<< <i>You really think the grunts that work in QA, the majority of whom probably have no real knowledge outside of US coins, should lose their jobs over a simple holder SNAFU?
Crap happens. Mistakes are made. People learn. >>
Assuming it's an isolated incident and the person responsible isn't FUBAR, I would tend to agree that this would be a "bring in donuts for the office" offense. I assume that people responsible for holdering and reviewing submissions for these kinds of mistakes are evaluated on their accuracy, perhaps even to the extent of being periodically sabotaged with "control submissions".
Since you asked, no photoshop here......Heck, I wouldnt know HOW to photoshop.......I'm sure PCGS would reholder at no cost but I think I will keep 'em the way they are (at least for now)
While this is certainly amusing, it's also scary. For example, consider two 1892-O Morgans submitted together, assigned grades of 64 and 65, and then slabbed as 65 and 64.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>While this is certainly amusing, it's also scary. For example, consider two 1892-O Morgans submitted together, assigned grades of 64 and 65, and then slabbed as 65 and 64. >>
exactly, an obvious mechanical error is one thing. but that mechanical error could just be one point difference in grade and nobody would ever know. And when someone submits that under the grading guarantee someday in the future PCGS could always just claim mechanical error and pay nothing. Very scary. The finalizer should be their very best grader.
<< <i>While this is certainly amusing, it's also scary. For example, consider two 1892-O Morgans submitted together, assigned grades of 64 and 65, and then slabbed as 65 and 64. >>
<< <i>While this is certainly amusing, it's also scary. For example, consider two 1892-O Morgans submitted together, assigned grades of 64 and 65, and then slabbed as 65 and 64. >>
exactly, an obvious mechanical error is one thing. but that mechanical error could just be one point difference in grade and nobody would ever know. And when someone submits that under the grading guarantee someday in the future PCGS could always just claim mechanical error and pay nothing. Very scary. The finalizer should be their very best grader. >>
Is mechanical error not covered by Secure+? I thought Secure+ guarantees a grade regardless. Then PCGS would be stuck with an inevitable buyback
BUT! There should be measures in place that make this an extremely rare occurrence, and the fact that we have two pairs of coins with similar mix-ups shows that this may be occuring on a regular basis.
Very bad stuff as 1) It undermines confidence in PCGS, and 2) This type of thing could cost someone a great deal of money if an unscrupulous individual new of the mixup and subsequently tried to market to an unsuspecting novice.
How much for the norse in that holder?? I collect errors.
"My friends who see my collection sometimes ask what something costs. I tell them and they are in awe at my stupidity." (Baccaruda, 12/03).I find it hard to believe that he (Trump) rushed to some hotel to meet girls of loose morals, although ours are undoubtedly the best in the world. (Putin 1/17) Gone but not forgotten. IGWT, Speedy, Bear, BigE, HokieFore, John Burns, Russ, TahoeDale, Dahlonega, Astrorat, Stewart Blay, Oldhoopster, Broadstruck, Ricko, Big Moose, Cardinal.
I agree with those who say those responsible need to be fired. They then need to hire experienced, world class numismatists for all facets of their operations; from customer service, secretaries, QA, shipping, grading, garbage collection, sales, etc.
Of course they will have to triple grading and shipping fees to cover that. That should make CLCT revenue soar along with the stock. Yeah, this is a great idea!!!
<< <i>While this is certainly amusing, it's also scary. For example, consider two 1892-O Morgans submitted together, assigned grades of 64 and 65, and then slabbed as 65 and 64. >>
I dunno, sounds like a wash... >>
Not when one coin is deserving of the 65 and the other is deserving of the 64. The 64'd coin gets in a mechanical error 65 holder and the 65 coin gets a 64 holder and is sent back for regrading, then there's potentially 2-65's in holders now. A big jump in price. Not good for the person who bought the 64 coin in the 65 holder.
@ Elite CNC Routing & Woodworks on Facebook. Check out my work. Too many positive BST transactions with too many members to list.
For what it is worth: I recently got back a 25 coin submission. All 25 coins were in their appropriate holders. :-) Somebody deserves a raise. The other side of the coin...
Comments
bob
Fun times!
So much for the QA department.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
<< <i>That's some nasty edge damage on the shilling to take it from round to octagonal.
Now that's pretty funny!! Lol!
U.S. Type Set
<< <i>You really think the grunts that work in QA, the majority of whom probably have no real knowledge outside of US coins, should lose their jobs over a simple holder SNAFU?
