Options
PCGS grading issue: 3CN with grafitti
SBK
Posts: 13
I came upon an 1870 3CN graded MS63. There is an obvious and offensive graffiti scratch right in the center of the obverse. I sent the coin in as a guarantee re-submission. To my amazement, it was regraded as an MS63. I have tried to get into contact with PCGS about this and nobody would ever call me back and the phone reps understandably couldn't help me.
The scratch is quite bad. The coin has been shown to nearly a dozen people with knowledge of coins and all agreed this cannot be given a numerical grade - twice.
My question is, does anyone know what has happened here? If anyone from PCGS is reading this, can someone please give me an explanation.
It's not a very valuable coin, but the fact that this has occurred worries me greatly. Also, I would be happy to post a pic, but I don't know how.
The scratch is quite bad. The coin has been shown to nearly a dozen people with knowledge of coins and all agreed this cannot be given a numerical grade - twice.
My question is, does anyone know what has happened here? If anyone from PCGS is reading this, can someone please give me an explanation.
It's not a very valuable coin, but the fact that this has occurred worries me greatly. Also, I would be happy to post a pic, but I don't know how.
0
Comments
To post a picture click on the
icon and then paste the URL with the picture.
Luckily I was at a long beach show and low and behold David Hall was walking by.
i ran over and showed him the coin and asked what I should do.
He said "its a beautiful coin and is graded pr63 and not pr65 because of the scratch."
such is...
http://i1155.photobucket.com/albums/p557/SBK/1870 3CN_zpsdqoap7e5.jpg
Assuming someone can view this, the scratch is actually worse in hand than the picture shows. Looking closely and the way that it loops around off to the right, it looks man-made. Considering I've seen many PCGS graded coins with "scratch" designations that require a loupe to even find any minute problem, this is very depressing for me.
Not being a rare date, the coin is junk. I might just throw it in the garbage. I certainly don't want it in my collection and it's rather embarrassing to sell this. I might re-sell it referring to it as junk on ebay. I'll certainly take a loss on it, but that's what I get for buying something sight unseen.
The travesty is that there are "no-grades" or "genuine/problem" coins at all. Net it down 50 or 60 points if you have to, but give it a grade
Understanding (and applying) this concept is the next big thing in numismatics.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
I will also have to disagree with grading everything.
It seems to me that it would go against one of the reasons third party grading was established in the first place.
No way would anyone buy anything sight unseen anymore even at wholesale.
An XF-45 could be a beautiful, circulated coin with nice even wear or a MS-66 that someone took an ice pick to.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
EAC 6024
is it possibly a strike-thru?
This is what I was thinking, too.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars
Bought it sight unseen?
I could see it possibly being a strike thru as well. Looks very curvy.
"If I say something in the woods and my wife isn't there to hear it.....am I still wrong?"
My Washington Quarter Registry set...in progress
I did buy the coin sight-unseen. I could have returned it, but decided at the time a guarantee re-submission was a better course of action.
I am not an error collector at all and have very little experience with something like a strike-through. I do know what it is and that idea didn't come to me nor did it to any of the other people who looked at it in hand. I certainly agree that the scratch is not just some random impact. In hand it did look like a fine carving to me, which is why I went with "graffiti." I personally still think this is the case, but I am open to the possibility that it could be a strike-through. In any event, I don't like it. If it was a mint error of this nature, shouldn't that have been indicated on the slab? One way or another, I just can't fathom this being a "normal" MS63, as in, on equal footing with most other 63s of this date.
Lance.
https://imdb.com/name/nm1835107/
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Look how it's curved kind of like a fishhook. Curled, like a string.
is it possibly a strike-thru?
This is what I was thinking, too.
I immediately saw a strike through as well.
CN eBay
All of my collection is in a safe deposit box!
Despite the modest consensus on the forum that it is a struck-through, I would just like to offer some counter-points as I see them, for the sake of discussion.
Firstly, realize how small and short this mark is. Any of the wires or typical objects commonly seen in strike-throughs are longer and larger. The way that something this size can curl around implies a real lack a structural integrity. In that case, it would have to be a fiber or possibly even a hair. The problem there is, it's not that thin.
As I mentioned, I'm not an error guy, and that area of numismatics is far from my expertise. My observations are merely from having closely examined the coin under magnification. Imagine some of those 19th century love tokens that included initials and possibly some floral like design. What if somebody started the design and didn't finish. I say that because if I took a fine pin and carefully went over my "carving" with several iterations, well, I think it would look much like what I see on this coin.
I've never seen a strike-through that looked like this if I take size and other factors into account. I'm not saying it necessarily isn't, especially with several opinions for, but I think it needs more scrutiny.
My other question was, again, even if it was a strike-through, why was that not indicated on the slab? I think we all can agree, this should not be a basic MS63.
Thanks again everyone for your input.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
The coin in Topographic's picture looks like a strike-through as made. Is that the coin the OP is referring to?
The picture of the posted coin (2nd post photo) doesn't look like a scratch to me either. It looks like a strike-through.
is it possibly a strike-thru?
Mt first thought was this.
-Paul
is it possibly a strike-thru?
Looks like a strike-thru from the pictures.
material encountered. Not PMD... therefore, accurate grade.... However, I do agree that
it should have been noted as such. Cheers, RickO
is it possibly a strike-thru?
Tada ! Looks exactly like it's struck through wire. TDN probably could guess the gauge.
The grade reflects that market, but that's not to say some collectors would prefer an example without that feature. If I had received this piece, I would have returned it. The grade dispute path can be a rocky and time consuming procedure, and you better off getting a refund if that is available to you.
Definitely a strike through... strike through's can be any size/shape.... all depends on the
material encountered. Not PMD... therefore, accurate grade.... However, I do agree that
it should have been noted as such. Cheers, RickO
I concur it is a strike-through, which explains why the depth of the depression becomes more shallow in the higher relief portion of the design - where the dies would impart the least striking pressure to impress the curled thread into the surface of the struck coin.
To have the error designated as such, it would have to be submitted under the "Mint Errors" service level.
is it possibly a strike-thru?
That was kind of my thought as well...
My YouTube Channel
I'd give the odds of the latter about 1 in a 30 million.
The "scratch" on that 1870 3cn looks like a strike through to me too. Not much different than lint marks, planchet roughness/streaks, roller marks, adjustment marks, etc. All the TPG can do is net it accordingly for the difference in eye appeal. It could be 65 coin otherwise. I can't see netting that coin down to a 62. MS62's are often horrendous looking with impaired luster, lightly cleaned surfaces, spots, heavy scratches or wipe lines, etc.
I agree that everything is netted down from MS70 and every coin has "some" problem(s). It's just a shame today that everyone wants perfect, problem-free coins for every grade that exists. That eliminates about 80% or more of the entire US rare coin market. I like to appreciate coins for what they are....not what they aren't. Fwiw, I've seen a PF65 seated quarter with a similar sized mark in the upper reverse field.
I'd give the odds of that about 1 in a 30 million.
Do you mean now or in the context in which it was written.
IE: That everything should be given a grade of some sort.
Just curious as the topic of this post is a perfect example of why that should not happen in my opinion.
I'd give the odds of that about 1 in a 30 million.
Do you mean now or in the context in which it was written.
IE: That everything should be given a grade of some sort.
Just curious as the topic of this post is a perfect example of why that should not happen in my opinion.
An ice pick taken to a MS66 coin that could reduce its net value to that of an XF would never be given a net Sheldon grade by PCGS or NGC. Every coin does get a grade, if the post mint damage is not severe enough to result in a genuine "details" holder. An ice pick on a gem coin would never be net graded XF45 or even G04. That kind of coin will find its value in ways other than via a TPG graded holder. If you have one or know of one, please post. I fully agree with the PCGS MS63 grade on the OP's coin. I don't find it offensive at all. It's a MS63. If the coin had dead luster or was cleaned, now that would be offensive.
Regardless if the OP's 1870 has PMD or mint made damage it's not so severe that the coin could never receive a net Sheldon grade. The ice-pick reference is not even applicable here. And if it's a strike through, it should certainly get a net grade or grade. I've owned 19th century type coins in MS62-64 grades with issues at least as severe as the OP's coin. A horrible strike on an otherwise Gem MS65/66 1902-0 or 1903-0 Barber half could be netted down to MS63/64. That's a mint made problem and will be graded. A strike through on a full struck MS66 1902-0 Barber half would probably be a more desirable coin than those poor strucks. Every worthy coin does get a grade....except where the ice pick, hammer, vice, or rail road tracks are concerned.
for PCGS. A 49+-Year PNG Member...A full numismatist since 1972, retired in 2022
I'd give the odds of that about 1 in a 30 million.
Do you mean now or in the context in which it was written.
IE: That everything should be given a grade of some sort.
Just curious as the topic of this post is a perfect example of why that should not happen in my opinion.
An ice pick taken to a MS66 coin that could reduce its net value to that of an XF would never be given a net Sheldon grade by PCGS or NGC. Every coin does get a grade, if the post mint damage is not severe enough to result in a genuine "details" holder. An ice pick on a gem coin would never be net graded XF45 or even G04. That kind of coin will find its value in ways other than via a TPG graded holder. If you have one or know of one, please post. I fully agree with the PCGS MS63 grade on the OP's coin. I don't find it offensive at all. It's a MS63. If the coin had dead luster or was cleaned, now that would be offensive.
Regardless if the OP's 1870 has PMD or mint made damage it's not so severe that the coin could never receive a net Sheldon grade. The ice-pick reference is not even applicable here. And if it's a strike through, it should certainly get a net grade or grade. I've owned 19th century type coins in MS62-64 grades with issues at least as severe as the OP's coin. A horrible strike on an otherwise Gem MS65/66 1902-0 or 1903-0 Barber half could be netted down to MS63/64. That's a mint made problem and will be graded. A strike through on a full struck MS66 1902-0 Barber half would probably be a more desirable coin than those poor strucks. Every worthy coin does get a grade....except where the ice pick, hammer, vice, or rail road tracks are concerned.
I agree with everything here.
My post was made in response to this.
