Warranty inquiry (coin quickly turned in holder) updated march 14

crypto79 · March 1, 2014 1:32AM

Have a coin that has me a bit curious. It is a hard to find 1873s Trade in PCGS AU55, I had the hardest time finding a suitable example and thought I had come close but it is changing in it's holder. While I have had coins turn in their holders before with tone this or that, it has never been this fast or really devastating to eye appeal. I am not sure how to proceed and would like some advice and I know find a better one is solid advice but I have never stopped looking so until I find a permanent one.

Considering I want it back: Do you think it should be submitted through conservation or review considering I would like it dipped? Anyone ever have luck dipping off such dark black spots that have grown so quickly? It has had a bath before and already has slightly impacted luster, is there any hope that it doesn't come back dead?

Here is the time line with photos*************
Graded? I would guess late 2011-early 2012 Secure plus photo taken at the time

Sold on HA April 21 2012

What it looks like Nov 2013 and it is a little worse now

chumley · March 1, 2014 1:43AM

unless you burn coal for heat,I can't imagine what could cause that in so short a time

crypto79 · March 1, 2014 1:49AM

<< unless you burn coal for heat,I can't imagine what could cause that in so short a time >>

I do not but it lives at the bank with the rest of them anyway in a SDB with hundreds of silver dollars. This being the only one affected.

lcoopie · March 1, 2014 1:52AM

might it have been poorly rinsed, and starting to turn even in the original photos?

kaz · March 1, 2014 2:06AM

Man, that's a shame. The only thing that makes sense to me, with your other coins serving as controls in the SDB, is an improperly neutralized dipping. If conservation services are available for this kind of thing that's the route I would take.

BryceM · March 1, 2014 2:27AM

I'm guessing the people who are suggesting active dip residue are correct. If you send it in for restoration, they'll probably just dip it again, but at least they'll do it correctly.

Broadstruck · March 1, 2014 2:27AM

It should be covered under PCGS's warranty and not something you need to pay for via their conservation service. You might want to call their customer service dept and see if's possible to have them perform a mild diluted dip as I don't think it could handle another full strength dip? I'd also inspect the rest of the coins in your safety deposit box, make sure it's not located on a exterior building wall that impacted by winter/summer temperatures. If all is well at least maybe get a different box as who know what was stored in yours before?

crypto79 · March 1, 2014 2:34AM

<< It should be covered under PCGS's warranty and not something you need to pay for via their conservation service. You might want to call their customer service dept and see if's possible to have them perform a mild diluted dip as I don't think it could handle another full strength dip? I'd also inspect the rest of the coins in your safety deposit box, make sure it's not located on a exterior building wall that impacted by winter/summer temperatures. If all is well at least maybe get a different box as who know what was stored in yours before? >>

I have the same box for 20 years before recently moving. I am all but certain that the improperly rinsed is correct. My questions revolved around

I remember under the old system you could request a return under the warranty system but I have never submitted under the new two tier spot and conservation system. Not sure if it should be a spot that they end up conserving or a conservation they end up spotting.

Also anyone ever have any luck dipping that kind of crap off?

Good suggestion about the diluted dip, ill put it on the form and hope for the best.

lkeigwin · March 1, 2014 2:35AM

I don't think PCGS's guarantee will cover that.

"What the PCGS Guarantee Does Not Cover...
Coins exhibiting environmental deterioration. The PCGS Guarantee does not apply to coins exhibiting environmental deterioration subsequent to PCGS grading and encapsulation. This deterioration may include, but is not limited to, spotting, hazing, PVC contamination, changes in color, and corrosion."

I would submit it for conservation. It will be dipped again, and it may suffer a little because of it, but probably less than if it is left to further deteriorate.
Lance.

crypto79 · March 1, 2014 2:42AM

<< I don't think PCGS's guarantee will cover that.

"What the PCGS Guarantee Does Not Cover...
Coins exhibiting environmental deterioration. The PCGS Guarantee does not apply to coins exhibiting environmental deterioration subsequent to PCGS grading and encapsulation. This deterioration may include, but is not limited to, spotting, hazing, PVC contamination, changes in color, and corrosion."

