NGC may have declared this coin "new" and not the stolen DuPont coin. They have certified it authentic and graded. The liability to NGC is with the authenticity and grade opinion. I do not see why NGC is on the hook either way if this turns out to be the stolen coin, that is the owners problem. Unless a special fee was paid to NGC for research and comparison and guarantee for that purpose, which is outside any normal grading/slabbing submission fee, I say not NGC's problem if it is later deemed stolen.
This sort of sounds like the discussion we now hear at every sports event that is subject to replay. "Since there is no irrefutable evidence, the calling on the field stands."
I actually started this thread accepting that this was indeed a new discovery coin. However, TDN's posting of the other 1854 without the tell tale neck marking is troubling when only the "Discovery" piece and the stolen piece (as seen in the auction photo) have it.
My question, did NGC have access to the coin TDN posted and had it been compared in hand?
@Batman23 said:
NGC may have declared this coin "new" and not the stolen DuPont coin. They have certified it authentic and graded. The liability to NGC is with the authenticity and grade opinion. I do not see why NGC is on the hook either way if this turns out to be the stolen coin, that is the owners problem. Unless a special fee was paid to NGC for research and comparison and guarantee for that purpose, which is outside any normal grading/slabbing submission fee, I say not NGC's problem if it is later deemed stolen.
Isn't there some legal issue about "receiving stolen property" that may be in play here? I guess one could look to the liability of pawn shops as a stating point.
@Batman23 said:
NGC may have declared this coin "new" and not the stolen DuPont coin. They have certified it authentic and graded. The liability to NGC is with the authenticity and grade opinion. I do not see why NGC is on the hook either way if this turns out to be the stolen coin, that is the owners problem. Unless a special fee was paid to NGC for research and comparison and guarantee for that purpose, which is outside any normal grading/slabbing submission fee, I say not NGC's problem if it is later deemed stolen.
Isn't there some legal issue about "receiving stolen property" that may be in play here? I guess one could look to the liability of pawn shops as a stating point.
The key is "Knowingly" receives stolen property. If NGC believes they have a "new" discovery piece then NGC did not knowingly receive stolen property. Given the coins condition difference I don't think you could prove such a case. If NGC returns the property back to the submitter while there is no proof that it is a stolen coin and NGC believes it is not the stolen coin, NGC did nothing wrong.
It then comes down to the owner, did the owner "Knowingly" possess a stolen coin? If the coin can be proven stolen then it may end up going back to the old rightful owner at the new owner's loss but not automatically a criminal offense. If the new owner knew it was stolen, (or reasonably should have known it was stolen), (or later learns that it was stolen) and still retained it after that point and then had it forcibly seized/recovered, that makes it a criminal "receiving or possessing stolen property".
I am not an attorney but that is my understanding.
DuPont heir: " I think you found my family's stolen coin "
NGC: "Well, here is our file, prepped and sanitized by our attorneys, for you to give your attorneys on our opinion why this is not the stolen coin, and a copy of the fine print the submitter agreed to relating to our liability for grading and authenticating coins. If you question this, you should take it up with the submitter who is the claimed owner of the coin. We don't have anything to do with the coin itself. Whether the coin is the DuPont coin or a new coin, it is still a 'Discovery of a Lifetime' and that's why we put it on the holder instead of anything else."
New Purchaser of coin: "Is this the stolen DuPont coin?"
It is fascinating how many people are experts in a coin they have never seen!
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
I hope NGC is right on it, but sometimes the experts are not perfect. It would be nice to know how many experts were consulted on this, as just NGC's employees making that call would raise the questions. Case one, NGC charges $100 and 1% of fair market value, they also get huge publicity that even money can't buy; case two, the coin gets tied up in legal wranglings. The late David Akers looked at the Wolfson coin, were there others who are still alive or are notes available on descriptions?
@CaptHenway said:
It is fascinating how many people are experts in a coin they have never seen!
I think the point which is most helpful to the broader numismatic community is to disclose the method used to ascertain that the coin is a new discovery. Until that is known everyone is guessing.
