From the scans this note looks like it could just as easily be a "40" as opposed to a "35." The only real difference is that the right was trimmed to get rid of the ugly missing piece. I wouldn't make a real big deal out of this personally......it's not like the missing piece was how the note was as made. If you hadn't seen the before picture it's not likely that the after picture would cause any real consternation.
"It certainly highlights the problem of one TPG......"
I agree and should have been clear about that.
There still seems to be something wrong about ignoring a note's past history, but I understand that the TPGs grade what's in front of them, not what was.
Collector and dealer in obsolete currency. Always buying all obsolete bank notes and scrip.
Agreed. Obviously, a note's grade has to reflect the state of preservation of the note at the time. But I really don't like the idea of rewarding someone for "fixing" a stain, or a fold, with an exacto knife.
SPMC LM #405 - Collector of Ohio obsoletes. And other stuff, that I'm not going to tell you, so you don't buy it before I do.
It certainly highlights the problem of one TPG......
Since the before and after are both graded by the same TPG, I agree, this one should of been caught. Just a simple search of their own database should of shown this was previously graded. But then again, if they do this, that would kill alot of people's habit of cutting a note out and sending it back in for grading again... Of course most people are not gutsy enough to submit it to the same TPG it was already graded with.
Originally posted by: uzuiwek Agreed. Obviously, a note's grade has to reflect the state of preservation of the note at the time. But I really don't like the idea of rewarding someone for "fixing" a stain, or a fold, with an exacto knife.
First Heritage estimate $1500 - $2500 Current Heritage estimate $ 7500 plus
for the same note before and after... along with the notation:" We have sold only two other examples from this issue for all grades and denominations combined." emphasis added
beryl
Posts: 129 ✭✭✭
Comments
Hopefully the potential buyer does a bit of research on the note.
This one defied gravity and jumped to the top of the census and highlights several problems with TPG certification.
I agree and should have been clear about that.
There still seems to be something wrong about ignoring a note's past history, but I understand that the TPGs grade what's in front of them, not what was.
It certainly highlights the problem of one TPG......
Since the before and after are both graded by the same TPG, I agree, this one should of been caught. Just a simple search of their own database should of shown this was previously graded. But then again, if they do this, that would kill alot of people's habit of cutting a note out and sending it back in for grading again... Of course most people are not gutsy enough to submit it to the same TPG it was already graded with.
http://www.depressionscrip.com
Always looking for more depression scrip -- PM me if you have any for sale or trade
First was PCGS.....second was PMG.
Whoops... my mistake... I though they were both PCGS.
http://www.depressionscrip.com
Always looking for more depression scrip -- PM me if you have any for sale or trade
Agreed. Obviously, a note's grade has to reflect the state of preservation of the note at the time. But I really don't like the idea of rewarding someone for "fixing" a stain, or a fold, with an exacto knife.
First Heritage estimate $1500 - $2500
Current Heritage estimate $ 7500 plus
for the same note before and after... along with the notation:" We have sold only two other examples from this issue for all grades and denominations combined."
emphasis added
It certainly highlights the problem of one TPG......