I would submit it for conservation. It will be dipped again, and it may suffer a little because of it, but probably less than if it is left to further deteriorate.
Lance. >>

That is a good point although I am not 100% sure it fits that definition.

ricko · March 1, 2014 2:43AM

That is nasty.... and if your other coins in the same SDB are not affected, it is most likely the result of a previous, poorly rinsed (and very active) dip. Not sure what it will look like even conserved. Good luck, Cheers, RickO

fcloud · March 1, 2014 2:46AM

Whomever cleaned it didn't do it right, so now you know it was cleaned. Maybe it can be conserved by our host.

PTVETTER · March 1, 2014 3:48AM

There is NO doubt about it.

That coin can be conservered and I highly recomend that it be done before it goes too far and can not be corrected.

You could break it out your self and conserve it yourself.

Then send it in again, maybe, (on a good day you may get A:U58)

bosco5041 · March 1, 2014 4:03AM

Nothing to add that hasn't been said but that is why I quit buying all white coins and coins that are not 100% (to the best of my knowledge) original. I bought a 1917-D standing quarter about 3 years ago and it was MS-63 and PQ for the grade and I give a PQ price for it and within a year after buying it it hazed over. I guess some collectors are conserving right before sending the coin in and not finishing the job right.

Cougar1978 · March 1, 2014 4:10AM

What a horrible looking coin. It certainly needs to be conserved. It looks like the kind of dog one would get sight unseen then have to return.

RYK · March 1, 2014 4:19AM

I don't have much experience in this area, but my gut feeling tells me that the coin is toast.

crypto79 · March 1, 2014 4:39AM

<< I don't have much experience in this area, but my gut feeling tells me that the coin is toast. >>

I agree with you. I am also surprised that most have it pegged as active dip residue but failed to notice that it apeara to have went through the sniffer. How does that impart confidence in that process.

lkeigwin · March 1, 2014 4:55AM

I think the Sniffer is hyped. And probably by us more than by PCGS. I'd love to read some statistics on what the Sniffer has actually found.

I am not saying that it doesn't live up to its raison d'etre. Finding remnants of human oils, putty, and other banned substances is meritorious. But too many collectors think coins are being sniffed when they're not (virtually all regular submissions aren't). And even think it detects AT.

I read recently it supposedly sniffs for acetone, which I find hard to believe. Acetone is ubiquitous, and used regularly by PCGS and collectors to safely conserve coins. What would be the point?

Someone said it detects dip. The same dip PCGS uses to conserve coins? Again, what sense does that make? Maybe it is just looking for excess dip not rinsed off?

Still, I think the Sniffer has been good for the hobby as there is an irrational fear. And that's welcome, if it keeps collectors and doctors from mucking with coins.

Anyway, bummer about the deteriorating condition of OP's T$. I still like the idea of PCGS restoration.
Lance.

crypto79 · March 1, 2014 7:01AM

<< I think the Sniffer is hyped. And probably by us more than by PCGS. I'd love to read some statistics on what the Sniffer has actually found.

I am not saying that it doesn't live up to its raison d'etre. Finding remnants of human oils, putty, and other banned substances is meritorious. But too many collectors think coins are being sniffed when they're not (virtually all regular submissions aren't). And even think it detects AT.

I read recently it supposedly sniffs for acetone, which I find hard to believe. Acetone is ubiquitous, and used regularly by PCGS and collectors to safely conserve coins. What would be the point?

Someone said it detects dip. The same dip PCGS uses to conserve coins? Again, what sense does that make? Maybe it is just looking for excess dip not rinsed off?

Still, I think the Sniffer has been good for the hobby as there is an irrational fear. And that's welcome, if it keeps collectors and doctors from mucking with coins.

Anyway, bummer about the deteriorating condition of OP's T$. I still like the idea of PCGS restoration.
Lance. >>

I have no problem going the restoration route but it is surprising the whole chain of events that caused a coin to turn so quickly but still pass muster through the sniffer.

numisma · March 1, 2014 7:25AM

My advise to you is to have PCGS take the coin off of the market under their guarantee program, and then you should use the money to find another AU example. I know these do not grow on trees, but that is the best solution at this point. Heck, you may get lucky and find an even better deal with patience and luck.

If you have the coin conserved, you will likely carry a subconscious (on conscious) fear that it may turn again in the future. Whatever PCGS does with the coin (after compensating you) is their business, but I am confident that they will do the right thing.

MilkmanDan · March 1, 2014 7:30AM

<< I have no problem going the restoration route but it is surprising the whole chain of events that caused a coin to turn so quickly but still pass muster through the sniffer. >>

Not sure we should assume it went through the sniffer just because there is a SP scan of the coin.