@coinlieutenant said:
The article mentioned that the owner had (paraphrased) "shown this coins to multiple dealers, who said it was counterfeit." Any of those dealers consulted by NGC? Names given? Seems like a lot of folks would have remembered that coin and the story. Not everyday you see a real or a fake 54-S 5$
It does not matter who saw the "new" coin or their opinion of it before it was certified. The new coin is not the problem - IT IS GENUINE. The only folks who matter are at NGC. They have certified the coin and have determined to the best of their ability that it is a previously unknown specimen. Stuff like this happens in our hobby/business.
It seems like a lot of people on this thread are assuming NGC made their determination by comparison to the crappy auction photo we have here. I'm going to assume, until I hear otherwise, that NGC used better photos from either the DuPont family or the police's theft investigation, to definitively rule out the coin as being the DuPont specimen. Yes, it would be nice if NGC confirmed this, but I'm not holding my breath.
I think there needs to be some sort of consensus of expert opinions from many other grading companies. Especially from our host, PCGS, possibly ANACS, even ICG on this coin. Hearing what NGc thinks just doesn't do it for me.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
@leothelyon said:
I think there needs to be some sort of consensus of expert opinions from many other grading companies. Especially from our host, PCGS, possibly ANACS, even ICG on this coin. Hearing what NGc thinks just doesn't do it for me.
Leo
LOL, please leave ICG out of it. While the coin is genuine, there is no way we can add anything about where it came from. Read the thread again.
@coinlieutenant said:
The article mentioned that the owner had (paraphrased) "shown this coins to multiple dealers, who said it was counterfeit." Any of those dealers consulted by NGC? Names given? Seems like a lot of folks would have remembered that coin and the story. Not everyday you see a real or a fake 54-S 5$
It does not matter who saw the "new" coin or their opinion of it before it was certified. The new coin is not the problem - IT IS GENUINE. The only folks who matter are at NGC. They have certified the coin and have determined to the best of their ability that it is a previously unknown specimen. Stuff like this happens in our hobby/business.
Agree from a standpoint of authentication. It does however matter from a believability standpoint. And if the hypothetical lawsuit from the DuPont heirs were to happen, I know that this would be investigated for corroboration and fact check.
Ah wait ... the finder who refuses to say where he got it, just remembered he found it in a deceased relatives SDB with no paperwork, and his first name was Izzy, lol
@coinlieutenant said:
The article mentioned that the owner had (paraphrased) "shown this coins to multiple dealers, who said it was counterfeit." Any of those dealers consulted by NGC? Names given? Seems like a lot of folks would have remembered that coin and the story. Not everyday you see a real or a fake 54-S 5$
It does not matter who saw the "new" coin or their opinion of it before it was certified. The new coin is not the problem - IT IS GENUINE. The only folks who matter are at NGC. They have certified the coin and have determined to the best of their ability that it is a previously unknown specimen. Stuff like this happens in our hobby/business.
Agree from a standpoint of authentication. It does however matter from a believability standpoint. And if the hypothetical lawsuit from the DuPont heirs were to happen, I know that this would be investigated for corroboration and fact check.
So let's get this right...when the hypothetical lawsuit comes about, without a better image (which no one posting knows even exists and which the grading service may or may not have used) the Duponts are going to prove what?
This is all a bunch of what if, when, and why won't they tell us. Let's go for 1K views.
Hopefully the OP will post this question on the other web site. They could us a few visits for the month.
@coinlieutenant said:
The article mentioned that the owner had (paraphrased) "shown this coins to multiple dealers, who said it was counterfeit." Any of those dealers consulted by NGC? Names given? Seems like a lot of folks would have remembered that coin and the story. Not everyday you see a real or a fake 54-S 5$
It does not matter who saw the "new" coin or their opinion of it before it was certified. The new coin is not the problem - IT IS GENUINE. The only folks who matter are at NGC. They have certified the coin and have determined to the best of their ability that it is a previously unknown specimen. Stuff like this happens in our hobby/business.
