Options
Why did PCGS not grade these gold error coins as errors??
jwitten
Posts: 5,076 ✭✭✭✭✭
Grades just posted on these, along with my 3 gold toners. First, a question. Should these show or say error in the pcgs coinfact page? I am hoping they all graded as errors, but I am not seeing it say that, so not sure. What are your thoughts?
0
Comments
After doing a little research, I am pretty sure they did not label ANY of these as errors. I'm not too thrilled about that. What's up with that?
What are the errorsin question?
The 1927 has a retained cud, and the 1925-D was struck through on the obverse. I believe the 1910 has a strike through as well. Here are 2 other examples similar to mine:
55, 53, 55? Can't really tell what's error and what isn't. It looks more like pmd...
The 1927 and 1925-D for sure are errors, as there are others already graded just like them. I was not sure about the 1910, but it did straight grade, which I would not expect it to do if that was pmd. I'm not sure if this was a computer error, and they really are in error holders, or what. Since the cert numbers are not error numbers I don't think they graded them as errors though.
Anybody?
Did you submit this batch as an "error submission"? If you don't pay for their expensive "error attribution" you're not going to get the label...
Reverse, running from 2 to A on bottom. Just like the one already graded as error by pcgs.
Yes, I submitted as errors, and paid the fees.
Given the "top prong retained plastic error", I hope PCGS would provide a free reholder if desired.
Of course, the error slab could be a novelty too.
This is not my coin, just an example of one they did call it an error. Mine apparently didn't even get called an error, which is weird, since I paid for it.
Just because a coin is submitted as an error (and the error submission fee is paid) does not mean it will be slabbed as an error. Apparently, PCGS did not believe the coin(s) met their threshold for an error.
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
But it is literally the exact same thin as the other 1927 posted. And there are several of them in pcgs holders on ebay right now. Fred even said it was in another thread.
PCGS either doesn't agree with you or they made a mistake. What has PCGS told you about the decision?
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
I found out yesterday, so have not had a chance to call them yet. I will Monday. I sent Fred a message too asking if he knew, but have not heard back yet. Hopefully he can shed some light.
I hope PCGS responds in a meaningful way.
It took MANY tries to get a response on a coin I submitted to them only to be given a stock "go away" kind of answer.
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
What did PCGS tell you when you called them about it? Did you get to talk with a grader?
If not, I think you'll have better luck with a call to PCGS. As you can see on this thread some members cannot see very large obvious mint defects on your coins. Even the folks who see them cannot know what PCGS did at the moment with your coins.
One thing I do know for sure, very often (with large mint defects) the second tier services will note things like "Struck Thru" on the label even when the submitter does not know there is an error on the coin! Good Luck.
I
PCGS is very slow, which may be a good thing, about attribution labeling; varieties, errors, etc... I had a batch that was not updated into the systems until after I received them in hand...the labels were attributed when I received them.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
This is what I'm hoping for. I am out of town until Wednesday, so will not have them in hand until then. I sent this 1847-O in on another form (it was already graded, just did not have the error listed), and it was correct on the computer before I got it in hand: http://www.pcgs.com/cert/83865388
Talked to PCGS (took awhile to get someone), and she said they usually leave a note saying why they are not errors. Mine did not have a note, so she said she would do some research and call me back. I got to thinking.. they had to break up a submission (had 4 error coins, but one was already graded, just not called an error). I also called after they received them and asked for them to all be put in a retro holder. I wonder if somehow there was a mixup in one of those situations where they removed the error notation?
I was just informed that the graders said they were not errors. To which I ask, why did they say the other ones I posted were errors, when it is the exact same error?? PCGS has lost my business forever if this can't be fixed.
@FredWeinberg , a little insight here would be greatly appreciated.
If mine is not an error, neither are these:
Right?
..."Interesting" button pressed...
TPGs (all of them) tend to be inconsistent and inaccurate with errors. The tag size limits the amount of information as well, and so the descriptions of errors tend to be incomplete. Sometimes they'll label a coin as an error even when it needs a magnifying glass to be seen. And other times, even when the error seems easily seen, they won't label it as such. These are all reasons why I've never submitted errors - not to mention the cost!
As for you're 1927 "retained die cud", does the crack show lateral or vertical displacement? If not, it would be logical not to label it as a retained cud.
You have probably already seen the other active thread on this subject.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/979643/variety-attribution-incorrect-back-to-the-end-of-the-line
It could be described as accuracy of variety attribution or customer service.
