myself both encouraged and discouraged to hear this (although not surprising).
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
<< <i>Grade just received from PCGS........Unc details (for tooling)
I'd say I'm speechless, but as the same thing happened to me recently,
I know your pain. I'm done resubmitting - it'll get cracked out and placed
in my Wayte Raymond album for 10 years ... Maybe the Florida humidity
and heat in my bank vault will give it color to "trompe- l'oeil " on a future
resubmission. It worked on my Dimes... It should work on a few questionables.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
New Barber Purchases
Eric
<< <i>"...trompe- l'oeil..."
Eric >>
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
New Barber Purchases
<< <i>"...trompe- l'oeil..." >>
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)