Agree from a standpoint of authentication. It does however matter from a believability standpoint. And if the hypothetical lawsuit from the DuPont heirs were to happen, I know that this would be investigated for corroboration and fact check.
So let's get this right...when the hypothetical lawsuit comes about, without a better image (which no one posting knows even exists and which the grading service may or may not have used) the Duponts are going to prove what?
This is all a bunch of what if, when, and why won't they tell us. Let's go for 1K views.
Hopefully the OP will post this question on the other web site. They could us a few visits for the month.
FWIW, after I recovered the DuPont's Linderman Specimen of the 1804 silver dollar, I was commissioned by the family to go to a few major auctions to compare a few rarities against the family's records of such coins. Copies of the records were provided to me to compare against the coins. Professional ethics prohibit me from revealing the nature of those records, but I can assure you that some records of the collection do exist.
TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@coinlieutenant said:
The article mentioned that the owner had (paraphrased) "shown this coins to multiple dealers, who said it was counterfeit." Any of those dealers consulted by NGC? Names given? Seems like a lot of folks would have remembered that coin and the story. Not everyday you see a real or a fake 54-S 5$
It does not matter who saw the "new" coin or their opinion of it before it was certified. The new coin is not the problem - IT IS GENUINE. The only folks who matter are at NGC. They have certified the coin and have determined to the best of their ability that it is a previously unknown specimen. Stuff like this happens in our hobby/business.
Agree from a standpoint of authentication. It does however matter from a believability standpoint. And if the hypothetical lawsuit from the DuPont heirs were to happen, I know that this would be investigated for corroboration and fact check.
So let's get this right...when the hypothetical lawsuit comes about, without a better image (which no one posting knows even exists and which the grading service may or may not have used) the Duponts are going to prove what?
This is all a bunch of what if, when, and why won't they tell us. Let's go for 1K views.
Hopefully the OP will post this question on the other web site. They could us a few visits for the month.
Not sure why you are upset about the discussion. If you don't like hypotheticals, then disengage. There is of course speculation, but if it were to go to court, it is beyond a reasonable doubt, which while may be hard to prove, would almost certainly involve more details ASIDE from the bad pic compared to the new one. You would make a good lawyer for the defense though.
@FadeToBlack said:
NGC has lost the ability to get the benefit of the doubt from myself and many other collectors with their subpar services over the past few years.
What if the "finder" knew NGC was more likely to slab it and picked them for that reason? They've been bleeding market share, PCGS is eating their lunch.
Just my two cents.
As a side note, this is not really true - that NGC is bleeding market share to PCGS. Yes, in the collector US coin market, everyone seems to want PCGS holders. For the ever expanding world coin market and for the modern US coin market, NGC is doing equal or better than PCGS. That is why they have graded more coins that PCGS and continue to......
Be specific on their subpar services? Their grading is equal to PCGS, I myself have proven that by submitting the same coins raw to both services and at least in my areas of interest, they run pretty equal in their grades. I have done this several times and seen the consistency. So I would like to know what you mean. I personally prefer the PCGS plastic - it is easier to clean up the scratches than the NGC plastic, but other wise, I don't see a difference, silly me?
You can sit here and crow that NGC's grading is equal to PCGS, but I disagree, and more importantly, the market disagrees, as it values PCGS coins of the same grade higher than NGC coins.
This is without even getting into coins I've owned and sold in PCGS holders that have ended up in NGC holders a point higher, when they were weak to start with, and didn't CAC. There's a dog of a 1902-O out there in an NGC 67 holder that's hairlined, and I know because I owned it raw. Crap like that is why NGC doesn't get the benefit of the doubt to me.
And I can show you doctored coins in PCGS holders with beans on them. I had a coin that was heavily cleaned in a details NGC holder that is now in a graded PCGS holder. You are picking one example, I've picked 2, these are the mistakes that both make, not the complete package. Also, the marketing of PCGS on US coins has been bolder and convinced a majority, most of which are not grading experts, so they prefer PCGS? Okay, congrats to PCGS and their marketing. I stand by my comments based on my experience, they are overall across the complete range of US coins, close to equal, each have their own grading standards for each series, but not too different.
