Home U.S. Coin Forum
Options

I Guess It's OK to Draw X's on Your Coins...

Because the below coin is PCGS F15. Photo is from PCGS CoinFacts (not my coin).

What are your thoughts on this? The graffiti looks old, but should this really have straight-graded? The X is just so apparent that I feel, if it were my coin, I wouldn't have been as lucky.

My intention with this thread is not to criticize the host's decision but rather to see how members would have labeled the coin (gradable vs not gradable) so that we may understand PCGS grading standards more clearly. image

image
Lurking and learning since 2010. Full-time professional numismatist based in SoCal.
«1

Comments

  • lasvegasteddylasvegasteddy Posts: 10,432 ✭✭✭
    our host needs to buy back that coin
    image needs to be removed from coin facts

    graffiti as such should never straight grade

    they're only human i suppose
    last month i posted a standing liberty quarter that doesn't represent our host's reputation either
    but it wasn't a coinfacts coin either
    everything in life is but merely on loan to us by our appreciation....lose your appreciation and see


  • coin22lovercoin22lover Posts: 3,542 ✭✭✭
    That probably looks worse in the pictures than in hand.
  • BustHalfBrianBustHalfBrian Posts: 4,191 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>That probably looks worse in the pictures than in hand. >>



    Funny, usually it's the opposite image
    Lurking and learning since 2010. Full-time professional numismatist based in SoCal.
  • coin22lovercoin22lover Posts: 3,542 ✭✭✭
    Really? I've found it to be the case more often than not.
  • PerryHallPerryHall Posts: 46,823 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>That probably looks worse in the pictures than in hand. >>



    Sounds like you think the pic may have been photo-shopped.

    Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
    "Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
    "Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire

  • stealerstealer Posts: 4,030 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>That probably looks worse in the pictures than in hand. >>



    Sounds like you think the pic may have been photo-shopped. >>


    It sounds like a legitimate statement to me. In my experience blown-up images/scans exacerbate scratches.
  • BustHalfBrianBustHalfBrian Posts: 4,191 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>That probably looks worse in the pictures than in hand. >>



    Sounds like you think the pic may have been photo-shopped. >>


    It sounds like a legitimate statement to me. In my experience blown-up images/scans exacerbate scratches. >>



    I can't imagine it would look any better in hand.
    Lurking and learning since 2010. Full-time professional numismatist based in SoCal.
  • PerryHallPerryHall Posts: 46,823 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>That probably looks worse in the pictures than in hand. >>



    Sounds like you think the pic may have been photo-shopped. >>


    It sounds like a legitimate statement to me. In my experience blown-up images/scans exacerbate scratches. >>



    Just like magnifiers and loupes?

    Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
    "Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
    "Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire

  • TopographicOceansTopographicOceans Posts: 6,535 ✭✭✭✭
    I dunno. It's a 5 inch scratch on my monitor. It may be smaller in hand image
  • stealerstealer Posts: 4,030 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>That probably looks worse in the pictures than in hand. >>



    Sounds like you think the pic may have been photo-shopped. >>


    It sounds like a legitimate statement to me. In my experience blown-up images/scans exacerbate scratches. >>



    Just like magnifiers and loupes? >>


    Actually, no, it has more to do with the lighting.
  • PerryHallPerryHall Posts: 46,823 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>That probably looks worse in the pictures than in hand. >>



    Sounds like you think the pic may have been photo-shopped. >>


    It sounds like a legitimate statement to me. In my experience blown-up images/scans exacerbate scratches. >>



    Just like magnifiers and loupes? >>


    Actually, no, it has more to do with the lighting. >>



    Obviously, adequate lighting is assumed when examining a coin. Any way you look at it, those scratches are fairly substantial. They're not exactly hairline scratches.

    Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
    "Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
    "Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire

  • 19Lyds19Lyds Posts: 26,492 ✭✭✭✭
    Depending upon the coin and/or variety, some marks are ok.

    I have no idea about the collectability of this 1814/3 Capped Bust but PCGS obviously felt it was gradable, especially at this grade level.
    I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.



    The name is LEE!
  • Cam40Cam40 Posts: 8,146
    Its not labeled 4 over 3? It matches the pic in the Red Book
    Maybe that's the answer. Since its a better variety, yes, the `old scratch` is somewhat overlooked
    or figured into the over all grade ?
  • BustHalfBrianBustHalfBrian Posts: 4,191 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Its not labeled 4 over 3? It matches the pic in the Red Book
    Maybe that's the answer. Since its a better variety, yes, the `old scratch` is somewhat overlooked
    or figured into the over all grade ? >>



    It is labeled 1814/3
    Lurking and learning since 2010. Full-time professional numismatist based in SoCal.
  • Cam40Cam40 Posts: 8,146
    I suppose I`m ok with `the straight grade`, somewhat overlooking the `x` as very distracting.
    Its not to me. It adds character if anything, if that means anything.
    Feel like I`ve written this before.. lol
  • PerryHallPerryHall Posts: 46,823 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>I suppose I`m ok with `the straight grade`, somewhat overlooking the `x` as very distracting.
    Its not to me. It adds character if anything, if that means anything.
    Feel like I`ve written this before.. lol >>



    Those scratches "adds character"? Are you serious? Most people consider scratches to be damage and a distraction.

    Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
    "Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
    "Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire

  • Cam40Cam40 Posts: 8,146
    true, most of the time. but, grading is an art, not a science so, its open to much interpretation.
    its a neat variety so, lets grade it.
    all in favor yes `eye`....
    :-)
  • I never saw the 4 over 3 because I was looking at the blasted scratch. If I owned the coin, I'd always see the scratch first. No good, no good.
    Let's try not to get upset.
  • LochNESSLochNESS Posts: 4,829 ✭✭✭
    Agreed. If a professional grader at the world's leading TPG can't spot graffiti like this in-hand ... basically I don't buy the "looks worse in the photo" argument.

    As the owner of a 'genuine' graffiti coin that is much rarer than this one, it really irks me that this got a grade.
    ANA LM • WBCC 429

    Amat Colligendo Focum

    Top 10FOR SALE

    image
  • LanceNewmanOCCLanceNewmanOCC Posts: 19,999 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Because the below coin is PCGS F15. Photo is from PCGS CoinFacts (not my coin).

    What are your thoughts on this? The graffiti looks old, but should this really have straight-graded? The X is just so apparent that I feel, if it were my coin, I wouldn't have been as lucky.

    My intention with this thread is not to criticize the host's decision but rather to see how members would have labeled the coin (gradable vs not gradable) so that we can maybe understand PCGS grading standards more clearly. image >>



    good call brian and don't forget,

    image

    because if you do, the next thing you hear just may be, "it's only tooling."
    .

    <--- look what's behind the mask! - cool link 1/NO ~ 2/NNP ~ 3/NNC ~ 4/CF ~ 5/PG ~ 6/Cert ~ 7/NGC 7a/NGC pop~ 8/NGCF ~ 9/HA archives ~ 10/PM ~ 11/NM ~ 12/ANACS cert ~ 13/ANACS pop - report fakes 1/ACEF ~ report fakes/thefts 1/NCIS - Numi-Classes SS ~ Bass ~ Transcribed Docs NNP - clashed coins - error training - V V mm styles -

  • TonerGuyTonerGuy Posts: 590 ✭✭✭
    Does genuflecting ever get tiring for PCGS apologist ?

    Coin is damaged. Should have never been straight graded... oh yeah PCGS is not infallible and they too over-grade coins and make mistakes.
  • ambro51ambro51 Posts: 13,945 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I think it's a very old mark contemporary to the coins circulation. The scratches were made to figure out if the coin was real, not lead or pewter or another non silver metal. I've seen such scratches on Feuchtwangers image
  • TookybanditTookybandit Posts: 3,414 ✭✭✭✭
    Those marks do not bother me on a F15. If the coin was XF or higher than I would pass.
  • dpooledpoole Posts: 5,940 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I found this SLH 1927-S in circulation as a kid (ruined further by my shining it up with a baking soda paste at the time). Apparently, carving Xs on coins was a pretty common occurrence in the old days.

