Can someone explain to me why my Semi-PL 1876-S Trade $1 came back from PCGS Genuine, questionable c

Goldbully · April 24, 2015 7:54AM

Any help would be appreciated. Needless to say, I am extremely disappointed and do not want to make a mistake like this again.

The coin is really beautiful in hand, and through my eyes, I see an NT toned Trade $1.

Obviously PCGS is the expert, and I value their expert opinion.

Thank you for looking.

RCDB · April 24, 2015 7:55AM

WOW, OMG, & %$##%*#@*&^^%$#!!!!!!!

COALPORTER · April 24, 2015 7:58AM

Looks like is missing two stars ? What happened?

Stuart · April 24, 2015 8:00AM

<< Can someone explain to me why my Semi-PL 1876-S Trade $1 came back from PCGS Genuine, questionable color, Unc. Details >>

GoldBully, In reply to your above posted question, from the images posted I do not see anything that would indicate a Genuine - Questionable Color designation.

The coin looks beautiful and very eye-appealing to me.

keyman64 · April 24, 2015 8:00AM

I see no color problems with that coin.

If the grade doesn't fit, you must resubmit!

Moldnut · April 24, 2015 8:00AM

I like it, try her again. That's what they want anyway.

Stuart · April 24, 2015 8:01AM

For comparison purposes, in Oct 2014 I purchased this 1876-S Trade Dollar in an NGC AU Details - Chopmarked slab...

1876-S Trade Dollar - Blue & Brown Dual-Sided Toner - (Type 1 Obverse & Reverse) - NGC AU Details - Chopmarked

relicsncoins · April 24, 2015 8:12AM

Simple explanation. Humans grading coins, occasionally make mistakes, and they made a mistake.

Stuart · April 24, 2015 8:13AM

GoldBully, I also found the following PCGS Secure image on their web site, using their Cert Verification application for your coin's serial number...

Perhaps this image may add clarity to our discussion in reply to your question...

tradedollarnut · April 24, 2015 8:15AM

Hmmmm. 50/50

jcping · April 24, 2015 8:24AM

Come on. With that finger print on obv 2 o'clock, this coin can't be AT

Moldnut · April 24, 2015 8:26AM

Sniffer said something?

291fifth · April 24, 2015 8:28AM

Probably cleaned and artificially retoned by someone with knowledge of chemistry. This has been going on for quite some time now. I recall hearing about professional chemists being employed by coin people at least 15 years ago.

Stuart · April 24, 2015 8:46AM

<< Sniffer said something? >>

Derek, You may have uncovered the answer, since the coin was submitted for grading via PCGS Secure.

I wonder if it would have Mint State Numerically certified if submitted via other method than PCGS secure??

AUandAG · April 24, 2015 8:51AM

Lots of little parallel scratches would indicate a cleaning, would it not?

Toning looks okay but it may have been someone trying to hide the wipe.

bob

GoldCoin98 · April 25, 2015 12:58AM

Crack it out and try again

ColonelJessup · April 25, 2015 1:23AM

<< Crack it out and try again >>

+1 ...

Kosher

sparky64 · April 25, 2015 1:31AM

<< Hmmmm. 50/50 >>

Shamika · April 25, 2015 2:01AM

Wow, that piece looks NT all day long. Absolute beautiful.

braddick · April 25, 2015 2:04AM

The toning appears a bit too thick in areas and perhaps the catchall is to label that as QT.

machoponcho · April 25, 2015 12:44PM

Purple/blue spotty toning below the date is slightly questionable. Again with the 2nd star to the right of the head. PCGS generally does not like the blue/purple combination unless it is a smooth transition between the two or it transitions to a deeper part of the toning spectrum(blue turns into yellow then purple then green etc). Here it is spotty and starts and stops in places. This piece does not have it THAT badly, but I can see them 91ing this one about half the time. It should eventually make it into a straight grade holder.