Boosi, threads always have their own evolution, thanks for being the Thread Content Monitor. I am simply not letting a poster with comments unjustifiably bashing another TPG get away with it.
@FadeToBlack said: "NGC has lost the ability to get the benefit of the doubt from myself and many other collectors with their subpar services over the past few years."
IMO, this is the kind of "hit-and-run," unsubstantiated CRAP that pushes the CU rules. "Subpar SERVICES?" Without several good examples THAT DON'T BELONG IN THIS THREAD... Sorry, I cannot continue as then I would be breaking the rules and I've been warned!
As yet another thread slides into garbage land......
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@CaptHenway said:
I am reminded of a story I once heard about a high-end coin club meeting where one of the members presented, as his "show-and-tell" contribution, an ancient coin that he described as "unique." After the coin was passed around and left out with the other items on display, it was suddenly noticed to be missing!
The owner, highly upset, requested that everybody in the room be searched. Most agreed, but one member refused. This caused the owner of the coin to cast veiled aspersions upon the other member's honesty. The other member stood by his rights.
Suddenly the coin was rediscovered in some plausible location that I cannot recall. The owner was satisfied that it was his coin, unharmed, and he offered a half-hearted apology to the other member, ending with the question "But if you knew that you did not have the piece, why did you object to being searched?"
In response the other member silently pulled out of his pocket a SECOND specimen of the allegedly "unique" coin.
Nobody has offered any CREDIBLE proof, or even suggestion, that the new coin is the DuPont coin. I would advise everyone here to remember this before casting aspersions upon it.
TD
P.S.: Rick Montgomery says the two coins are not the same. He is damned good at what he does. I trained him to be an Authenticator.
No one has publicly offered credible proof that it is not the DuPont specimen. The fact that the coin could be a new specimen does not mean that it is the most likely scenario.
So, in looking at the coin in question again, the pixelated Dupont photo, and the specimen TDN posted, the newly discovered coin seems to have the weak crosslet on the "4" in the date, while the TDN example and the Dupont specimen appear to have a much stronger crosslet on the 4. The DuPont specimen also shows shadowing on the rim at 3:00 on the obverse that are indicative of rim ticks, that don't appear to be present on the newly discovered specimen. Unfortunate that a higher-quality image of the DuPont coin doesn't seem to exist, for more conclusive comparisons.
There also appears to be a chip, or a mark, on the left edge of the date's "8" in the discovery coin, where the outer loops of the 8 meet, that doesn't appear to be (as best as can be determined) on the DuPont example. And since I'm judging from the image, seeing the actual new coin in hand "might" be more informative.
I think the Wild West part of the hobby is what makes it interesting. Imagine a world where everything was known and agreed upon by honorable, omniscient beings. It would be boring.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
@afford said:
If anyone thinks this hobby is honest is fooling themselves. There are many many honest dealers, experts and collectors in the hobby. But the businesses that benefit over making money turn the hobby into a legalized gambling machine. And couple that with the dealers who are corrupt breeds trouble. Nothing has changed really since the hobby started in the 1800's. The purists are few and far between. It is still like the wild wild west imho.
What the... does this have to do with the thread?
Who is being dishonest? The guy who found the coin? The TPGS? If you think the grading service is being dishonest, spit it out as that might be relevant to the thread. I happen to agree with something posted earlier, same coin or not, the grading service slabbed it as authentic and the coin is a lower grade. They did the job they got paid for. They have decided it is a different coin. Given what WE have to work with, CASE CLOSED!
@afford said:
If anyone thinks this hobby is honest is fooling themselves. There are many many honest dealers, experts and collectors in the hobby. But the businesses that benefit over making money turn the hobby into a legalized gambling machine. And couple that with the dealers who are corrupt breeds trouble. Nothing has changed really since the hobby started in the 1800's. The purists are few and far between. It is still like the wild wild west imho.
no different then anything where things are negotiated. Car salesman, insurance salesman and landlords etc . Anybody that can separate you from your money. It’s just not coins
Got to do your due diligence
m
Walker Proof Digital Album 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......
