Options
Well I have seen it all now. ICG vs PCGS...WOW!!!
Wabbit2313
Posts: 7,268 ✭✭✭✭✭
This has to be more damaging to them than over grading, as many claim. I sent in some DMPL coins to see if they were as strict as everyone else these days. For the fun of it, I cracked this out and sent it along, (at the 5 day service level to boot!!)
I am thinking it's a 65, so they might as well give it 66.
I am sorry, but if they are really using 3 graders, someone cue the music to the 3 Stooges, or to Three Blind Mice, either one works.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
And under different lighting to show luster, which is amazing.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
<< <i>Based on what I see here I'd have left it in the old holder. Nice coin, good luster but 81-S Morgans come nice... I agree with 64, shot 65, but 66 is fantasyland IMO. ICG's been getting heat for overgrades plus they've had to play kissy face with ebay to retain anointed TPG status, so they're almost going the other way now. This is an example. It's not a 63, but it's darn sure not a 6. Again, JMHO >>
Coin Rarities Online
<< <i>While the coin does have nice luster, there is several areas of damage on it. I just don't think it has 64 potential. There is severe damage to the neck.
Uhhhh "Severe Damage to the Neck"??
The name is LEE!
Could you list what there were before and then what they did at ICG?
Severe damage? LOL, no wonder your coin sold for 20 bucks the other night.
Come one Folks, the MS-66 was thrown in for a joke since they are always blamed for over grading. It is a 65 anyway.
No I am not losing my mind. It was a personal experiment, for my own reasons, to see just how good or bad they are. This is only one example of the total foolishness that was returned from 2 orders.
I'll post more some other time, but this example takes the cake!
From the pictures the coin looks very nice but without looking at the coin in person we don't know that for sure.
Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
<< <i>My first thought is there could be hairlines or evidence of light cleaning that the submitter missed but the graders didn't. I can't tell if hairlines are present from the pictures but pictures are notorious for the inability to show light scratches or hairlines.
From the pictures the coin looks very nice but without looking at the coin in person we don't know that for sure. >>
I am quite sure PCGS did not holder a cleaned coin as a 64 in an old Rattler. It is not cleaned, and I keep hearing the trombone at the end of the Stooges song for some reason.
<< <i>While the coin does have nice luster, there is several areas of damage on it. I just don't think it has 64 potential. There is severe damage to the neck.
Huh? You circled the tiniest nicks on a picture the size of a saucer plate. This is a 63/64/65 conversation LOL!
<< <i>Too bad you can't now send it to CAC for a gold bean.
This is truly funny!!!
Jim
<< <i>Was this done for entertainment? Or did you honestly think that cracking a coin out of a P64 Rattler and sending it to ICG was a money making strategy? >>
Now I am going to send it to PCGS as a crossover, and hope for an upgrade! I think it has a shot!
Opinions will always differ on coins. Thats why they are opinions.
Free Trial
<< <i>
<< <i>My first thought is there could be hairlines or evidence of light cleaning that the submitter missed but the graders didn't. I can't tell if hairlines are present from the pictures but pictures are notorious for the inability to show light scratches or hairlines.
From the pictures the coin looks very nice but without looking at the coin in person we don't know that for sure. >>
I am quite sure PCGS did not holder a cleaned coin as a 64 in an old Rattler. It is not cleaned, and I keep hearing the trombone at the end of the Stooges song for some reason. >>
The idea of market acceptance grading is in play here and this is most likely a case of that. Perhaps the coin was nice enough for an MS65 grade except for some light cleaning, light enough that a no-grade wasn't warranted but the final grade was affected. That was probably what happened with ICG except the grade penalty was more severe. If the PCGS grade was MS64 then ICG grades it MS63 there's probably an issue with the coin, not a result of the "3 Stooges" element. The coin might not be as nice as you think it is.
Take a look at the rattlers around today. They slabbed plenty of problem coins then. Back then they weren't as keen on catching problem and doctored coins as they are today.
Use this experience as a learning tool and don't be so combative when people are trying to be constructive.
Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
<< <i>To me ICG seems to grade classic coins very conservatively and modern stuff very liberally. I like consistency. At least you can apply a correction factor that way between the services. >>
This has been my observation.
<< <i>Use this experience as a learning tool and don't be so combative when people are trying to be constructive. >>
Wah Wah Wah, Wah Wah Wah Wah Wah Wah. I think that is how the song goes.
Yes Father!
The coin is not cleaned, but the one that does have some hairlines came back a 65!!!! So much for that idea. Don't have those pics right now.
<< <i>
<< <i>Use this experience as a learning tool and don't be so combative when people are trying to be constructive. >>
Wah Wah Wah, Wah Wah Wah Wah Wah Wah. I think that is how the song goes.
Yes Father! >>
That crying part sounds more like you when you got your blessed results from ICG.
CoinBuyer12, Matrix1980 and yourself make up the perfect 3 Stooges if you all aren't the same person to begin with.
Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
<< <i>Was this done for entertainment? Or did you honestly think that cracking a coin out of a P64 Rattler and sending it to ICG was a money making strategy? >>
<< <i>Was this done for entertainment? Or did you honestly think that cracking a coin out of a P64 Rattler and sending it to ICG was a money making strategy? >>
It's entertainment now.
Just because it was in an old PCGS holder does not mean an automatic upgrade
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
This is exactly how I wanted it to turn out.
Anyway, the coveted 64 Rattler holder becomes a 63 at ICG. I can't even say that without chuckling.
<< <i>I'm just curious how much more money in fees OP is willing to spend on a coin that even in his best case scenario of MS65 is worth perhaps $150-$170 tops. Once sent in to and returned from our hosts he will have nearly that much into the coin already just in fees/ship costs between the two services, and that's not counting whatever was originally paid for the coin. At some point I'd cut my losses and admit it was a mistake busting it from the rattler. JMHO. >>
Who cares how he has fun?
I enjoy whiskey. I don't get any money back after I drink some. At least he's got a coin still.
<< <i>
<< <i>Was this done for entertainment? Or did you honestly think that cracking a coin out of a P64 Rattler and sending it to ICG was a money making strategy? >>
It's entertainment now.
I think it was an experiment.
Hey, someone actually read the thread! You should see what else I sent in, and what came back.
If I can't blow 25 bucks for my own reasons, I need to move to France, or was it Russia?!
By the way, IIRC, the ICG holder is THE toughest one to crack open!
Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes
<< <i>
<< <i>Was this done for entertainment? Or did you honestly think that cracking a coin out of a P64 Rattler and sending it to ICG was a money making strategy? >>
Now I am going to send it to PCGS as a crossover, and hope for an upgrade! I think it has a shot! >>
So your out a $100 in grading fees and shipping, and basically traded a generic 64 Morgan in a rattler for a generic 63 Morgan in an irrelevant companies holder. Why? Even if it went 65 you would get no more value due to it being ICG.
Latin American Collection
<< <i>By the way, IIRC, the ICG holder is THE toughest one to crack open! >>
I think SEGS has that honor.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Was this done for entertainment? Or did you honestly think that cracking a coin out of a P64 Rattler and sending it to ICG was a money making strategy? >>
Now I am going to send it to PCGS as a crossover, and hope for an upgrade! I think it has a shot! >>
So your out a $100 in grading fees and shipping, and basically traded a generic 64 Morgan in a rattler for a generic 63 Morgan in an irrelevant companies holder. Why? Even if it went 65 you would get no more value due to it being ICG. >>
Man, does anyone have a sense of humor anymore!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
<< <i>
<< <i>By the way, IIRC, the ICG holder is THE toughest one to crack open! >>
I think SEGS has that honor. >>
I finally mastered the ICG crack out.
<< <i>While the coin does have nice luster, there is several areas of damage on it. I just don't think it has 64 potential. There is severe damage to the neck.
All I can say, besides 'WOW' if you consider this as 'severe damage', is you should do more reading and less talking.
Also, he's edited ANOTHER post (as most are), and he seems to have a good grasp on posting images......this is no newb here, just another alt that will be bammed sooner than later, hopefully.