Kove · April 25, 2015 1:43PM

I'd try it again. Too bad they just took your money on that one, though.

lkeigwin · April 25, 2015 2:04PM

Resubmit it, GB. It'll grade problem-free.

Bummer to have to pay the fee again.
Lance.

valente151 · April 25, 2015 2:07PM

<< Purple/blue spotty toning below the date is slightly questionable. Again with the 2nd star to the right of the head. PCGS generally does not like the blue/purple combination unless it is a smooth transition between the two or it transitions to a deeper part of the toning spectrum(blue turns into yellow then purple then green etc). Here it is spotty and starts and stops in places. This piece does not have it THAT badly, but I can see them 91ing this one about half the time. It should eventually make it into a straight grade holder. >>

Agree with this. The toning on yours actually reminded be exactly of the toning on this coin. I bought it in a straight grade, cracked and resubbed, came back 91. Tried it ATS and got the straight grade and the upgrade. I think if I had tried it again at PC, it would have worked there, but I had a sub going to NGC the day I got it back so I threw it in with that one. I wouldn't give up on this coin, try it again at PC or ATS and it should make it into a straight grade.

karma32 · April 25, 2015 2:55PM

The coin has mottled toning, as if the toning has been done quickly as opposed to natural toning over time. It's not natural, especially under the arm next to the breast looks just doesn't fit. When you said semi-PL and AT, I immediately think covering up some cleaning. I think the secure plus is much more indicative of the true nature of the coin. It's a coin worthy of trying to AT especially to cover up a negative.

cecropiamoth · April 25, 2015 3:35PM

If the coin went through Secure Plus is it possible to resubmit it? I thought these coins are digitally fingerprinted so there would be no chance that it would straight grade on a crack and resub as it is now in a database. Am I incorrect in this thinking?

Jeff

machoponcho · April 25, 2015 10:20PM

<< If the coin went through Secure Plus is it possible to resubmit it? I thought these coins are digitally fingerprinted so there would be no chance that it would straight grade on a crack and resub as it is now in a database. Am I incorrect in this thinking?

Jeff >>

It is possible to resubmit it and get an upgrade going from a Secure MS65 to Secure MS66, for example. It is just a little harder to convince the graders the coin is something else even though nothing has been done to the coin since last submission and that Secure picture was taken. I have heard of upgrade by grade even though it was Secured before. I have not heard of a Secure 91 Questionable Color going subsequently going into a Secure straight grade but I'm sure it could happen. But then if you submit it non Secure this time around will they check it to see if it has been Secured before? That I don't know. If you submit it under the Secure service, do they always check to see if it has been Secured before? Don't know, either.

Yes, valente151, lot of the same thing going on with your 20 center.

CoinZip · April 25, 2015 10:29PM

I'll tell you the same thing I tell a lot of people Goldbully.

When you send a coin in to a grading company, you are paying for that company's opinion. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, even the grading company.

lkeigwin · April 25, 2015 11:19PM

<< If the coin went through Secure Plus is it possible to resubmit it? I thought these coins are digitally fingerprinted so there would be no chance that it would straight grade on a crack and resub as it is now in a database. >>

The simplest thing to do is bypass SP via a regular submission where the coin is not scanned and sniffed.

FWIW, the digital scan is not for the purpose of ID'ing previously BB'd coins so they can be BB'd again. Yes, the coin will be matched, and its checkered past will be revealed. But it will get regraded in the normal fashion. This is assuming it has no banned substances the Sniffer detected. Still, I wouldn't go this route. Why publicize that it was BB'd previously?
Lance.

TwoSides2aCoin · April 25, 2015 11:38PM

The keyboard is good therapy and I hate using contractor's tools from another trade , but sometimes some things are under greater scrutiny than others.

Plastic and opinions are that way, too. Sometimes you just gotta break out and let it out.

Enjoy a cup o joe

Connecticoin · April 25, 2015 11:51PM

A good soak in acetone may get rid of whatever the PCGS sniffer detected. If any of the color is removed, then you know it was added on AT. Then submit again, however, I would probably try ATS when submitting again.