    image[/URL]
  • BryceMBryceM Posts: 11,854 ✭✭✭✭✭
    My thoughts:
    1. I don't have a real problem with this coin at that grade.
    2. If cracked & resubmitted, it might not grade again.
    3. This is not a coin I'd generally desire to own.
    4. While most likely graffiti, it's not impossible that these are only circulation marks.
    5. I agree that the photographs may be over-emphasizing the scratches.
    6. I doubt you'd be successful in having our hosts buy it back.
    7. The heavy die clash marks are cool. image
  • BroadstruckBroadstruck Posts: 30,497 ✭✭✭✭✭
    It should be details graded.

    It should never have been submitted.

    It is spot-able by the naked eye & a loupe.

    It was definitely seen when it was photographed.
    To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
  • WoodenJeffersonWoodenJefferson Posts: 6,491 ✭✭✭✭
    image
    Chat Board Lingo

    "Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
  • jayPemjayPem Posts: 4,082 ✭✭✭✭✭
    This is one of the only submissions I've had bagged...reverse graffiti. Kind of a head scratcher, the area in question is nearly impossible to see in hand...different day, different result.
    Didn't we just learn recently that graders spend only 5 seconds with coins like these ? image

    imageimage
  • 291fifth291fifth Posts: 24,680 ✭✭✭✭✭
    It should be in a "genuine" holder ... period.
    All glory is fleeting.
  • PatchesPatches Posts: 1,700 ✭✭✭


    << <i>It should be in a "genuine" holder ... period. >>



    Agreed
  • jayPemjayPem Posts: 4,082 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Actually, my thoughts are maybe it's time to send this one back in image

    image
  • TwoSides2aCoinTwoSides2aCoin Posts: 44,573 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Could be a mechanical error. One coin doesn't make PCGS' grading standard.
    Don't let your feelings get in the way of a good discussion about standards based off feelings about one coin.
    You should know it's okay to draw x's on your coins. As to "grading standards" or "net grades", or mechanical errors.
    I feel (since your basing your whole premise off of your FEELINGS), that there are more opinions of the company's integrity
    than there are collectors of coins, due to responses that prove that the whole is a sum of it's parts.
    And quite a few of those parts are actually some of the biggest issues due to misinterpreting and possibly misunderstanding.

    The coin, in my view would grade FINE (net grade) and notation would be made to the buyer that there is some graffiti
    which may hinder or detract, especially for the discerning collector. In the case of the Bust Half, it's pretty obviously a Net Grade, even if not noted.
    I feel this coin is not for you and possibly points out some flaws in your thought processes.


    On that note , here is one that got past my eyes and the sellers' but didn't get past PCGS.
    image
    imageimage

    no genuflecting or human sacrifices necessary. No kool aid. Just a simple man's opinion.
  • shorecollshorecoll Posts: 5,447 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I think it should have bagged. That 15 on the other hand wouldn't surprise me to be straight graded, unless there is other hidden tooling.
    ANA-LM, NBS, EAC
  • BustHalfBrianBustHalfBrian Posts: 4,191 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>I think it should have bagged. That 15 on the other hand wouldn't surprise me to be straight graded, unless there is other hidden tooling. >>



    I agree with you on the 1815.

    Give that one another go, jayPem. I think it's worth the risk considering the date. image
    Lurking and learning since 2010. Full-time professional numismatist based in SoCal.
  • ARCOARCO Posts: 4,431 ✭✭✭✭✭
    It is graffiti, plain and simple. It never should have holdered straight.

    Tyler
  • AngryTurtleAngryTurtle Posts: 1,587 ✭✭✭
    On the OP coin:

    1) Its a giant picture. My experience is that defects are easier to see in pics, so I am guessing its less obvious in hand
    2) Its low grade. More "stuff" is acceptable as you get into the lower grades, in my opinion
    3) It appears to be net graded. Other wise pretty nice for a F15, again in my opinion.

