PCGS Genuine

NorthIdahoFree · August 21, 2015 12:42PM

Hi everyone,

This is my first thread on Collectors Universe. I wanted to start with an oldie but one I find increasingly interesting: the Genuine designation.

There are three separate conversations I wanted to seek opinion on.

1) Should PCGS seek greater differentiation among the "Genuine" coins?

Coins that were smoothed, tooled/whizzed, filled, DIY/restorer plugged, toning, and altered should be borderline body bag coins. Thinking of Draped bust coins, a numismatic artist can pretty recreate a very attractive coin, with XF or AU details, but what would that even mean?

Next level would be coins that are damaged. Some of the mounted coins can look terrible or pretty decent. I place planchet flaws here since some of these add history while others are no linger coins.

Coins that polished, cleaned, etc via boneheadery or naivete is borderline criminal but to me but less criminal that a guy with a dremel actively deceiving. And cleaning is still working with a decent, undamaged coin. Also, many coins were cleaned ages ago and a decent patina has built up.

Scratches are the next level. Some scratches are simply lacking age to even out. I have seen XF details that if cracked out and rubbed a bit with age would grade at VF35 or even XF40. I see these as superior--all else equal--to the coins that were intentionally altered or damaged. Many coins here are super close to gradable

Finally, there is the old plugged coins. I place these at the top of the heap. Mind you, I am not talking about DIY or even restorer quality plugging but the kind of plugging done by the Mint in the early days. I saw a cool 1792 half-dime on eBay for $29K. It was PCGS Genuine with VF details (me thinks). The remark on the holder was that it was plugged. Yet when I looked closely (sad to say the photo did not allow for a really close up look--grrrr), it was clear that the letters were stamped over the plug. So the coin was plugged as a blank and then placed in the press. It seems to me that such a coin should have been gradable.

So given the wide range of offenses, I wonder if PCGS should break up Genuine, into "Genuine" and "Genuine +/Nearly Gradable." Right now, the burden is on the buyer, but with so many horrible offenses out there on eBay, etc. I think lovers of these old coins would be well served with that differentiation (just like CAC offers differentiation at the top end).

OK. I felt good to release. Now, what do you all think?

NIDF

BY the way, copied and pasted from PCGS for your reference.
82 Filed Rims Rim(s) and/or edge is filed. (more) Yes Yes
83 Peeling Lamination Potential for sealing damage. (more) Yes No
84 Holed and/or Plugged Any filled or non-filled hole. (more) Yes Yes
91 Questionable Color Any artificial re-toning & dipped copper. (more) No Yes
92 Cleaning Harsh cleaning or polishing. (more) No Yes
93 Planchet Flaw Generally large & prominent flaw(s). (more) No Yes
94 Altered Surfaces Any applied substance (wax, putty, lacquer). (more) No Yes
95 Scratch(s) Large & prominent scratch(s). (more) No Yes
97 Environmental Damage Corrosion, excessive toning, verdigris. (more) No Yes
98 Damage Any metal movement. (more) Yes Yes

lasvegasteddy · August 21, 2015 12:51PM

welcome aboard

surely what you address here....will be by someone in the future
as this sounds like another sticker company waiting to be

a sticker for this
a sticker for that
genuine stickers...why not

OldIndianNutKase · August 21, 2015 1:13PM

NIDF, welcome to the Twighlight Zone of coin grading. I think it important to understand that gradine standards, especially for details coins, tends to hinge on what is "market acceptable". I think the term "market acceptable" refers to sophisticated collectors and knowledgable dealers, and not to casual collectors. This is because the TPG provides a grading guarantee with a financial guarantee as to the stated grade.

I have submitted numerous coins that did not grade because of Questionable Color, code 91. Typically proof IHC's that may have been dipped to make them grade Red. Huge price uptick for RD vs RB or BN. Never ad a BN or RB IHC receive a .91 grade. I don't waste my time or money on RD IHC's anymore unless they are already certified. I still have a few .91's that look very good to me, but maybe they will just tone put to nice RB someday?

I think the current "details" grade is sufficient for market assessment purposes, and are indicative of true market value. But in the case of code .91 I would like to know a numerical grade as well. Some coins seem to "details" grade with a numberical value, and maybe someone with knowledge can explain why?

OINK

CuKevin · August 21, 2015 1:19PM

Letters or detail on top of the plug does not mean it was done at the mint. Skilled hole pluggers can add the details that are supposed to be where the hole was.

Baley · August 21, 2015 3:34PM

I'd like to see a third party that stickers PCGS and NGC "genuine" holdered coins with a reasonable "net" grade

the key, though, is, they (or someone) would have to make a market in the stickered coins.

