Does PCGS recognize Type 1 Goodacre Presentation Sacagawea Dollars?

REALGATOR

Of the 5000 made and originally sent to ICG for grading it was discovered about 125 or so did not receive the final burnishing. The satin look of the "Type 1" is obvious where the typical type 2 has much greater reflection or shine.

A discussion is provided here:
http://smalldollars.com/dollar/page24.html

Will PCGS cross this as Type 1?

ricko

Send it in with the stipulation if that is important to you.....Of course, a phone call to customer service ahead of time could be helpful..... I personally would not want to reholder the coin. That is original and reholdering loses that....much akin to cleaning a coin... JMO.....Cheers, RickO

ianrussell

I don't believe PCGS recognizes Type 1 for this coin.

• Ian

oih82w8

Yes, they do. 2000-P SAC$1 Goodacre Presentation (Special Strike) PCGS #:99584

"Jaime Hernandez: In the year 2000, the U.S. Mint paid $5,000 to Glenna Goodacre for creating the winning design on the obverse of the Sacagawea Dollars.

The Mint struck 5,000 Sacagawea Dollars just to pay Glenna Goodacre the $5,000 commission. Mint Director Phil Dhiel delivered the 5,000 Sacagawea coins directly to Glenna Goodacre in Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Approximately five years later, it was discovered that the coins that were paid to Glenna Goodacre were struck on specially prepared planchets and by specially produced dies. As a result, the Goodacre Presentation coins displayed a different appearance that was fairly transparent. The coins struck off these dies have a burnished satin like appearance and most notable, is the fact that the coins tend to be of much higher quality than most regular circulation strike Sacagawea Dollars from the same date and mint mark.

The coins presented to Glenna Goodacre are now referred to as the Goodacre Dollars. PCGS also recognizes the special status of these coins. Goodacre Dollars certified by PCGS will receive a special designation indicating Goodacre Presentation on the holder."

http://www.pcgscoinfacts.com/Coin/Detail/99584

I would call Customer Service to ensure that the ICG recognized pedigree would cross over to PCGS, and it may not cross at SP69, so it may be worth more residing in the ICG holder at SP69.

thevolcanogod

OP is asking about type 1 status not just Goodacre presentation and I don't believe they are recognized differently by PCGS. I'd leave it in the current holder.

oih82w8

More than one Type of Goodacre Dollar??? Some were not burnished?...on that note, I did not see any differentiation between the two on the PCGS link, just Goodacre Dollar presentation pieces. Thanks for pointing out what the OP stated TVG.

REALGATOR

More than one Type of Goodacre Dollar??? Some were not burnished?

Yes, it seems that the earliest (first 2 to 3 percent) of this special strike did not receive the post-strike burnishing.

brg5658

They only recognize the burnished (special finish) examples. Outside of the plastic from ICG, the others are indistinguishable from regular issue circulation 2000-P dollars.

REALGATOR

Outside of the plastic from ICG, the others are indistinguishable from regular issue circulation 2000-P dollars.

I disagree. The strike is sharp like a proof.

thevolcanogod

@REALGATOR said:
Outside of the plastic from ICG, the others are indistinguishable from regular issue circulation 2000-P dollars.

I disagree. The strike is sharp like a proof.

Correct - they were struck with higher-than-normal pressure from highly polished dies. They also used planchettes that received a pre-strike burnish. The type 2s also received a post-strike burnish.

brg5658

@REALGATOR said:
Outside of the plastic from ICG, the others are indistinguishable from regular issue circulation 2000-P dollars.

I disagree. The strike is sharp like a proof.

Put one in a bag with 1,000 regular strike coins, and let's see if you or anyone else could pick it out. There were more than 760,000,000 Sacs minted in 2000 at Philly -- these are not special enough to merit plastic hype and marketing (which is what this is).

REALGATOR

Oh, you can tell the difference. Just like those hyped 1921-S Zerbe Proof Morgans.

REALGATOR

These are not "alternative facts"

smalldollars.com/dollar/page24.html

brg5658

@REALGATOR said:
These are not "alternative facts"

smalldollars.com/dollar/page24.html

I know they are real. I never said they were not. But, not everything needs a special designation from the plastic factories and demands a premium.

If you're so worried about maintaining the designation, I don't see why you don't just leave it in the original ICG slab. That would have more value to any true collector anyway -- since it has been there since the beginning. Glenna Goodacre didn't choose PCGS to slab her $5000 payment.

REALGATOR

Actually I was hoping someone from PCGS would answer the original question. I only want to know if they recognize the type as a hypothetical cross. I have no intentions of sending it to any grading service regardless of the answer. Probably everyone else that owns one feels the same way so our host may have never seen one yet.

We can agree to disagree, but the 2 types in hand are very distinctly different from each other and other business strikes and proofs.

jmcu12

I too have both and have tried to get PCGS to recognize the Type 1 and they would not. And in hand there is a HUGE difference between the two.

I believe NGC might recognize them but in lieu of sending to them I will just keep it in the ICG holder. I do agree with brg5658 at least on that point - 'they are probably worth more to the true collector in the original ICG vs. PCGS holder anyway.' (Paraphrased).

abcde12345

Not popular enough for pcgs.

JBK

I looked at the www.smalldollars.com link and found a lot of good information there. I clearly see and understand the difference between the Type 1 & 2, and I think the Type 1 is a nicer/better coin as it does not have the post-strike burnishing (polishing).

According to the site, the remaining Goodacre dollars (her personal stash) were bought by a dealer and re-slabbed by PCGS with a special signed label (Philip Diehl, not Goodacre).

Personally, I would prefer an ICG slab as that is part of the coin’s history. The value is in the connection to GG, but if someone is chasing numeric grade and they want to do so in PCGS plastic then I suppose they would cross it over. BTW, I assume that if any of these – Type 1 or 2 - are broken out by the owner then the GG connection is lost as I don’t see how any of them can be 100% proven to be GG dollars if raw.

LindeDad

@abcde12345 said:
Not popular enough for pcgs.

Diagree as they did the SMS 1964 coins and there were less that this one.