It would be helpful if PCGS would create an "official appeal process for variety attribution".
It would be helpful if contact info for the person doing the particular variety attribution could be provided to the customer,
so that the customer could send additional materials on the variety.
The customer may have more recent or more accurate sources of info on the variety, such as what is shown above on this thread or in the linked thread.
Ideally the customer should be able to list their sources, such as web links or page numbers in reference books, when they submit the coin for attribution, to increase their chances of a correct attribution and make the official appeal unnecessary.
This is a separate issue from resubmitting regarding the grade. Sometimes variety attribution can be unclear if there is a lot of wear, but it is not as subjective as grading.
Answered.
The name is LEE!
What do you mean? The wrong answer is not "answered", in my opinion.
The fact that Fred said it was this error in another thread, and all of these examples I've posted were graded as that error tells me it is indeed that error. Is he the only one that looks at errors? I'd really love to hear from him on this. It would be interesting to see if he looked at them or someone else did.
And how could the 1925-D and 1910 straight grade if it was not errors? It would have to be PMD, correct?
@jwitten said: "I was just informed that the graders said they were not errors. To which I ask, why did they say the other ones I posted were errors, when it is the exact same error?? PCGS has lost my business forever if this can't be fixed."
Two of those coins are 100% "errors" - mint made defects. The one on the cheek probably is too. Let's give PCGS a break this time as the problem with dealing with TPGS staff rather than an actual numismatist is things tend to get fouled up. Unfortunately, hell will freeze over before that happens at the "big two." Things are very different when dealing with a "second-tier" we-try-harder TPGS. The reason for that is simple. ANACS and ICG do not have the volume of coins NGC and PCGS have. Look at this thread. A professional grader would be tied up all day on the phone dealing with collectors who cannot see things on their coins or don't know what a retained cud looks like ,etc. PCGS and NGC are huge operations and things happen. With patience and a little communication when you can get through to them, all will work out.
A suggestion: Stop this "I won't use them any more" stuff. LOL. News flash, they don't care! In the end you'll be the loser because your coins may be worth a little less in a different slab.
@GoldenEgg said: " TPGs (all of them) tend to be inconsistent and inaccurate with errors. The tag size limits the amount of information as well, and so the descriptions of errors tend to be incomplete. Sometimes they'll label a coin as an error even when it needs a magnifying glass to be seen. And other times, even when the error seems easily seen, they won't label it as such. These are all reasons why I've never submitted errors - not to mention the cost! "
Well look what we have here... Someone who never submits errors to a TPGS (none of them) yet he knows how inconsistent and inaccurate (all of them) they are. I don't share your opinion at all. Based on the number of coins that go through the services, a few slip-ups like those coins above MUST happen. Put yourself in the position of a professional grader: A retained cud on some dates of $2 /2 Indians is nothing special. Most of the stuff CRH and the average collector (including me) think is neat is worthless except to teach seminar students the characteristics we find on coins. The majority of dealers don't even look for die cracks, cuds, clash marks, struck thru's and all the other defects that don't usually add squat to a coin. Yet a collector who finds a defective coin with a detracting strike thru (?) hole in the center of the cheek of a coin likes it, thinks it is neat, and pays his money to save it from the gold refiner where it would have ended up! Then he pays more to have it slabbed so he deserves to have it done right.
Professional graders look at coins differently and much faster than the rest of us. That's possibly why some TPGS ask that you tell them what to look for on your coin in the error tier and then charge extra for a common rotated die. If you choose to deal with the top two TPGS, you need to do things their way or the highway. LOL.
But I did say on the submission what and where the errors were. Also, I was under the assumption Fred it the one that does the errors. He already commented on a previous thread saying 2 were for sure errors. If someone else looked at them I might understand a slip up, but who knows. I'd love to hear what he thinks about these.
You raise an interesting question. I don't know this for sure but Fred is a coin dealer with a business to run. IMO, PCGS is not going to waste his time with a common retained cud. Do I think Fred drops by PCGS every day to look at a hundred errors they hold from orders - who knows. He may routinely go once a week. I do know that Fred looks at the important major errors. Let's see what he has to say about his business hours and the time he spends either at their office or looking at over-night consultant mail. With the traffic situation in CA...I'll bet it's done by mail, or PCGS gopher. For security reasons, we'll never know as I would not tell!
What I should like to believe is that the professionals at PCGS can tell a mint error from PMD. So, in the case of your coins, they may be covering their butt but it will get fixed - that's the good part.
I recall your previous thread, prior to submission.... and I agree, from the pictures, they appear to be mint errors. Be sure to let us know the 'rest of the story'.... Cheers, RickO
Good Morning (I was out of the office yesterday, and I see your email)
I don't recall seeing those coins from PCGS, when they send me coins for
the Mint Error tier - yes, I saw them on the other thread here. Did you
submit them on the Mint Error tier?
The 1925-D looks like a struck thru (as mentioned in the other thread)
The 1927 is a Retained Cud on the Reverse at 6:00 (PCGS has slabbed numerous examples)
The 1910 - I'd have to see that in-hand, to determine if it's a struck thru or PMD.
Were these three all submitted as Mint Errors?
for PCGS. A 49+-Year PNG Member...A full numismatist since 1972, retired in 2022
Yes, I submitted these under the error tier. Are you supposed to take a look at all of them? Is there anyway to get these sent back in and re-looked at? I was 99% positive the 1925-D and 1927 would come back error, and hopeful on the 1910. When I got the email about them, and saw that NONE were graded errors, I was very disappointed, to say the least.
Here is the screenshot showing they were under the error category:
@jwitten
I just noticed the 1910 has an additional "struck thru" in the feathers. Since it is basically the same shape but a little smaller, now I'm leaning to PMD although the inside of each mark looks natural in the photo. Easy to determine one way or the other in hand and I'll bet the PCGS graders decided it was damage.
Would that amount of damage keep it from grading MS60 like it did? It's a very weird submission result, one way or another.
IMO, if it is damage, there are two "hits." One very large and deep in a PFA and one smaller and shallow hidden in the headdress.
The one that is hidden in the feathers would knock down the MS grade to 60 or 61.
The one on the cheek should get the coin a details grade!
Nevertheless, since an MS-60 grade indicates a fairly beat up coin (heavy marks in all areas) and this is a fairly nice coin with only some medium size marks + one huge detracting and one large hidden - my opinion of: "Uncirculated details, damaged" may be a bit harsh. That's why I'd never make a TPGS grader. LOL.
Did you submit these under mint error service? In ordered to receive a numeric grade on an error coin, they must be submitted as such. The types of errors you submitted will almost always receive a grade without mention of error, unless they are submitted under mint error service, in which case the designation would be added to the holder.
Disregard my above post, I can see the were submitted via mint error. Not sure why no designation was made.
Mark Stephenson has asked me to ship them back in. Hopefully they get to the right eyes this time
Fred does NOT do nor see all the Error coins. I went round and round with them on one error that I had and was basically told to stop objecting. BTW, Fred "completely" agreed with the error. He even has it in his error encyclopedia book but......their game.....their rules.
My submissions have dropped off dramatically over the past couple of years from hundreds of coins to basically 8.
Now, to the heart of the matter.
Lots and lots of folks come on here, read about coins and, as collectors, submit some, sell some, upgrade sets and all sorts of other things.
BUT, PCGS was NEVER formed for collectors. It was and still is a Dealer Driven Service. Just because we are allowed to join a "Collectors Club" which enables us to submit coins for grading without having to go through an "Authorized PCGS Dealer" doesn't mean squat to PCGS' bottom line as this is merely another service that they offer that adds a little more income to that bottom line.
In short, their business would NOT dry up and and blow away if all the Collectors Club Members said: "Never more! I'm done with them." because, quite frankly, they still have their PCGS Authorized Dealer Network which is their primary bread and butter.
So your coins didn't grade as errors. Now, you may not be able to achieve the resale figures you were hoping for and at $60 extra per coin, thats gonna hurt. My best advice is to just label them with the error and then move on. The simple fact that a good number of folks asked "Where's the Error?" should have been your clue.
The name is LEE!
The presence of the second indent, similar in size, shape and alignment to the obvious one, makes me think it is much more likely that both are PMD. What are the chances that two pieces of debris would fall on the planchet that similarly?
TD
I picked them up at my post office today. 2 orders, one of toners, one of errors. Both were pcgs secure, with retro holder. The toners graded correctly, but the error coins not only were not graded errors, they also are missing the secure shield on the holders. Weird.
i love those old retro holders. i don;t think they put the secure image on there...i have one that is secure plus without the shield.
My toners got the shield, my errors did not.
weird for sure
...just fixin' to ask for some images of the labels.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...