@afford said:
If anyone thinks this hobby is honest is fooling themselves. There are many many honest dealers, experts and collectors in the hobby. But the businesses that benefit over making money turn the hobby into a legalized gambling machine. And couple that with the dealers who are corrupt breeds trouble. Nothing has changed really since the hobby started in the 1800's. The purists are few and far between. It is still like the wild wild west imho.
What the... does this have to do with the thread?
Who is being dishonest? The guy who found the coin? The TPGS? If you think the grading service is being dishonest, spit it out as that might be relevant to the thread. I happen to agree with something posted earlier, same coin or not, the grading service slabbed it as authentic and the coin is a lower grade. They did the job they got paid for. They have decided it is a different coin. Given what WE have to work with, CASE CLOSED!
Everything dude.
The guy who found the coin could be, why hasn't he discussed provenance or where he got it from yet?
The tpg could be, because I can't tell if they are saying it isn't the Dupont coin and grading it or just grading it.
When a great deal of money is involved I don't trust anybody because this hobby/industry has proved countless time son being corrupt imho.
Why hasn't he come forward (even through lawyers)? There is no advantage for him to do so. We aren't talking about small potatoes here or a couple bags of potato chips, but the whole ball of wax he has come into and he doesn't want the fame or possible notoriety. Same thing with other hoards, we still don't have any idea who "John and Mary" are. The problem way develop if he runs it in a great big auction where it's the star attraction.
@afford said:
If anyone thinks this hobby is honest is fooling themselves. There are many many honest dealers, experts and collectors in the hobby. But the businesses that benefit over making money turn the hobby into a legalized gambling machine. And couple that with the dealers who are corrupt breeds trouble. Nothing has changed really since the hobby started in the 1800's. The purists are few and far between. It is still like the wild wild west imho.
What the... does this have to do with the thread?
Who is being dishonest? The guy who found the coin? The TPGS? If you think the grading service is being dishonest, spit it out as that might be relevant to the thread. I happen to agree with something posted earlier, same coin or not, the grading service slabbed it as authentic and the coin is a lower grade. They did the job they got paid for. They have decided it is a different coin. Given what WE have to work with, CASE CLOSED!
Everything dude.
The guy who found the coin could be, why hasn't he discussed provenance or where he got it from yet?
The tpg could be, because I can't tell if they are saying it isn't the Dupont coin and grading it or just grading it.
When a great deal of money is involved I don't trust anybody because this hobby/industry has proved countless time son being corrupt imho.
Yeah dude, I see what you mean. Look dude, you or I could also be dishonest. However, AFAIK, the possible dishonesty of the dude who owns the coin has NOTHING TO DO with any dude here accusing a major TPGS of being dishonest. That kind of nonsense does not belong on this thread.
Perhaps you are a dude who immigrated to this country. Fortunately, we STILL have a tiny hint of privacy here. If I owned the coin, I'd tell anyone who asked about how I got it to "pound sand" and then "eat soap!" Same response I should expect from a TPGS about how they reached their opinion of its grade. Why not call our host and get a grader to "hold-your-hand" on your next submission. LOL GOOD LUCK dude!
@coinlieutenant asked: "Not sure why you are upset about the discussion. If you don't like hypotheticals, then disengage."
In case you have not noticed, in the two years I've been on CU, I don't get upset at all about discussing ANYTHING. I say what I think and welcome rebuttals. I'm argumentative by nature and thoroughly enjoy pushing buttons to stir up a debate. I'll even disagree with you if I agree with you just to bring out more opinions. I guess that makes me a
Everything dude.
The guy who found the coin could be, why hasn't he discussed provenance or where he got it from yet?
The tpg could be, because I can't tell if they are saying it isn't the Dupont coin and grading it or just grading it.
When a great deal of money is involved I don't trust anybody because this hobby/industry has proved countless time son being corrupt imho.
Yeah dude, I see what you mean. Look dude, you or I could also be dishonest. However, AFAIK, the possible dishonesty of the dude who owns the coin has NOTHING TO DO with any dude here accusing a major TPGS of being dishonest. That kind of nonsense does not belong on this thread.
