What is PCGS policy on 2000-P pattern Sacagawea $1's out of original packaging?
CaptHenway
Posts: 32,731 ✭✭✭✭✭
This ebay seller has a coin he says has the detailed feathers, but that PCGS would only certify it as a regular coin because it was not in the original packaging. THe photos are really bad, but it could be the die variety.
Do they certify these based upon the coin itself or by the packaging?
linky
Do they certify these based upon the coin itself or by the packaging?
linky
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.
0
Comments
<< <i>I sure wouldn't know why they would need the packaging to determine it. It does impact the sellers credibility in my eyes that he's not actually showing a clear photo of the tailfeathers. >>
+1 on both counts
.
NGC will slab the coin and label it what it is.
PCGS will accept these as a cross-over.
So, send to NGC and then cross with PCGS.
For what it's worth: Although his photos are poor, that one is the real deal. I suspect it wasn't submitted correctly (for example, the added fee not paid) and thus ended up the way it did.
peacockcoins
PCGS cheerio guidance does not directly answer OP's question, but does state "PCGS only applies the “Cheerios” designation to Sacagawea Dollars with the Reverse of 1999."
It would seem that there should be three different special labels for this coin: (1) "Rev. of 1999," (2) "Cheerios" for coins submitted in original wrapper and (3) if the Cheerios coin also has the Rev. of 1999 (they don't all have it) then the label should identify identify both ""Rev. of 1999" and "Cheerios."
Do we know for a fact that the Reverse of 1999 was used only on dollars distributed through the Cheerios promotion? If this is know to be true then it would stand to reason that all Rev. of 1999's should receive the Cheerios designation. I'd prefer that they only put "Reverse of 1999" on these lables.
No Way Out: Stimulus and Money Printing Are the Only Path Left
11661631
it was an original in the package cheerios sac....and i sent it to PCGS as such....came back as a 67 plain old sac $1....called pcgs right away...and i said it was a cheerios specimen....they re-slabbed no problems as a cheerios 67.
don't know if the policy has changed....but you can't deny if it has the markings....packaging or no packaging...feathers on the tail = cheerios specimen.
jmho
gyros
<< <i>It does impact the sellers credibility in my eyes that he's not actually showing a clear photo of the tailfeathers. >>
Especially with the story that it is a Cheerios dollar that is not indicated as such on the slab.
If you were selling such a coin, wouldn't you make every effort to show clear, close-up pix of the tailfeathers?
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
<< <i>
<< <i>It does impact the sellers credibility in my eyes that he's not actually showing a clear photo of the tailfeathers. >>
Especially with the story that it is a Cheerios dollar that is not indicated as such on the slab.
If you were selling such a coin, wouldn't you make every effort to show clear, close-up pix of the tailfeathers? >>
and not disable the zoom feature when creating the listing?
No Way Out: Stimulus and Money Printing Are the Only Path Left
Come on. You don't disable the zoom feature with setting up an eBay auction, you must enable it.
A fine distinction, to be sure, but only fair to the auction to do so.
peacockcoins
<< <i>^
Come on. You don't disable the zoom feature with setting up an eBay auction, you must enable it.
A fine distinction, to be sure, but only fair to the auction to do so. >>
It remains defaulted to it's last setting until changed once again. If he disabled it in an earler auction he would have to turn it back on.
No Way Out: Stimulus and Money Printing Are the Only Path Left
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
<< <i>I would think the Rev. of '99 is more important than the Cheerios designation. It's probably not known whether or not all Rev. of '99 are Cheerios coins, so in order to get both designations it has to be in the original packaging. The thing is, I don't see a coin number for Rev. of '99 in either the Sacagawea dollar section or in patterns. Seems to be a shortcoming of PCGS's coin numbering. >>
That's because they lable the Rev. of 99 as a "Cheerio."
No Way Out: Stimulus and Money Printing Are the Only Path Left
<< <i>I would think the Rev. of '99 is more important than the Cheerios designation. It's probably not known whether or not all Rev. of '99 are Cheerios coins, so in order to get both designations it has to be in the original packaging. The thing is, I don't see a coin number for Rev. of '99 in either the Sacagawea dollar section or in patterns. Seems to be a shortcoming of PCGS's coin numbering. >>
So the reverse of '99 doesn't have its own cereal number?
(Sorry, couldn't resist!)
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
<< <i>
<< <i>I would think the Rev. of '99 is more important than the Cheerios designation. It's probably not known whether or not all Rev. of '99 are Cheerios coins, so in order to get both designations it has to be in the original packaging. The thing is, I don't see a coin number for Rev. of '99 in either the Sacagawea dollar section or in patterns. Seems to be a shortcoming of PCGS's coin numbering. >>
That's because they lable the Rev. of 99 as a "Cheerio." >>
But since it's been shown that they aren't necessarily one in the same, this is no longer a sufficient description of anything other than the original packaging.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution