Mistakes made by TPG companies on the slabs.

winky · September 12, 2015 12:52AM

I just got a 1877S F111 seated dime graded by NGC and NGC slabbed it as 1877 P instead of S.

PerryHall · September 12, 2015 1:07AM

I have several slabs where they got the grades wrong on the label.

johnny9434 · September 12, 2015 1:08AM

<< I have several slabs where they got the grades wrong on the label. >>

i got a few to.

JJSingleton · September 12, 2015 1:08AM

<< I have several slabs where they got the grades wrong on the label. >>

Broadstruck · September 12, 2015 1:19AM

This is a HT-293 variety instead of a HT-57 which has a Phoenix rising from flames obverse instead of a building.

Not sure if the wrong token got in the wrong holder but this MS63RB betters two MS65BN's I've sold.

DennisH · September 12, 2015 2:30AM

I have seen many slabbed coins where the date and/or mint mark stated on the holder was wrong.

BryceM · September 12, 2015 2:32AM

It's always easy to spot the outliers in any data set........

ronctx · September 12, 2015 2:57AM

1885-O in a 1886 holder. This has been corrected.

oih82w8 · September 12, 2015 2:59AM

I have heard of several slabs NOT having the proper attribution added and had to be sent back repeatedly...I hope that I don't have to resort to that with my present submission, three of four attribution noted...one remains for three weeks now, stuck in queue.

LindeDad · September 12, 2015 3:04AM

Most submission forms have a statement about the submitter checking the coins on return. Have found the grading companies usually fix the mistakes pretty quick.

keets · September 12, 2015 3:16AM

I have several slabs where they got the grades wrong on the label.

POTD!!!

humor aside, I think the use of the term "mechanical error" by any TPG including PCGS is rather cowardly, and I have them by most every TPG including PCGS. as a matter of fact I just received a "mechanical error" back from NGC that was submitted for the same thing. they got the catalogue number correct this time but still the wrong date, absolutely ridiculous. if a coin is clearly dated one thing and the label says another there is an obvious "human error" involved that the TPG should just accept responsibility for.

for my entire life I have been held to account for my mistakes at work.

PerryHall · September 12, 2015 3:40AM

<< I have several slabs where they got the grades wrong on the label.

POTD!!!

humor aside, I think the use of the term "mechanical error" by any TPG including PCGS is rather cowardly, and I have them by most every TPG including PCGS. as a matter of fact I just received a "mechanical error" back from NGC that was submitted for the same thing. they got the catalogue number correct this time but still the wrong date, absolutely ridiculous. if a coin is clearly dated one thing and the label says another there is an obvious "human error" involved that the TPG should just accept responsibility for.

for my entire life I have been held to account for my mistakes at work. >>

I have to agree. The term "mechanical error" never made sense to me. Sounds like a machine malfunctioned rather than a data input error on the part of a human employee. Let's call it what it is---"human error".

WoodenJefferson · September 12, 2015 3:41AM

Your bound to have a few mechanical errors out of 36,000,000 submissions but those errors represent just a minuscule percentage of the total that were correct.

ronctx · September 12, 2015 3:48AM

keets · September 12, 2015 3:55AM

Your bound to have a few mechanical errors out of 36,000,000 submissions but those errors represent just a minuscule percentage of the total that were correct.

you probably shouldn't cosign their BS. when someone make an input error to print the label they need to proof-read and correct their mistake. if they miss it, someone checks it after them when the are finished. it is simple --- multiple people need to pay closer attention to what they are doing.

morgansforever · September 12, 2015 4:08AM

Have had it for years, keepin it this way.

GRANDAM · September 12, 2015 5:28AM

This is a VERY nice coin,,,,,, I will offer you FULL PCGS Price Guide price for it,,,,,

<< Have had it for years, keepin it this way.

>>

morgansforever · September 12, 2015 5:43AM

GRANDAM, It's really not that nice, very baggy in hand and cloudy mirrors.
Gotta be the ugliest 79S in 63 I've seen.

PerryHall · September 12, 2015 5:43AM

I give up. What's wrong with the 1879-S Morgan slab?

morgansforever · September 12, 2015 5:45AM

CAM and DCAM is the designation for proof Morgans, not business strikes. It should've been PL not CAM.

GRANDAM · September 12, 2015 5:47AM

<< GRANDAM, It's really not that nice, very baggy in hand and cloudy mirrors.
Gotta be the ugliest 79S in 63 I've seen. >>

----------------------------------------------------

Good photo anyway,,,,,

PerryHall · September 12, 2015 6:23AM

<< CAM and DCAM is the designation for proof Morgans, not business strikes. It should've been PL not CAM. >>

Thanks. Are you sure it's not a rare branch mint proof?

morgansforever · September 12, 2015 6:33AM

<<Thanks. Are you sure it's not a rare branch mint proof?>>

I wish I was that lucky, the rims aren't square enough, it's undoubtedly a business struck Morgan.

Mistakes made by TPG companies on the slabs.

Comments

Leave a Comment