First, why would a person crack a coin from PCGS, send it to ICG, and then post the results on the PCGS forum? What's the point? If it upgraded, downgraded, or was bodybagged what would be learn? Not much.
Second, there is an underlying feeling that a coin in a rattler is automatically special and therefore deserves a shot at upgrade without any other thought.
Third, some of the analysis given here is ridiculous.
I know a few dealers that automatically send ALL of their new rattlers and OGH coins (but not the others) to the New Jersey jelly bean factory. I guess they can run their business however they'd like, but what ever happened to looking at a coin and making a determination based on its merits?
Judging grades from photos is a fool's game at best. It's impossible to see fine hairlines or really appreciate luster without holding a coin and giving it a good look. The only things a photo can show well are contact marks (but some flaws can be hidden with the right photo technique) and strike. I'm no Morgan expert, but this one looks like a 64 should look. One grade in either direction could be EASILY explained by something not appearing in the photos.
Grading companies do not grade to the same standards. In other words, these two companies put different weight on different qualities. What the greater market prefers is obvious from auction results and sale prices.
Bagmarks + wipe lines = 64 at best.
If this coin truly had upgrade potential there were 2 much better ways to handle it with your downside only being a $10-$25 submission fee.
1. regrade....but you'll lose the rattler
2. submit to CAC....a gold bean is worth next grade up, sometimes more.
I don't see what's so damaging to PCGS in the OP's orig post. Generic Morgans routinely can shift a grade either way. In fact out of a typical 10 examples in the 63-65 range
I'd bet you could submit each of them 5X with only 1 to 3 coins out of the 10 achieving the same grade each time. Getting the same grade 3X or 4X in a row on ANY coin is a
lot harder than you think.
<< <i>
<< <i>While the coin does have nice luster, there is several areas of damage on it. I just don't think it has 64 potential. There is severe damage to the neck.
All I can say, besides 'WOW' if you consider this as 'severe damage', is you should do more reading and less talking.
Also, he's edited ANOTHER post (as most are), and he seems to have a good grasp on posting images......this is no newb here, just another alt that will be bammed sooner than later, hopefully. >>
What difference does it make if I edit my posts? Seriously? I often edit them to fix spelling mistakes, add sentences, re size images, etc.
Look at the neck. There is severe damage to the area where it forms a V. Call it bag marks if you want.
Uncirculated, Mint State (MS-65) No trace of any wear. There may be a few minute bag marks and other abrasions.
mi·nute 2 (m-nt, -nyt, m-) adj. 1. Exceptionally small; tiny. See Synonyms at small.
The marks on the neck are by no means tiny.
This coin does not meet 65 from the standards of the ANA. Mind you, I have read the book on Morgan Dollars.
This is a 64.
See any deep "marks" on any area? No.
Unlike most, I see that the education of all of this was a huge motivating force for you. When you look at it that way, it all makes sense, except for the results from ICG.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>While the coin does have nice luster, there is several areas of damage on it. I just don't think it has 64 potential. There is severe damage to the neck.
All I can say, besides 'WOW' if you consider this as 'severe damage', is you should do more reading and less talking.
Also, he's edited ANOTHER post (as most are), and he seems to have a good grasp on posting images......this is no newb here, just another alt that will be bammed sooner than later, hopefully. >>
What difference does it make if I edit my posts? Seriously? I often edit them to fix spelling mistakes, add sentences, re size images, etc.
Look at the neck. There is severe damage to the area where it forms a V. Call it bag marks if you want.
Uncirculated, Mint State (MS-65) No trace of any wear. There may be a few minute bag marks and other abrasions.
mi·nute 2 (m-nt, -nyt, m-) adj. 1. Exceptionally small; tiny. See Synonyms at small.
The marks on the neck are by no means tiny.
This coin does not meet 65 from the standards of the ANA. Mind you, I have read the book on Morgan Dollars. >>
Nothing is that cut and dry, sorry. As it has been previously mentioned, the worst offenses on this coin are not included in your circles, and are actually found in the fields.