ANACS coins in old white holders Part Deux: Grades Revealed
rhedden
Posts: 6,563 ✭✭✭✭✭
I must admit, I am a bit of a scumbag for starting the other thread about the 1861-s half when I already got its PCGS grade yesterday.
However, it was really fun to watch the discussion go ballistic for a few hours, much as I did when I first found the hidden rim bumps.
There was another coin cracked out of an old white ANACS holder in this submission: a beautiful, well struck 1811 Bust half that was ANACS AU50. I grade it AU55 minimum. No rim bumps this time, so I was pleased after the cracking. (I thought I had a photo, but it is nowhere to be found.) Anyway, here's how the two coins turned out:
1861-S 50C PCGS MS61
1811 50C Genuine- questionable color
Congrats to those who guessed MS61 in the other thread. I guess the conclusion is that the AU58 grade by ANACS was one of those instances where they assigned a "net grade" without indicating so on the holder. PCGS decided it netted out to MS61 instead. It's probably worth less in this grade due to the Everyman AU58 Effect!
As for the 1811 half, it I guess this coin turned out to be the real reason not to buy coins in old ANACS holders. Never crossed my mind that it might bag for color! Cruel irony.
Edited to add: the chain cent in the other thread is obviously damaged, so I didn't try to cross it.
However, it was really fun to watch the discussion go ballistic for a few hours, much as I did when I first found the hidden rim bumps.
There was another coin cracked out of an old white ANACS holder in this submission: a beautiful, well struck 1811 Bust half that was ANACS AU50. I grade it AU55 minimum. No rim bumps this time, so I was pleased after the cracking. (I thought I had a photo, but it is nowhere to be found.) Anyway, here's how the two coins turned out:
1861-S 50C PCGS MS61
1811 50C Genuine- questionable color
Congrats to those who guessed MS61 in the other thread. I guess the conclusion is that the AU58 grade by ANACS was one of those instances where they assigned a "net grade" without indicating so on the holder. PCGS decided it netted out to MS61 instead. It's probably worth less in this grade due to the Everyman AU58 Effect!
As for the 1811 half, it I guess this coin turned out to be the real reason not to buy coins in old ANACS holders. Never crossed my mind that it might bag for color! Cruel irony.
Edited to add: the chain cent in the other thread is obviously damaged, so I didn't try to cross it.
0
Comments
You just gotta try again with the bust half. You know what they say, if the grade doesn't fit ya gotta resubmit or something like that.
<< <i>It's more like, "If the grade doesn't fit, get a jar of Dip...." >>
That could work too!
<< <i>It's probably worth less in this grade due to the Everyman AU58 Effect! >>
They even each other out from what I see looking at price guide.
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.americanlegacycoins.com
Lance.
<< <i>I gotta mind to start a thread on the pro's and con's of cracking my '57-O quarter from an older PCI-60 holder for a try at our host. >>
PCI? It may look great in the slab, but when you crack it, it will turn out to be aluminum foil filled with chocolate.
In all seriousness, I once bought an 1857-O quarter in VF35 in a SEGS holder at a Baltimore show for $28. It turned out to be the Briggs plate coin for 7-C, a misplaced date variety with less than 10 still known, probably worth $600-1000 right now. I guess nobody cared about Seated quarter varieties back then.
<< <i>I must admit, I am a bit of a scumbag for starting the other thread about the 1861-s half when I already got its PCGS grade yesterday. >>
So, you bashed the old ANACS slabs knowing that PCGS already upgraded your coin. I agree with your scumbag assessment.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
<< <i>PCI? It may look great in the slab, but when you crack it, it will turn out to be aluminum foil filled with chocolate. >>
Dolan
So, you bashed the old ANACS slabs knowing that PCGS already upgraded your coin. I agree with your scumbag assessment. >>
No apologies to ANACS on this one. I just about suffered a heart attack after finding the rim bumps after I cracked it. I would have been really ticked if both of them bagged.
<< <i>So, you bashed the old ANACS slabs knowing that PCGS already upgraded your coin. I agree with your scumbag assessment. >>
No apologies to ANACS on this one. I just about suffered a heart attack after finding the rim bumps after I cracked it. I would have been really ticked if both of them bagged. >>
Those minor rim bumps apparently didn't bother PCGS too much if they gave it an MS-6!.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
As an example I had about 12 PCGS genuine Lincolns consigned them to me....all were toned though none with any major rainbows etc and dates ranged from 1909 to 1950. I cracked them out and submitted all of them to NGC as they looked ok to me...and 11 of the 12 coins graded. So based on your logic I shouldn't buy Lincolns from PCGS because they can't judge color or should I not buy toned Lincolns from NGC because they can't judge color
It will be sent on to PCGS as a crossover with no min grade.
AJ
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
Ankur, I think you will do just fine on the 1820 Half.
For a large selection of U.S. Coins & Currency, visit The Reeded Edge's online webstore at the link below.
The Reeded Edge
Well, take my warning FWIW. If you're a diehard fan of old ANACS holders, then best of luck with your crossovers when the time comes. I actually like their grading standards quite a bit, but the possibility of hidden rim issues in the white plastic has soured me considerably, as you can see. NGC has the same problem with their older holders. As for the other comment, I'm not sure where you're reading that I think only ANACS would get the color wrong now and then. I have similar feelings about NGC and the third-world services.
Those minor rim bumps apparently didn't bother PCGS too much if they gave it an MS-6!.
I'm highly suspicious that some of you might be friends with the old ANACS crew.
One thing I always liked was the nice compact size of these older holders. They were pretty sturdy, weighed a lot less, and the coin looked pretty nice in it.
I would love to see a viable small holder option again. LOL I must be getting old as the idea that comes to mind is hefting into the overhead might be easier, able to put more out in showcases etc. Oh well that will never happen as we all like bigger!!!
And I would just probably bring more so net affect -0-
Website-Americana Rare Coin Inc
On the other hand, had a very nice-appearing 1920-D Walker in old ANACS in VF, super surfaces front and back, cracked it out for an album -- and the edges were a sickly, mottled, pitted PVC green. Should never have been put into a problem-free holder, was quite invisible when in the ANACS slab. Sold that one raw to a sympathetic local dealer just to get rid of it, and took a significant loss.
I'll admit the OP reminded me of that incident, and I've not forgotten it ever really!
occurred more as a reaction to the "sawed in half" alterations that were being sold in fake holders.
Believe me, the sick feeling you have when a hidden rim or edge problem appears after a coin is cracked
out of a holder is NOTHING when compared to the feeling you get when two separate pieces fall out of
a fake holder (and some of these holders were pretty deceptive).
I know from conversations at coin shows that way too many collectors and dealers got burned by these.
The two separate halves issue in a slab just sounds like a new twist on the old classic "1916-D" dime in a super-thick Capital Plastics-type holder; a wonderful deal is made until the holder is later opened up.