NGC Fatty Question...
michaelkp
Posts: 52 ✭✭
Would there be any there any reason to keep an NGC fatty slab in lieu of trying to crossover the coin. Are these slabs desirable in the marketplace? (Like PCGS rattlers/OGH's).
Just wondering... Thanks for the feedback!
Just wondering... Thanks for the feedback!
0
Comments
The fat holders allowed further toning, something not happening anywhere near as fast in the newer NGC holders. Yes, the old fatties leaked air.
<< <i>Some people think the old fat NGC holdered coins are worth more because the grading standards were more conservative at that time. Personally, I think most all fat holdered coins that were undergraded have already been upgraded. What is left is properly graded by today's standards. JMHO
The fat holders allowed further toning, something not happening anywhere near as fast in the newer NGC holders. Yes, the old fatties leaked air. >>
And the label helps the toning as well.
siliconvalleycoins.com
The only reasons that I would cross an NGC fattie to a new PCGS holder would be:
1) If I really needed the coin for a registry
2) If I were preparing to sell the coin and KNEW that it was a lock upgrade. This presupposes that I have complete confidence in my own grading abilities.
I have crossed 4 NGC fatties to PCGS - two proof Mercury dimes and two toned BTW commem halves. One of each upgraded to 66, and one of each stayed the same at 65.
What I lost on the fattie premium I made up on the upgrades.
If neither of those two reasons exist for me, I just leave the coin alone.
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
If I may ask a further question, if there are some predominate scratches on the holder and some rips on the holograph part that helps verify the holders authenticity, would you still keep it in the same holder? Or would you get it reholdered?
It also matters on what coin and grade it is, of course. If an upgrade is not worth much, or the grading fees cost as much as the coin, (many Mercs for instance), then leave as is.
here is something to think about-Albanese was the finalizer for those fatty slabs at NGC...he founded and ran the place for many years. good piece of history.
in the end, the marketplace demands pcgs period
Please do not start by describing the NGC slab instead at least sharing the series, date and grade so one can consider more than just a slab. I will not consider a holder over the look of the actual coin in suggesting a value. Not all coins at the same grade are created equal- and that is before consideration for the plastic holder.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
NGC fatties also include the gold stenciled reverse lettering in use only to around 1990...long before gradeflation. Those slabs are very much in demand and should normally exceed today's typical TPG quality. The hologram reverses were in play up to the mid or later 1990's -when gradeflation was already under way.
I'm partial to both of these older holders and usually won't touch them, preferring to get them green/gold CAC'd instead. Albanese was with NGC until 1998 as a board member, even if not in the grading room. So as I see it, he had a hand in final output of NGC through 1998. I have a number of NGC coins slabbed by 1990 or earlier that didn't sticker at CAC. So that's puzzling since JA did finalized those coins back in the early years.
I've run across QUITE a few NGC fatty coins that I've cracked out (stupidly) that have actually DROPPED a grade or two plus a designation. But, I've done more dealings on the other side of the spectrum, so, I'm impartial to them. It always comes down to buy the COIN not the SLAB...
I remember when NGC was a newborn. I love their early graded MS gold pieces b/c a lot of those coins would have a frosty/creamy surface.
I don't think it is puzzling at all. If Coin "X" is a low end 65, JA would have been correct to put it in a 65 holder as a finalizer but then reject the coin as a CAC principal. Of course, no one is consistent either, so there will always be normal variation.
Like in any holder, grading is subjective. I have sent in half a dozen fatties to CAC, everyone of them beaned. So it is a matter of selecting the right ones and they grade well by todays standards.
Best, SH
I was actually going to posit the same question today. Went to the SDB and pulled out a bunch of fatties that have been there for over 20 years, thinking I would send in to PCGS for the monthly special - no cross/ no fee. I'm thinking that is the best choice since, A) they are all Franklins, and grading standards for them have definitely changed in those years,
they were fattied before the TPGs were using the FBL designation, and some of them are FBL, and C) selling them, not keeping them, and D) an NGC fattie, even with a green or gold bean, but without a deserved FBL on the slab, is a bastard of a grade.
Then again, I can remember years ago sending in 2 hundred coin boxes of rattlers for reslabbing, and regretting it ever since.