Zoins · March 1, 2014 7:45AM

<< Nothing to add that hasn't been said but that is why I quit buying all white coins and coins that are not 100% (to the best of my knowledge) original. I bought a 1917-D standing quarter about 3 years ago and it was MS-63 and PQ for the grade and I give a PQ price for it and within a year after buying it it hazed over. I guess some collectors are conserving right before sending the coin in and not finishing the job right. >>

At least it's only one coin out of his collection. Given that percentage, does avoiding all white coins seem overly aggressive?

crypto79 · March 1, 2014 8:26AM

<< 

<< I have no problem going the restoration route but it is surprising the whole chain of events that caused a coin to turn so quickly but still pass muster through the sniffer. >>

Not sure we should assume it went through the sniffer just because there is a SP scan of the coin. >>

I wasn't aware that they weren't part of the same routine, I am making an assumption about them being one and the same. It is not in a SP holder

blu62vette · March 1, 2014 8:35AM

I dont think the sniffer cares about a dipped coin...

Baltimore in 3 weeks, get that coin turned in.

rhedden · March 1, 2014 8:41AM

I would not want that coin back. I have dipped a few inexpensive coins like this one, and the spots just keep coming back on some coins. Why pay shipping to have it conserved and then have the same problem in 6 months? Much better to go hunting for another 1873-s, even if they are very tough.

mkman123 · March 1, 2014 6:05PM

let PCGS know about it and see what can be done. Perhaps they will reimburse you

Rampage · March 1, 2014 11:12PM

I looked at the larger images on the cert check and though I am not one hundred percent certain, it looks to me like there may have been some dip residue on the coin when it was graded and just got worse since the time of grading. When you look at your image, and then look at the PCGS image, the damage on your coin matches the off-color area of the coin in the original image.

I would send it in for conservation and let PCGS do it the right way. Depending on how the luster looks, once you get the coin back, send it in again for reconsideration and maybe you will get a bump to AU58 as someone else mentioned.

Good luck.

Rampage · March 1, 2014 11:14PM

Otherwise, it looks like a lovely coin. I am curious though...I am not a Trade dollar enthusiast, so I do not know. But, the PCGS price guide is at $565 for that coin, but it sold at auction in 2012 for $1150. Have prices come down that much, or is this one of those coins like the 1904-S Barber half that just cannot go by price guides?

AMRC · March 1, 2014 11:39PM

Do not wait, send it back to PCGS now. let them figure out the best course of action.

crypto79 · March 1, 2014 11:42PM

<< Otherwise, it looks like a lovely coin. I am curious though...I am not a Trade dollar enthusiast, so I do not know. But, the PCGS price guide is at $565 for that coin, but it sold at auction in 2012 for $1150. Have prices come down that much, or is this one of those coins like the 1904-S Barber half that just cannot go by price guides? >>

Save for the key dates 73cc & 78cc, the price guides are very out of date. Even the common type prices have goon up dramatically on the retail side.

BillJones · March 1, 2014 11:48PM

I would contact PCGS. I once had a coin turn on me, and PCGS offered to fix it. They dipped the coin and put it a new holder in the same grade.

As for advice, this is all I can offer. There is something be said about old holders. If a coin has been in a holder for five years or more, the chances of it turning are much less. This is something you should keep in mind when you seen an older copper coin that is red or an older silver coin that is white. If it is in a brand new holder, and once you have seen a lot of labels, you will be able to tell the difference, if looks too bright to be true, that just might be the signs of an impending problem.

WildIdea · March 2, 2014 12:54AM

"Doesn't come back dead"

Crypto, With my limited knowledge of the series, considering a white AU 55 grade, um...already looked kind of weird. Toning might help that coin. I would expect most large silver coins from that time period with circulation to look a little mottled. Crusty with honest wear would be preferred by me. Anyway, with that said,

I'm sure PCGS sees plenty of this and has protocol for this situation. I understand the concern having watched a coin turn. It's happened to we with newps before, but I just see it is an cost of participation in the hobby. I'm sure most of the coins we own looked different at some time it's just a bonus you have that information! Ha ha. The detective work some put in here with auction archives is pretty cool, watching a coin get dipped and flipped for a profit. Prong holders really worry me as these coins prob didn't get recently discovered or reholdered for scratched plastic. Eventually one will get hung out to dry on one or two, oh well. Could be a copper coin, or putty gold just as easy.

