BUYER BEWARE: PCGS Misattributed Kennedy Half Dollar on eBay

Caleb

It is a nice looking coin, just too bad it is DDO-013 instead of the DDO-004 / DDR-002

PCGS has graded and attributed 3 / 0 1971-D FS-101 Kennedy half dollars in MS66, the one linked above plus the one I have are not the right critters, that makes me wonder about if the third one out there is correct or also misattributed

But if the third coin is correct, it is a pop 1 / 0 and worth more then the owner thinks it is

LanceNewmanOCC

.
if you provide links for us (me) to see diagnostics for confirmation of attribution or in this case misattribution, i'll be happy to report the listing.

i never report listings w/o confirming myself
.

Wolf359

That guy has serious photo skills to make an MS66 coin look AU58.

19Lyds

<< <i>It is a nice looking coin, just too bad it is DDO-013 instead of the DDO-004 / DDR-002

PCGS has graded and attributed 3 / 0 1971-D FS-101 Kennedy half dollars in MS66, the one linked above plus the one I have are not the right critters, that makes me wonder about if the third one out there is correct or also misattributed

But if the third coin is correct, it is a pop 1 / 0 and worth more then the owner thinks it is >>




<< <i>.
if you provide links for us (me) to see diagnostics for confirmation of attribution or in this case misattribution, i'll be happy to report the listing.

i never report listings w/o confirming myself
. >>

DDO-013 is a new listing which has not yet been posted to the Variety Vista Web Page. However, after Caleb got his DDO-013 attributed by James Wiles, he sent me photo's and the easiest way to tell is that the DDO-013 has a die gouge in back of Kennedy's neck.



The eBay coin has that same marker.

Caleb

<< <i> if you provide links for us (me) to see diagnostics for confirmation of attribution or in this case misattribution, i'll be happy to report the listing.

i never report listings w/o confirming myself. >>



19Lyds is correct about the die gouge behind Kennedy’s neck being a marker for the DDO-013. But another way of telling that the coin is not the FS-101 is that the FS-101 is on CONECA DDO-004 which is also the DDR-002, if there is no doubling on the reverse then it is not the FS-101.

I did not ask anyone to report this listing to eBay, the seller has done nothing wrong, and he is only offering a coin he believes is correctly attributed by PCGS. My post was only a FYI so maybe no one on the boards would get burned buying a “sheep in wolf costume.”

Don’t get me wrong, the 1971-D DDO-013 is a nice double die on it’s own, maybe even stronger then the DDO-004 / DDR-002 (FS-101). But it is not in the Cherrypickers’ Guide and there forth not required in the competitive PCGS Registry sets.

I do wonder about the third MS-66 out there in PCGS plastic labeled as the FS-101, if it is the right critter then it is a top pop all by itself. It is too bad that misattributed varieties screw up the pop reports and dilute the value of the true variety.

braddick

What would you place the value of the coin listed if it was properly attributed?

(I'm thinking it would still be $500., but I am no expert in Kennedy varieties such as this.)

19Lyds

<< <i>

<< <i> if you provide links for us (me) to see diagnostics for confirmation of attribution or in this case misattribution, i'll be happy to report the listing.

i never report listings w/o confirming myself. >>



19Lyds is correct about the die gouge behind Kennedy’s neck being a marker for the DDO-013. But another way of telling that the coin is not the FS-101 is that the FS-101 is on CONECA DDO-004 which is also the DDR-002, if there is no doubling on the reverse then it is not the FS-101.

I did not ask anyone to report this listing to eBay, the seller has done nothing wrong, and he is only offering a coin he believes is correctly attributed by PCGS. My post was only a FYI so maybe no one on the boards would get burned buying a “sheep in wolf costume.”

Don’t get me wrong, the 1971-D DDO-013 is a nice double die on it’s own, maybe even stronger then the DDO-004 / DDR-002 (FS-101). But it is not in the Cherrypickers’ Guide and there forth not required in the competitive PCGS Registry sets.