Perhaps you are a dude who immigrated to this country. Fortunately, we STILL have a tiny hint of privacy here. If I owned the coin, I'd tell anyone who asked about how I got it to "pound sand" and then "eat soap!" Same response I should expect from a TPGS about how they reached their opinion of its grade. Why not call our host and get a grader to "hold-your-hand" on your next submission. LOL GOOD LUCK dude!
I don't eat gluten so this always makes me smile. Two Boots Pizza West Village
m
Walker Proof Digital Album 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......
Comments
NGC may have declared this coin "new" and not the stolen DuPont coin. They have certified it authentic and graded. The liability to NGC is with the authenticity and grade opinion. I do not see why NGC is on the hook either way if this turns out to be the stolen coin, that is the owners problem. Unless a special fee was paid to NGC for research and comparison and guarantee for that purpose, which is outside any normal grading/slabbing submission fee, I say not NGC's problem if it is later deemed stolen.
This sort of sounds like the discussion we now hear at every sports event that is subject to replay. "Since there is no irrefutable evidence, the calling on the field stands."
I actually started this thread accepting that this was indeed a new discovery coin. However, TDN's posting of the other 1854 without the tell tale neck marking is troubling when only the "Discovery" piece and the stolen piece (as seen in the auction photo) have it.
My question, did NGC have access to the coin TDN posted and had it been compared in hand?
Isn't there some legal issue about "receiving stolen property" that may be in play here? I guess one could look to the liability of pawn shops as a stating point.
The key is "Knowingly" receives stolen property. If NGC believes they have a "new" discovery piece then NGC did not knowingly receive stolen property. Given the coins condition difference I don't think you could prove such a case. If NGC returns the property back to the submitter while there is no proof that it is a stolen coin and NGC believes it is not the stolen coin, NGC did nothing wrong.
It then comes down to the owner, did the owner "Knowingly" possess a stolen coin? If the coin can be proven stolen then it may end up going back to the old rightful owner at the new owner's loss but not automatically a criminal offense. If the new owner knew it was stolen, (or reasonably should have known it was stolen), (or later learns that it was stolen) and still retained it after that point and then had it forcibly seized/recovered, that makes it a criminal "receiving or possessing stolen property".
I am not an attorney but that is my understanding.
DuPont heir: " I think you found my family's stolen coin "
NGC: "Well, here is our file, prepped and sanitized by our attorneys, for you to give your attorneys on our opinion why this is not the stolen coin, and a copy of the fine print the submitter agreed to relating to our liability for grading and authenticating coins. If you question this, you should take it up with the submitter who is the claimed owner of the coin. We don't have anything to do with the coin itself. Whether the coin is the DuPont coin or a new coin, it is still a 'Discovery of a Lifetime' and that's why we put it on the holder instead of anything else."
New Purchaser of coin: "Is this the stolen DuPont coin?"
NGC: (crickets)
Open in another screen and the photo is large:
It is fascinating how many people are experts in a coin they have never seen!
I hope NGC is right on it, but sometimes the experts are not perfect. It would be nice to know how many experts were consulted on this, as just NGC's employees making that call would raise the questions. Case one, NGC charges $100 and 1% of fair market value, they also get huge publicity that even money can't buy; case two, the coin gets tied up in legal wranglings. The late David Akers looked at the Wolfson coin, were there others who are still alive or are notes available on descriptions?
There is an excellent article on the issue in Coinfacts: http://www.pcgscoinfacts.com/Coin/Detail/8260
I think the point which is most helpful to the broader numismatic community is to disclose the method used to ascertain that the coin is a new discovery. Until that is known everyone is guessing.
Latin American Collection
Great thread
My YouTube Channel
The Boyd specimen is a damn nice AU58+!
It does not matter who saw the "new" coin or their opinion of it before it was certified. The new coin is not the problem - IT IS GENUINE. The only folks who matter are at NGC. They have certified the coin and have determined to the best of their ability that it is a previously unknown specimen. Stuff like this happens in our hobby/business.