So the question for me is what condition is the least risk/ hassle percentile to buy for the money....and what is the ethical way to dispose or value the coin now. Thanks for the post, it's poses an interesting topic.

DDR · March 2, 2014 5:46AM

Ouch, I feel your pain on that one. What a shame. The 73-S is a tough Trade dollar to find in problem-free circulated condition.

I agree with what others have said, unless the coin is in a SecurePlus holder I don't think it has been evaluated by the Sniffer.

Bring the coin to Baltimore, talk to PCGS's customer service reps and see what they can do for you. I've found them to be reasonable and helpful on a couple of issues I've had to discuss with them over the years.

Good luck.

crypto79 · March 29, 2014 3:13AM

Update:

Took it to PCGS at Baltimore and they instructed me to conserve it at my cost as it did not qualify for warranty service. I asked them if I left it be until it went past the point of no return would it then and if so why not now when it is clear there is a problem. No answer.

Not going to squabble over the 60-70$ to get it conserved properly by experts (a service easily worth it) but I have to say I am bothered by the pass the buck approach that has crept into their warranty service the past couple years. Adds substantial value to the verification company IMHO.

Unknown · March 29, 2014 6:02AM

This content has been removed.

crypto79 · March 29, 2014 7:50AM

<< Crypto, how long have you owned the 1873-s ? >>

About a year I guess, I didn't buy it off of HA and that was exactly 2 years ago. I suspect the ha.com buyer dumped it once it started to change and I needed a 73s. (I buy what I see that meets a base standard and upgrade when I can when/if a "perfect" coin comes along)

The coin had some black on it but continued to go bad in the past year.

Let me be clear, I got the coin at a discount for being ugly and even after conservation I will be fine. 70$ is but a lunch out on the town and a great value for the professional service being provided. My problem is the change in position of PCGS and their warranty to where a doctored coin in one of their holders is now the owners problem. Not sure exactly what the warranty covers now if they can use the "wasn't apparent" when graded argument. What about if I let it turn solid black, would PCGS take it off the market then, just let a Damaged coin trade continuously in a graded holder?

I think PCGS is walking a slippery slope that could affect their brand value even if it lowers their warranty payout in the short term. JMHO

keyman64 · March 29, 2014 8:01AM

Best of luck crypto! I hope you will update us with new photos after the conservation!
Here is my before/after PCGS Conservation that cost me about $100 just a few months back.

BEFORE:

AFTER:

crypto79 · March 29, 2014 8:24AM

If anybody can save it it is them. Why are 73s so hard to find in AU

Unknown · March 29, 2014 8:27AM

This content has been removed.

crypto79 · March 29, 2014 8:32AM

<< 

<< If anybody can save it it is them. Why are 73s so hard to find in AU >>

Aren't they equally harder to find/acquire in ms? >>

Surprisingly no, I see a dozen "UNCs" for every holdered xf-AU. Granted that is only a few dozen UNCs which isn't common but I just have never seen a perfect AU for sale in 7-8 years

Unknown · March 29, 2014 8:48AM

This content has been removed.

crypto79 · March 29, 2014 8:52AM

Something like 660 hammer + 10% but yes

I saw it too but it was still better than my 53 at the time.

Don't get me wrong PCGS's point is logical: well it didn't look like that when we slabbed it and the holders aren't air tight so we can't control that so we should be liable or if they didn't see the PVC and so on. But at the end of the day I think they have to ask themselves if they want rotten coins in their graded holders. I will conserve my mistakes and get white semi-mistakes but most will not esp on cheaper coins which are where most beginners play. How many shaddy dealer who buy problem TPG coins at huge discounts and pass them off at normal prices before it becomes a mainstream problem? I guess one could say that goes on now but I think the scale will get much larger without the mechanism pulling bad coins off the market.

Question?

What happens in 10 years when there is a glut of bad coins that aren't worth conservation but are next to worthless because of their look or PVC damage ect in TPG holders and they are being pushed on the unsuspecting much like the old raw days because they don't qualify for warranty? I maintain that the warranty service biggest mission was to get bad coins out of holders more than protect customer directly. I would wager that lots of claims were by dealers.

What does that do to brand values of the TPG holders when new collectors pay their dues on holdered coins instead of raw?

Does this officially kill a sight unseen market for TPG coins?

Warranty inquiry (coin quickly turned in holder) updated march 14

Comments

Leave a Comment