The travesty is that there are "no-grades" or "genuine/problem" coins at all. Net it down 50 or 60 points if you have to, but give it a grade
Understanding (and applying) this concept is the next big thing in numismatics.
Sorry for the interruption.
My post was made in response to this.
The travesty is that there are "no-grades" or "genuine/problem" coins at all. Net it down 50 or 60 points if you have to, but give it a grade
Understanding (and applying) this concept is the next big thing in numismatics.
Sorry for the interruption.
OK, it seems we are in complete agreement then.
I don't think the next big thing in grading is to give legitimate "no grade" coins a grade, no matter how much you have to net them down (ie 60 points). PCGS is in the business of grading coins. There are professional dealers out there who are experts at valuing problem coins and buying/selling them. They will continue to be the "graders" of the problem coin market....by assigning a value to those coins. That is a very special skill set that takes many years to master. I could only imagine a collector expecting a beautiful 1870 XF45 seated quarter for their set only to receive a net graded, MS66 blazer with dozens of ice pick digs covering both sides of the coin. 2 totally different coins for totally different markets. There's probably a buyer for that ice picked MS66 (maybe Lord M) and other collectors of damaged/holed coins. But it's not for the fussy XF45 collector building a matched registry set.
Not every coin deserves a TPG grade. But every coin deserves a fair market value assigned to it. It's possible the TPG's could venture beyond details grades and actually assign a net market value grade. In that respect you could have that ice picked MS66 quarter with a details grade of UNC, and a market grade of XF. No doubt when making such a valuation, they would have to err on the conservative side. Are collectors requesting such a feature? If anything, the tightening in grading since 2008 and CAC have been leading collectors away from low end coins, never mind the weightier issue of problem coins.
I must try to do better at making sure everyone else knows what I mean.
My posts always make sense to me because I know what I mean.
I must try to do better at making sure everyone else knows what I mean.
Probably not your fault. If anything my misunderstanding your context. So it's Baley's point that I disagree with. But, he may have been being cynical when he stated that. Now if Baley would agree that an ice picked MS66 could be net graded into an XF45 holder, then we'd have something.
TD
Although the issue, as it may, at the center of the obverse was not known to me at the time of purchase, it would be rather unethical to return it at this point. It's far from a big dollar item and I'll just take the loss on it.
I suppose I should brush up on my error coin knowledge. I don't own a single error coin in my collection (other than this coin and a handful of minor unimportant laminations). I've been collecting for a good while now over the course of my life and am confident on many areas of the hobby, but there are always new things to learn.
Thanks
Successful BST (me as buyer) with: Collectorcoins, PipestonePete, JasonRiffeRareCoins
I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that it should have been disclosed to you.
It would have surprised anyone if they had not been told first.
I can't see how returning it would be unethical and the price is non factor, IMHO.
"If I say something in the woods and my wife isn't there to hear it.....am I still wrong?"
My Washington Quarter Registry set...in progress
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Ike Specialist
Finest Toned Ike I've Ever Seen, been looking since 1986
All grades below 70 are "net" grades. All coins grading below 70 are "problem" coins
The travesty is that there are "no-grades" or "genuine/problem" coins at all. Net it down 50 or 60 points if you have to, but give it a grade
Understanding (and applying) this concept is the next big thing in numismatics.
Interesting perspective.
To tell the truth, I hope I am wrong in thinking this is PMD. That would make my purchase of this coin less troublesome for me.
Despite the modest consensus on the forum that it is a struck-through, I would just like to offer some counter-points as I see them, for the sake of discussion.
Firstly, realize how small and short this mark is. Any of the wires or typical objects commonly seen in strike-throughs are longer and larger. The way that something this size can curl around implies a real lack a structural integrity. In that case, it would have to be a fiber or possibly even a hair. The problem there is, it's not that thin.
As I mentioned, I'm not an error guy, and that area of numismatics is far from my expertise. My observations are merely from having closely examined the coin under magnification. Imagine some of those 19th century love tokens that included initials and possibly some floral like design. What if somebody started the design and didn't finish. I say that because if I took a fine pin and carefully went over my "carving" with several iterations, well, I think it would look much like what I see on this coin.
I've never seen a strike-through that looked like this if I take size and other factors into account. I'm not saying it necessarily isn't, especially with several opinions for, but I think it needs more scrutiny.
My other question was, again, even if it was a strike-through, why was that not indicated on the slab? I think we all can agree, this should not be a basic MS63.
Thanks again everyone for your input.
Take a current Jefferson nickel and try as many times as you feel you need to repeat your 'scratch / PMD'. The composition is exactly the same only the size of Jefferson nickel is larger. Your fine pin analogy is great in theory but not possible in practice.
PCGS does not make small error designations on slabs, unless it was submitted for error service. We can not tell what the grade should be from a picture of one side. It is a strikethrough and I have seen small chunks of wire/thread as well as sawdust on coins.
Imagine pulling a garden hoe through the soil. At the end of the furrow, soil will be piled up above the level of the ground.
Similar occurrence when an implement is drawn across - and digs into the surface of a coin.
A good loupe and a strong light will help.
In the photo at least - appears to be struck-through.
"long-time lurker, first time poster"