It seems like a lot of people on this thread are assuming NGC made their determination by comparison to the crappy auction photo we have here. I'm going to assume, until I hear otherwise, that NGC used better photos from either the DuPont family or the police's theft investigation, to definitively rule out the coin as being the DuPont specimen. Yes, it would be nice if NGC confirmed this, but I'm not holding my breath.
I think there needs to be some sort of consensus of expert opinions from many other grading companies. Especially from our host, PCGS, possibly ANACS, even ICG on this coin. Hearing what NGc thinks just doesn't do it for me.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
LOL, please leave ICG out of it. While the coin is genuine, there is no way we can add anything about where it came from. Read the thread again.
Agree from a standpoint of authentication. It does however matter from a believability standpoint. And if the hypothetical lawsuit from the DuPont heirs were to happen, I know that this would be investigated for corroboration and fact check.
siliconvalleycoins.com
Ah wait ... the finder who refuses to say where he got it, just remembered he found it in a deceased relatives SDB with no paperwork, and his first name was Izzy, lol
Book 'em Danno!
The Mysterious Egyptian Magic Coin
Coins in Movies
Coins on Television
So let's get this right...when the hypothetical lawsuit comes about, without a better image (which no one posting knows even exists and which the grading service may or may not have used) the Duponts are going to prove what?
This is all a bunch of what if, when, and why won't they tell us.
Let's go for 1K views.
Hopefully the OP will post this question on the other web site. They could us a few visits for the month.
LOL! As I write this there is over 2700 views!
FWIW, after I recovered the DuPont's Linderman Specimen of the 1804 silver dollar, I was commissioned by the family to go to a few major auctions to compare a few rarities against the family's records of such coins. Copies of the records were provided to me to compare against the coins. Professional ethics prohibit me from revealing the nature of those records, but I can assure you that some records of the collection do exist.
TD
Not sure why you are upset about the discussion. If you don't like hypotheticals, then disengage. There is of course speculation, but if it were to go to court, it is beyond a reasonable doubt, which while may be hard to prove, would almost certainly involve more details ASIDE from the bad pic compared to the new one. You would make a good lawyer for the defense though.
siliconvalleycoins.com
As a side note, this is not really true - that NGC is bleeding market share to PCGS. Yes, in the collector US coin market, everyone seems to want PCGS holders. For the ever expanding world coin market and for the modern US coin market, NGC is doing equal or better than PCGS. That is why they have graded more coins that PCGS and continue to......
Be specific on their subpar services? Their grading is equal to PCGS, I myself have proven that by submitting the same coins raw to both services and at least in my areas of interest, they run pretty equal in their grades. I have done this several times and seen the consistency. So I would like to know what you mean. I personally prefer the PCGS plastic - it is easier to clean up the scratches than the NGC plastic, but other wise, I don't see a difference, silly me?
Best, SH
The Smithsonian Institution coin once belonged to ... Egypt's King Farouk.
The Mysterious Egyptian Magic Coin
Coins in Movies
Coins on Television
Unfortunately the topics discussed in this thread now have nothing to do with the discovery of how NGC verified the new coin as a new discovery.
The grading standards of PCGS and NGC are completely irrelevant to the central topic.
Latin American Collection
And I can show you doctored coins in PCGS holders with beans on them. I had a coin that was heavily cleaned in a details NGC holder that is now in a graded PCGS holder. You are picking one example, I've picked 2, these are the mistakes that both make, not the complete package. Also, the marketing of PCGS on US coins has been bolder and convinced a majority, most of which are not grading experts, so they prefer PCGS? Okay, congrats to PCGS and their marketing. I stand by my comments based on my experience, they are overall across the complete range of US coins, close to equal, each have their own grading standards for each series, but not too different.
Boosi, threads always have their own evolution, thanks for being the Thread Content Monitor. I am simply not letting a poster with comments unjustifiably bashing another TPG get away with it.
Best, SH
@FadeToBlack said: "NGC has lost the ability to get the benefit of the doubt from myself and many other collectors with their subpar services over the past few years."
