Hmmm, something seems amiss...

@UrbanDecay04 said:
Just looked it up... there's absolutely nothing wrong with

To be fair, if it were a fake slab they often use a real cert number.

The dot matrix style of label was only used with the rattler slabs. That is not a rattler slab. The PCGS Coin Facts web site has a "Museum of Coin Holders" which shows a pic of each slab style used by PCGS.

@TomB said:
If I recall correctly, I think APMEX will sometimes do mock-ups of holders with slab info or coin images dropped into them. I seem to recall seeing some other combinations in the past, too.

You are correct!

https://www.apmex.com/product/41105/1924-20-saint-gaudens-gold-double-eagle-ms-63-pcgs-rattler

@MsMorrisine said:
no guarantee you get the coin pictured either.

that may be good with the black schmutz above Liberty's left arm.

Looks like there is more of that black schmutz elsewhere on the obverse as well.

@ricko said:
The last numbers on the label in the OP are 6059426.... The number posted by @UrbanDecay04 is 06059426... an extra digit. Cheers, RickO

When I enter cert #6059426 into the PCGS verification page, it returns #06059426, same as the screenshot from @UrbanDecay04. The difference is a leading zero. I do not believe that it is significant.

FWIW, the pop numbers appear to have changed since yesterday afternoon.
The "Population" at MS63 is now 93,520 (+17), and the "Pop Higher" is now 169,522 (+69).

@ricko said:
The last numbers on the label in the OP are 6059426.... The number posted by @UrbanDecay04 is 06059426... an extra digit. Cheers, RickO

Is the coin verifiable with and without the leading zero? I'm giving odds that it is. Pride goeth before a fall

That's likely because after OGH's were initially replaced by blue labels, PCGS continued to use the same numbering system for cert #'s as before. Why change? But when you run out of 7-digit numbers, 8 digits is next. My understanding is that when our hosts first went over to this new code, the first integer related to some service tier. "0" meant "no determinable tier", which seems possible only if the old cert # is retained. That coding protocol changed when CAM and DCAM began to be applied to proofs. Before that, it was all 7-digit coding. No one seemed to care.

FWIW, I designed the internal software for NGC, the highlight of which (for submitters) was a reverse directory approach that eliminated the seriously cumbersome task of looking up every coin number. Their system coding internals have changed greatly too.

The above is my surmise conflated with anecdotal examples from other OCD/numbers geek/slab/coin enthusiasts.

I used to love seeing coins in auctions with 7-digit codes. It was maybe two years later when they went to 8 digits. Every single coin with a 7-digit number can be classified (as a grading generation) to be the analog for OGH 2.0.