I do wonder about the third MS-66 out there in PCGS plastic labeled as the FS-101, if it is the right critter then it is a top pop all by itself. It is too bad that misattributed varieties screw up the pop reports and dilute the value of the true variety. >>

As Frank Abagnale Jr. once said, "I concur" on not reporting the listing. However, the seller should and will be notified of the attribution error.

As for price on the DDO-013? I personally think that the current asking price is a couple hundred more than the coins actual value but thats just me. I would think that the DDO-013, since it has comparable doubling, would be good at around the same price as the DDO-004. Perhaps $300.

LanceNewmanOCC

.
thanks for the confirmation of information. i would double check the diagnostics but after looking at that kennedy pcgs set registry i'm going to go out on a limb on this one and say you know what you are talking about

at the very least if you are correct the listing should be removed and pcgs has a buy-back and/or fixing the label.

whomever is the purchaser regardless of similar values for the varieties will be getting ripped and may never know the diff until it comes time to sell/trade or estate

i see why some tpgs don't get into the variety business on a whim. they must have up-to-date information, an extensive database and highly trained employees to attribute with minimal errors.
.

19Lyds

<< <i>.
thanks for the confirmation of information. i would double check the diagnostics but after looking at that kennedy pcgs set registry i'm going to go out on a limb on this one and say you know what you are talking about

at the very least if you are correct the listing should be removed and pcgs has a buy-back and/or fixing the label.

whomever is the purchaser regardless of similar values for the varieties will be getting ripped and may never know the diff until it comes time to sell/trade or estate

i see why some tpgs don't get into the variety business on a whim. they must have up-to-date information, an extensive database and highly trained employees to attribute with minimal errors.
. >>

While the price is a little out of line you can't blame the seller for PCGS's error as it happen's with some frequency.

I have contacted the seller and he should be around shortly.

Should eBay pull the Auction? On what grounds? Our word for it?

Seeing as how eBay is a PCGS Oriented venue, I don't think that the drones at eBay are going to pull the listing since PCGS says its an FS-101 right on the label.

LanceNewmanOCC

.
the listing should be pulled since enough information has been provided to justify doing so and until the coin is verified as what the label proclaims it to be and since the seller has been made aware, he is now partly responsible for the item being sold. the obvious (i presume) responsibility resulting from awareness.

kind of thought that it goes w/o saying with all the information in this thread

edited to add:

at the end of the day are we not responsible/accountable for our actions, especially when someone sounding legitimate alerts us to potential errors/wrongdoing?
.

19Lyds

<< <i>.
the listing should be pulled since enough information has been provided to justify doing so and until the coin is verified as what the label proclaims it to be and since the seller has been made aware, he is now partly responsible for the item being sold. the obvious (i presume) responsibility resulting from awareness.

kind of thought that it goes w/o saying with all the information in this thread

edited to add:

at the end of the day are we not responsible/accountable for our actions, especially when someone sounding legitimate alerts us to potential errors/wrongdoing?
. >>

Truth be told, I doubt the coin will sell since its $190 over PCGS Price Guide ($465/$275)and everybody knows that PCGS Price Guide values on varieties is, uh, very, uh, "hopeful".

Feel free to report way though.

LanceNewmanOCC

<< <i>Feel free to report way though. >>



won't be reported by me as i still feel as if i do not have enough information to do so and for the listings i do report i feel confident i can debate my points quite well, this not being one of them although caleb has made a great presentation of the information.

like it has been said maybe we should wait to see what the seller does. a good update or two to this thread based on what the seller says/does which includes if they do nothing will dictate any actions i take
.

Caleb

<< <i>What would you place the value of the coin listed if it was properly attributed?

