Unattributed and Misattributed slabs

mt_msla

(As I post this, kinda wondering if I'll get any photo comments on it....doubtful.)

Post your PCGS, NGC, ANACS mis-attributed or un-attributed slabs!

ricko

Hmmm ... that presents an issue... I have no idea if I have an un-attributed slabs.... could be.... I do not follow VAMs or other minor anomalies... there could be some in the stacks of slabs I have.... However, that is one exercise I will not undertake. Cheers, RickO

oih82w8

Where do I start??? Most recent;

1849/8 H10C NGC MS64

Insider2

Well I don't expect to see any other slabs here except from NGC, ANACS, and ICG. LOL!

First off, many professional TPGS graders are not familiar with varieties - even very obvious ones. Secondly, many folks grade without using magnification. Third, AND MOST IMPORTANT, there is a charge for attribution. Pay your money or put a cheap sticker on the slab w/the variety!

PS Did you happen to list the coin as a 49/8 on the form? If so, you may have gotten a freebie as this overdate is in the Redbook .

Inside Secret: Some of the second tier services automatically attribute coins such as Bust halves, and Large cents IF they believe a cheap submitter is not trying to put one over or if they believe the submitter has no idea what he owns. It's part of customer service as their graders are not pushing thousands of coins a day through the room.

mt_msla

I guess part of my point here was that sometimes the mis or un attribution makes that particular slab more collectible (to certain people like me)... if one were collecting TPG grading errors. I do enjoy coming across a grading error from time to time... the so-called "Mechanical error". And more often than not, I'd like to just keep the slab the way it is; even if I know better.

oih82w8

Ok,
Here is a 1908 1C MPD FS-301 S-4 PCGS MS64RB, which now resides in an attributed holder;

1872-S H10C MM Below MPD FS-302 PCGS MS65

1929-S 25C Obv Die Clash FS-401 PCGS MS66+ CAC

Insider2

You are correct. Lots of folks like to get their hands on slabs with label mistakes. One that can be considered "The Holy Grail" is a Proof 1880 Shield nickel with a Mint State Label!

oih82w8

@Insider2 said:
Well I don't expect to see any other slabs here except from NGC, ANACS, and ICG. LOL!

First off, many professional TPGS graders are not familiar with varieties - even very obvious ones. Secondly, many folks grade without using magnification. Third, AND MOST IMPORTANT, there is a charge for attribution. Pay your money or put a cheap sticker on the slab w/the variety!

PS Did you happen to list the coin as a 49/8 on the form? If so, you may have gotten a freebie as this overdate is in the Redbook .

Inside Secret: Some of the second tier services automatically attribute coins such as Bust halves, and Large cents IF they believe a cheap submitter is not trying to put one over or if they believe the submitter has no idea what he owns. It's part of customer service as their graders are not pushing thousands of coins a day through the room.

Redbook Varieties are not charged, as you mentioned, unless you want the FS # (Cherry-Picker Variety Number).

I purchased the 49/8 unattributed and it will be going to ATS for attribution.

The three PCGS holdered coins above (and several more) did require the fee since they are not Redbook listed varieties.

oih82w8

Misattributed; some members may remember this "Matte Proof Lincoln";

1909 V.D.B. 1C (I don't have an image of the slab itself, and this number has been deactivated due to misattribution)

AMRC

Most of the time an attribute is not listed because the submitter was not willing to pay for it. Searching slabs for un-attributed diagnostics is a well-worn collecting approach.

messydesk

Any coin that is part of a series for which exhaustive die marriage research has been published that is in a holder without an attribution is unattributed. I assume you're looking for "Red Book varieties" here.

Misattributed coins, especially minor varieties, happen with all grading services. While some services to better than others, for the most part, they do a good job. I don't see much value in calling out individual, anecdotal misattributions I've seen.

The strangest one I've seen personally was an 1879 dollar that our hosts called "VAM 10" that I had submitted for someone without attribution. This is a VAM that isn't on any of the recognized lists, so I had to look it up. It wasn't correct, but it was clearly in the "mechanical error" category and not something I'd call a misattribution. I put the correct attribution on the back based on a letter from Leroy Van Allen, and then some time later it was discovered that he had previously listed it with a different VAM number. So this is one that nobody got right, including the guy who catalogs the varieties. No harm, no foul, though.

Peace_dollar88

Here is an unattributed 1934-D Peace Dollar.

Insider2

LOL! Understand this:

1. We are all free to collect anything we wish.
2. The more research done in a particular series, the more varieties MAY be recognized.
3. I can personally find something interesting on just about any coin I view. Perhaps, 40+% should qualify as a new variety or one already listed somewhere.
4. IMHO, none of the four major grading services give a rat's butt about coins that are clashed EXCEPT for the FE and 25c var. Additionally, the thousands of VAMS on coins like 1881-S dollars are virtually worthless at present along with all the Seated Liberty coins and nickels with die breaks (two CSA 50c excluded). Nevertheless, these coins are sought by experienced specialists and can be found on the cheap.
5. Just because these "special" coins are not attributed on a label should tell you something and it has nothing to do with the TPGS.

I'm happy all you specialists exist. Your attention to detail adds to the study of coin types. As I posted above, some smaller TPGS will give a submitter a VAM#72 "high O" or Snow #32 RPD when requested. I believe they are ahead of the times. As values increase, cherrypicking the tens of thousands of unattributed "varieties" in TPGS slabs will be even more popular!

yosclimber

@oih82w8 said:
Where do I start??? Most recent;

1849/8 H10C NGC MS64

I believe your coin is V-6, based on the LDS "9 over far 6" obverse,
and the location of the die crack at R on the reverse.
The obverse is a late die state of the same obverse as the V-2 "9 over far 6".
The third party graders are not really to blame for attribution confusion of the 1849 -
the half dime experts did not agree on these either, for a long time.
You can see my detailed image study of the 1849 half dime die varieties at:
https://web.stanford.edu/~clint/hdag/

howards

@Insider2 said:
You are correct. Lots of folks like to get their hands on slabs with label mistakes. One that can be considered "The Holy Grail" is a Proof 1880 Shield nickel with a Mint State Label!