291fifth · April 25, 2015 11:59PM

While most seem to think that you should continue to throw good money after bad, I say cut your losses and sell this problem now.

EagleEye · April 26, 2015 2:21AM

Johnnie Cochran once said "if the grade dosn't fit, you must resubmit", at least I think he did.

ricko · April 26, 2015 2:30AM

While I have seen coins with this type of tarnish... this appears to be artificially created...and likely to cover some flaws...the lines in the upper right of the obverse are parallel...not a fingerprint.... I agree with the decision at this point. Cheers, RickO

roadrunner · April 26, 2015 2:31AM

<< While most seem to think that you should continue to throw good money after bad, I say cut your losses and sell this problem now. >>

I'd probably agree. Thing is, it's very hard to get good money (or even acceptable money) for coins of this quality that aren't in graded holders. When it comes to AT, I usually try both services before giving up. I've cracked a number of PCGS and NGC toned seated coins out that ended up coming back AT on the next go-around. Standards tighten up over the years. So what worked 10 years ago might not pass today. The one exception to my "rule" was a MS64 $10 Lib that I cracked out because it had exceptionally clean surfaces in line with a 65/66 coin. It came back PCGS BB and NGC BB. I gave up and shipped her off to auction. The auction house resubmitted w/o my knowlege and voila....MS66. I was willing to sell that coin for 63+ money raw, but no gold wholesaler/dealer would give it to me (a 25% loss). They all offered raw, mid range 63 money (a 38% loss). I had zero choice but to send it to auction, and wait 3 months to get paid. Well, I got a lot more than 63+ money for it (3X).

I agree with TDN on the 50/50 look of this coin. It does a similar look to many AT jobs that are covering up problems. Some AT jobs are over original toning to just touch up some wiped areas.

Wabbit2313 · April 26, 2015 8:25AM

Sometimes coins are toned to try and hide damage/graffiti and the coin get the lesser of 2 evils with a grade of AT. X marks the spot and something funky going on higher up on the coin. My only explanation anyway.

cecropiamoth · April 26, 2015 3:39PM

Regarding the X marks the spot, is it really possible that would be considered graffiti? Those stars are so small and that X is just a tiny bit bigger than the star (and so very shallow at that). While it is almost a perfect X, for it being so small, I'm not sure that could really be considered 'man-made' graffiti. One heck of an eye spotting the X though, that is for sure!

Jeff

abitofthisabitofthat · April 26, 2015 9:11PM

I would love to see the coin in hand. The very shallow stars, in an area where the dentils are not compromised, is very, very suspicious to me. I suspect that this coin has been worked harder than people think. I suspect that damage was smoothed and the toning was applied to hide the work. A fingerprint added to the area can also help obscure what happened.

Only conjecture without seeing in hand, of course.

s4ny · April 26, 2015 10:46PM

The comments on this thread really make the argument for CAC if so many
think it could get a PCGS or NGC grade.

oreville · April 26, 2015 11:21PM

TDN was generous with his 50/50.

Parenthood a 2nd time is mellowing him. LOL.

Broadstruck · April 26, 2015 11:34PM

Goldbully, Not to worry as I'll make you whole with an offer of bullion spot, plus $1 face, and will cover all your lost submission & shipping expenditures just for kicks

CoinJunkie · April 27, 2015 1:14AM

<< The comments on this thread really make the argument for CAC if so many
think it could get a PCGS or NGC grade. >>

An ignorant statement, in my view. Any time you render a binary judgment based on subjective
evaluation, there will be borderline examples that can go either way. It doesn't matter who is
doing the evaluation. I can guarantee you that many coins that have a sticker only received
it after multiple submissions.

Can someone explain to me why my Semi-PL 1876-S Trade $1 came back from PCGS Genuine, questionable c

Comments

Leave a Comment