Crap happens. Mistakes are made. People learn. >>
Assuming it's an isolated incident and the person responsible isn't FUBAR, I would tend to agree that this would be a "bring in donuts for the office" offense. I assume that people responsible for holdering and reviewing submissions for these kinds of mistakes are evaluated on their accuracy, perhaps even to the extent of being periodically sabotaged with "control submissions".
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
www.brunkauctions.com
It happens and when it happens to you, one has to take a deep breath and be thankful its not something worse.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Sure, it's funny in a sad kind of way. But PCGS should know about it.
Lance.
"If I say something in the woods and my wife isn't there to hear it.....am I still wrong?"
My Washington Quarter Registry set...in progress
Taylor
Not even consecutive cert. numbers?
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.american-legacy-coins.com
They figured it out pretty quick and strongly urged me to return the coin for reholdering and I was given several free express gradings.
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
Great conversation piece. (S)
Www.killermarbles.com
Www.suncitycoin.com
<< <i>They once put my MS65RD 1909-S VDB into an MS67RD holder by mistake... increasing the street value by over $100k.
They figured it out pretty quick and strongly urged me to return the coin for reholdering and I was given several free express gradings. >>
You could have kept it and been very rich!
[URL=http://s1091.photobucket.com/user/Panthersgd/media/002-2.jpg.html]
[URL=http://s1091.photobucket.com/user/Panthersgd/media/001-3.jpg.html]
I keep submitting CBHs with attributions, and PCGS still keeps screwing them up. What are we paying for?
Hoard the keys.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>While this is certainly amusing, it's also scary. For example, consider two 1892-O Morgans submitted together, assigned grades of 64 and 65, and then slabbed as 65 and 64. >>
exactly, an obvious mechanical error is one thing. but that mechanical error could just be one point difference in grade and nobody would ever know. And when someone submits that under the grading guarantee someday in the future PCGS could always just claim mechanical error and pay nothing. Very scary. The finalizer should be their very best grader.
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
<< <i>While this is certainly amusing, it's also scary. For example, consider two 1892-O Morgans submitted together, assigned grades of 64 and 65, and then slabbed as 65 and 64. >>
I dunno, sounds like a wash...
<< <i>
<< <i>While this is certainly amusing, it's also scary. For example, consider two 1892-O Morgans submitted together, assigned grades of 64 and 65, and then slabbed as 65 and 64. >>
exactly, an obvious mechanical error is one thing. but that mechanical error could just be one point difference in grade and nobody would ever know. And when someone submits that under the grading guarantee someday in the future PCGS could always just claim mechanical error and pay nothing. Very scary. The finalizer should be their very best grader. >>
Is mechanical error not covered by Secure+? I thought Secure+ guarantees a grade regardless. Then PCGS would be stuck with an inevitable buyback
<< <i>
Shouldn't that now qualify as an Error Coin or should one say, Error Coins? The value of both just skyrocketed.
Same submission, 3 coins fell in between and they were correctly holdered
www.brunkauctions.com
BUT! There should be measures in place that make this an extremely rare occurrence, and the fact that we have two pairs of coins with similar mix-ups shows that this may be occuring on a regular basis.
Very bad stuff as
1) It undermines confidence in PCGS, and
2) This type of thing could cost someone a great deal of money if an unscrupulous individual new of the mixup and subsequently tried to market to an unsuspecting novice.
Of course they will have to triple grading and shipping fees to cover that. That should make CLCT revenue soar along with the stock. Yeah, this is a great idea!!!
illini, you should have told PCGS you already sold the MS67 S-VDB. LOL. I think Stewart said he'd pay $100k for any.
Lance.
<< <i>
<< <i>While this is certainly amusing, it's also scary. For example, consider two 1892-O Morgans submitted together, assigned grades of 64 and 65, and then slabbed as 65 and 64. >>
I dunno, sounds like a wash... >>
Not when one coin is deserving of the 65 and the other is deserving of the 64. The 64'd coin gets in a mechanical error 65 holder and the 65 coin gets a 64 holder and is sent back for regrading, then there's potentially 2-65's in holders now. A big jump in price. Not good for the person who bought the 64 coin in the 65 holder.
Too many positive BST transactions with too many members to list.
Empty Nest Collection
www.brunkauctions.com
Many members on this forum that now it cannot fit in my signature. Please ask for entire list.