My holy grail would be the other way around - buying an 1880 shield nickel at proof prices that is actually a business strike.

I also have more than one 1883/2 shield nickel which is unattributed in a holder. And I've seen a couple 1882 filled 2 shield nickels in 1883/2 holders (horrors!).

Insider2

@howards said:

@Insider2 said:
You are correct. Lots of folks like to get their hands on slabs with label mistakes. One that can be considered "The Holy Grail" is a Proof 1880 Shield nickel with a Mint State Label!

My holy grail would be the other way around - buying an 1880 shield nickel at proof prices that is actually a business strike.

I also have more than one 1883/2 shield nickel which is unattributed in a holder. And I've seen a couple 1882 filled 2 shield nickels in 1883/2 holders (horrors!).

Agree! Horrors.

Question: what did you call the spikes into the field from the letters of Shield nickels and what did you think caused them. I forgot. Thanks.

RainbowGrader

I have one which I recently sold tucked away in a slab box It is an NGC 1891 Seated Dime AU58, which should be labeled PF/PR58.I will get it out and post photos late tonight. The strike is sharp and the coin is dark unless you turn it on an angle to see the reflective fields which a proof normally has.

dpoole

Here is an unattributed 1992-D Close AM Lincoln, and an unattributed 1999 Wide AM:

DoughDeo

How about unattributed. Then misattributed. Now vaguely attributed.

Purchased unattributed, thinking I cherrypicked an S-2:

PCGS agreed. Which is reasonable based on the Cherrypickers Guide.

Then I received my copy of Rick Snow's Attribution Guide and figured out it was more likely an S-5a. Brought it to the Eagle Eye table at Central States where Rick took the time to look it over and confirmed it was NOT an S-2. So, I walked it over to the PCGS table where I was told they would correct this "mechanical error" at no charge to me. (The PCGS rep and I discussed the meaning of "mechanical error" for some time. But that's for another thread).

The label currently recognizes it as a "Minor Variety" without a specific attribution.

howards

@Insider2 said:

Question: what did you call the spikes into the field from the letters of Shield nickels and what did you think caused them. I forgot. Thanks.

I call them "die fatigue spikes." They always occur along the edges of a coin device and protrude into the fields. My explanation (for which I have no proof) is that where the recess in the die for the device meets the field experiences extra stress, and is a likely spot for die failure.

On shield nickels one often sees these along the edges of the big 5 on the reverse.

davewesen

there are thousands of unattributed slabs since most gradings have not paid for attribution

this gold looks like a S rather than a D
https://pcgs.com/cert/25349101

WaterSport

Lets just say in the past 2 weeks I bought 3 unattributed PCGS slabs from dealer web sites and ebay auctions for a total of $609 dollars that once they are in attributed holders have a PCGS base value price of $3150. Enough said.

WS

mt_msla

I like how you think @WaterSport

Insider2

@DoughDeo said: "How about unattributed. Then misattributed. Now vaguely attributed." Then I received my copy of Rick Snow's Attribution Guide and figured out it was more likely an S-5a. Brought it to the Eagle Eye table at Central States where Rick took the time to look it over and confirmed it was NOT an S-2. So, I walked it over to the PCGS table where I was told they would correct this "mechanical error" at no charge to me (The PCGS rep and I discussed the meaning of "mechanical error" for some time. But that's for another thread).

Of course what I am posting is my opinion and has nothing to do with a TPGS. However, if this happened at "INSIDER'S SLAB SERVICE"...

First, Insider's graders are not infallible, they make mistakes. Rarely is it something that cannot be corrected. Some of the time it is an error in authenticity. Some of the time it is a brain fart. That's why an O-101a gets slabbed as an O-101 or an S-5a (based on a nice coin and a clear image in a book) gets labeled S-2 (entered at the receiving desk from the submission form). Sometimes it is an actual typing error. A grader puts in the code for a Proof rather than a MS coin and it is not caught. I'll bet 95% of the "errors" above are caught and corrected before the slab gets out!

Now let's look at this problem: "The label currently recognizes it as a "Minor Variety" without a specific attribution."

As I've posted somewhere before, not all varieties that make the specialists drool all over their shirt are worth a premium to 97% of the dealers and collectors. Take Indian cents. Until Rick and others came along, started a club and wrote a book - the coin in question was just another medium value early cent. I'll venture to say it is still not going to bring a large premium today because RPD's are common as dirt in this series and the guys who really care have this one!

Insider's Slab Service has a predicament. Decades ago, unscrupulous folks were selling minor varieties like this coin for "full boat" to uninformed collectors. Example, some 1972 DDO coins are worth $$$ while other 1972 DDO in the same grade are only worth $. Therefore, in an effort to protect the uninformed, minor varieties are either not recognized or labeled as "minor."

Next, Insider does not suffer those folks who want to discuss nonsense like "mechanical errors" with his employees. They are the type of customer he likes to refer to SEGS, ANACS, and ICG. However, if a customer were to come to his table with any type of "mechanical error," provide a photo of the variety; tell Insider he is a specialist collector and should really like to have the actual Snow # on the label; and offer to pay extra as that variety was probably not in the TPGS computer - Insider would tell him what a neat coin he had, not charge anything, thank him for catching the error, offer him one extra coin graded for free, and put S#5a,RPM, Minor Var. on the new label.