    So in sum, I am probably OK with it, but I have also been trained by my coin deal friends not to buy coins like this.
  • stevebensteveben Posts: 4,635 ✭✭✭✭✭
    my guess is that this coin was net graded and holdered before pcgs started genuine grading. if it were cracked out and resubmitted today, it would not grade.
  • messydeskmessydesk Posts: 20,294 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Without the graffiti it's still F15, with the graffiti it could never sell for what a nice F15 should sell for. Yeah, it's old and not super deep, but it's still there and detracting from the coin.
  • JustMe2JustMe2 Posts: 180 ✭✭
    I still like the 1796 50c that sold for $37,375 on 4/17/2008 at Heritage as NCS Etched Stars and the same coin sold for $51,750 on 7/9/2009 as PCGS Fine 15.
  • WHPRATTWHPRATT Posts: 114 ✭✭✭
    it marks the spot.
  • rawmorganrawmorgan Posts: 618 ✭✭✭
    Here's my X-celent coin. Always liked the "x" on this one.
    An ATS AG-03.

    image[/URL]
    image[/URL]
  • TopographicOceansTopographicOceans Posts: 6,535 ✭✭✭✭
    People, I don't know how many times I need to repeat this, but

    PLEASE DO NOT DRAW MARKS ON YOUR COINS
  • lkeigwinlkeigwin Posts: 16,893 ✭✭✭✭✭
    It should have been BB'd, IMO. But here are some snippets from PCGS's Grading Standards page. I'll bet PCGS would confirm the problem-free grade if it were sent in for review.
    Lance.

    Large & prominent scratches - Depends on the severity and/or the quantity of the scratch(s). Faint, old, toned-over scratches may be acceptable; bright, fresh scratches may not. Placement is an important factor.

    Damage/Graffiti - significant distracting etchings- occasionally net graded on early coins.
  • For what it is worth when i look at this coin on my Note 3 at the actual size of the coin and hold my phone like I am holding the coin the scratch is almost not visable and that is on a high def screen. Under ambient lighting i would guess the scratch to be even less noticable. This leads me to believe because of it's placement, it's old toned over age and the fact that it is a light x that it could be considered market acceptable. JMO
  • 19Lyds19Lyds Posts: 26,492 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Agreed. If a professional grader at the world's leading TPG can't spot graffiti like this in-hand ... basically I don't buy the "looks worse in the photo" argument.

    As the owner of a 'genuine' graffiti coin that is much rarer than this one, it really irks me that this got a grade. >>

    Which coin would that be and would you care to post pictures?
    I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.



    The name is LEE!
  • LochNESSLochNESS Posts: 4,829 ✭✭✭
    I'm happy to post a photo, but I don't believe it should matter. As many others have commented, there is absolutely zero reason this coin should have gotten a grade. It doesn't matter if the marks were contemporary, to verify the metal content, it is called a "scratch" and many wonderful coins get BB'd because of a single miniscule "scratch" and/or "graffiti" and this is clearly the case with this coin. Which reminds me, I really need to image my MS details Jefferson brockage error. The "scratch" on that is much less noticeable than the giant "X" on the OP's coin ...

    1822-27 Anhalt-Bernburg 1/24 Thayer, full brockage error.

    image
    ANA LM • WBCC 429

    Amat Colligendo Focum

    Top 10FOR SALE

    image
  • jayPemjayPem Posts: 4,082 ✭✭✭✭✭
    That is one seriously cool coin Lochness....I'd be interested to see one without the brockage.


  • << <i>many wonderful coins get BB'd because of a single miniscule "scratch" and/or "graffiti" >>



    There's an 1804 $1 with a 'D' punched in it. In 2000 it straight graded PCGS PR64 and in 2009 it was straight graded as PCGS PR65. You think they would really 'Genuine' that?
  • TonerGuyTonerGuy Posts: 590 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>many wonderful coins get BB'd because of a single miniscule "scratch" and/or "graffiti" >>



    There's an 1804 $1 with a 'D' punched in it. In 2000 it straight graded PCGS PR64 and in 2009 it was straight graded as PCGS PR65. You think they would really 'Genuine' that? >>



    Well who would want an 1804 $1 in a Details slab... c'mon now you gotta think about the resale !! And CAC doesnt give little green stickies to Details slabs !

    Its all about the resale !

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file