(I'm thinking it would still be $500., but I am no expert in Kennedy varieties such as this.) >>



The value is like it always is, what someone is willing to sell and somebody else is willing to pay. Within the past year I have been able to purchase two 1971-D PCGS MS66 “Minor Varieties”, the first on eBay for $50 and the second one on Teletrade for $55 plus juice. The inclusion of the FS number on the label is what generates the higher prices – especially for playing the Registry game.

I also picked this PCGS MS67 1971-D a few years ago for $65, it now resides in a PCGS MS67 FS-102 slab and is still a top pop of 1 / 0 for this variety.

I’m not blaming PCGS for misattributing the coin that started this thread, currently there are fifteen different 1971-D Kennedy half dollar Double Die Obverses in the CONECA file (three of them not yet listed on CONECA web page). I have no idea how many different 1971-D DDOs that Wexler has listed but probable several more then CONECA. Some of these varieties are so close that you really need to understand the stages and markers for each separate variety.

Several of the different Double Die varieties for the 1971-D Kennedy half dollar can be found in that year’s Mint Sets so find pristine examples may take a litter work but doable.

To answer Braddick’s question, if the coin mentioned in the first post was properly attributed by PCGS as a “Minor Variety” on the label I would estimate the value at between $50 - $75.

Just my two cents worth,
Caleb

19Lyds

<< <i>

<< <i>What would you place the value of the coin listed if it was properly attributed?

(I'm thinking it would still be $500., but I am no expert in Kennedy varieties such as this.) >>



The value is like it always is, what someone is willing to sell and somebody else is willing to pay. Within the past year I have been able to purchase two 1971-D PCGS MS66 “Minor Varieties”, the first on eBay for $50 and the second one on Teletrade for $55 plus juice. The inclusion of the FS number on the label is what generates the higher prices – especially for playing the Registry game.

I also picked this PCGS MS67 1971-D a few years ago for $65, it now resides in a PCGS MS67 FS-102 slab and is still a top pop of 1 / 0 for this variety.

I’m not blaming PCGS for misattributing the coin that started this thread, currently there are fifteen different 1971-D Kennedy half dollar Double Die Obverses in the CONECA file (three of them not yet listed on CONECA web page). I have no idea how many different 1971-D DDOs that Wexler has listed but probable several more then CONECA. Some of these varieties are so close that you really need to understand the stages and markers for each separate variety.

Several of the different Double Die varieties for the 1971-D Kennedy half dollar can be found in that year’s Mint Sets so find pristine examples may take a litter work but doable.

To answer Braddick’s question, if the coin mentioned in the first post was properly attributed by PCGS as a “Minor Variety” on the label I would estimate the value at between $50 - $75.

Just my two cents worth,
Caleb >>

I remember that FS-102 Caleb! Ya just had to get one a point higher than my previous Top Pop dincha~!

fcloud

interesting. I posted about a misattributed mercury dime and no one seem to respond to the post. It happens, and pretending there is a second 1942-S inverted S dime is sad. The person who bought the coin doesn't know, and maybe he will be happy with the point in his registry set, but if he ever goes to sell it he will find out it is just a regular dime.

I'm glad this one was found, but it is too bad that these errors happen especially with the fees we pay to make sure they are right.

johnny9434

<< <i>.
if you provide links for us (me) to see diagnostics for confirmation of attribution or in this case misattribution, i'll be happy to report the listing.

i never report listings w/o confirming myself
. >>

neither do a few others here

Caleb

<< <i>interesting. I posted about a misattributed mercury dime and no one seem to respond to the post. >>



That is because Mercury dimes are down there with SBA dollars on the "food chain" of coin collecting

19Lyds

<< <i>

<< <i>interesting. I posted about a misattributed mercury dime and no one seem to respond to the post. >>



That is because Mercury dimes are down there with SBA dollars on the "food chain" of coin collecting >>

You are such a bad boy for poking on fcloud! Go to your room!

As for fcloud's thread, I thought it got a fair amount of replies.

fcloud

Caleb

<< <i> >>



I thought you might like that one!