IMO, this is the kind of "hit-and-run," unsubstantiated CRAP that pushes the CU rules. "Subpar SERVICES?" Without several good examples THAT DON'T BELONG IN THIS THREAD... Sorry, I cannot continue as then I would be breaking the rules and I've been warned!
True story:
TPG1 “no, those are not proofs”
TPG2 “yes, they are proofs”
TPG1 “they aren’t and TPG2 f’d up”
Coins are placed in a major collection. Four years later when the collection was to be auctioned, TPG1 crossed the coins as proofs.
The only thing consistent is the inconsistency of TPG opinions..,
I like it when any shiny, unusual, vintage coin is labeled as a "SPECIMEN."
As yet another thread slides into garbage land......
So, in looking at the coin in question again, the pixelated Dupont photo, and the specimen TDN posted, the newly discovered coin seems to have the weak crosslet on the "4" in the date, while the TDN example and the Dupont specimen appear to have a much stronger crosslet on the 4. The DuPont specimen also shows shadowing on the rim at 3:00 on the obverse that are indicative of rim ticks, that don't appear to be present on the newly discovered specimen. Unfortunate that a higher-quality image of the DuPont coin doesn't seem to exist, for more conclusive comparisons.
What you're not seeing is that it is on the TDN example -- the light is just hitting it differently.
There also appears to be a chip, or a mark, on the left edge of the date's "8" in the discovery coin, where the outer loops of the 8 meet, that doesn't appear to be (as best as can be determined) on the DuPont example. And since I'm judging from the image, seeing the actual new coin in hand "might" be more informative.
I think the Wild West part of the hobby is what makes it interesting. Imagine a world where everything was known and agreed upon by honorable, omniscient beings. It would be boring.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
What the...
does this have to do with the thread?
Who is being dishonest? The guy who found the coin? The TPGS? If you think the grading service is being dishonest, spit it out as that might be relevant to the thread. I happen to agree with something posted earlier, same coin or not, the grading service slabbed it as authentic and the coin is a lower grade. They did the job they got paid for. They have decided it is a different coin. Given what WE have to work with, CASE CLOSED!
no different then anything where things are negotiated. Car salesman, insurance salesman and landlords etc . Anybody that can separate you from your money. It’s just not coins
Got to do your due diligence
m
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......
RE: "The only thing consistent is the inconsistency of TPG opinions..,."
Yep!
Standards, informed research, consistency.
Why hasn't he come forward (even through lawyers)? There is no advantage for him to do so. We aren't talking about small potatoes here or a couple bags of potato chips, but the whole ball of wax he has come into and he doesn't want the fame or possible notoriety. Same thing with other hoards, we still don't have any idea who "John and Mary" are. The problem way develop if he runs it in a great big auction where it's the star attraction.
Yeah dude, I see what you mean. Look dude, you or I could also be dishonest. However, AFAIK, the possible dishonesty of the dude who owns the coin has NOTHING TO DO with any dude here accusing a major TPGS of being dishonest. That kind of nonsense does not belong on this thread.
Perhaps you are a dude who immigrated to this country. Fortunately, we STILL have a tiny hint of privacy here. If I owned the coin, I'd tell anyone who asked about how I got it to "pound sand" and then "eat soap!" Same response I should expect from a TPGS about how they reached their opinion of its grade. Why not call our host and get a grader to "hold-your-hand" on your next submission. LOL GOOD LUCK dude!
@coinlieutenant asked: "Not sure why you are upset about the discussion. If you don't like hypotheticals, then disengage."
In case you have not noticed, in the two years I've been on CU, I don't get upset at all about discussing ANYTHING. I say what I think and welcome rebuttals. I'm argumentative by nature and thoroughly enjoy pushing buttons to stir up a debate. I'll even disagree with you if I agree with you just to bring out more opinions. I guess that makes me a
Dude!
This dude
is off to teach a grading seminar. 
I'll miss you guys 
...until Monday.
I don't eat gluten so this always makes me smile. Two Boots Pizza West Village
m
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......