Just saying, "it's worth $xx", with no financial backing, would not be worth very much to collectors.

They need the liquidity in order to trade at the price, and right now, the market for problem coins is very narrow.

I've got a couple, I like them, but I don't kid myself that they'd be easy to sell, because they wouldn't, not for any decent price at least.

TopographicOceans · August 21, 2015 4:31PM

It used to be only ANACS would certify "problem" coins and they used a NET numeric grade.
Then NGC started slabbing genuine coins with mnemonic details grades and PCGS followed suit a few years ago.

I like TPG Genuine grading, mostly because I no longer get body bagged coins. But I think problem coins should be slabable as genuine and notating the issue(s)

But I don't see any reason to expand to a Genuine+ nor add any new problem reasons.
They do seem to be more forgiving based on the what the coin is.

I really don't like the concept of "market acceptable" grading and would prefer consistent grading standards.

ambro51 · August 21, 2015 8:59PM

Writing on a tomb

BillJones · August 22, 2015 12:53AM

Let me say at the start that I avoid coins in "genuine" holders. My attitude is if I can't afford a decent example of a coin, I won't own it. Having said that, here are my views.

Not all collectors feel the same about various defects. I think the worst defect of all is holed. Everyone agrees that a hole is a huge problem, especially if it is located in a vital spot, like the date.

A repaired hole, if it is done well, is a mitigating factor. And yes, the letters you see over repaired holes were not put there by the mint at the time the piece was struck. They are the work of the those who repair the coins. Ethics dictate that those repairs should be slightly "off" so that the hole repair can be seen without totally ruining the esthetics of the piece. But I have seen a few such repairs that were so well done that it was very hard to spot them.

Next is big scratches and mutilation. These can also be repaired, but it's been my observation that such repairs are easier to spot.

Cleaning and polishing come next. To polishing is worse than cleaning because the metal has been moved to a greater degree. I have bought coins that had been hairlined from cleaning. Sometimes such coins get straight grades from the major services, with perhaps a net reduction in grading points.

The final area is mint caused defects. These include planchet problems that were on the coin when it was struck. They also include clipped planchets, adjustment marks, planchet laminations and even massive die failures. These defects can enhance the value of modern coins, but they can lower the value of older pieces.

For example yes ago I bought a very nice, AU-58, 1795 half cent that had a tiny planchet clip. The coin was raw, and the deal with the dealer was I would purchase the piece at a premium price if it came back without a mention of the planchet clip. If the clip was mentioned on the slab, the deal was off because that would have taken a few thousand dollars off the value of the piece. The clip was something like 1 or 2 % and the coin came back "normal" so I own it.

I hope that this answers part of your questions.

BryceM · August 22, 2015 1:03AM

Good to see a fellow Idaho collector here.

In general, there seems to be little incentive for the TPGs to become involved in stratifying coins that they don't feel are gradable. Grade guarantee and warranty issues would be a headache.

Things get blurry when talking about early federal issues or very rare coins. For the most part though, there is already partial compensation for this in the grading. A borderline rarity might grade (or net grade) while a borderline common coin will simply be flunked.

When I was very new to the scene, I bought a mint-sealed 2009 UHR coin and submitted it for grading. It came back "cleaned". I contacted PCGS and asked them to review it. They then assigned it a grade of MS65. I was relieved, but in retrospect, it made virtually no difference. That coin (which indeed was a poor specimen) was worth more raw than in either a genuine or MS65 holder.

joeykoins · August 22, 2015 2:53AM

Hey,

to school! You will be taught in various areas of coins, as well as, ethics and manners here on our forum. Once again, Welcome aboard and have fun! Your topic is very interesting. I was just thinking of sending in a Morgan Silver dollar (1921s) that my father engraved my name and birth date. I wanted to see if PCGS will "Genuine"it for me for a keepsake. Good Luck in your questions and hunting down certain coins.-joey

winky · August 22, 2015 6:51AM

WELCOME. This is too long for me to read tho.

asheland · August 24, 2015 5:40AM

CoinJunkie · August 24, 2015 8:12AM

<< <i>Right now, the burden is on the buyer, [...] >>

Mine may be the minority view, but the ultimate burden will always be on the buyer no matter
how much verbiage, stickerage, etc. ends up on the slab. I own and have seen plenty of graded coins
with scratches, for example. It's all a matter of degree as well as a matter of opinion. What is acceptable
to one collector (or TPG) may be unacceptable to another.

PCGS Genuine

Comments

Leave a Comment