Washington Quarter Registry Thread

Thank you for the update @Whitewashqtr.

I just received 2 quarters back from the grading room. Here is the '51-S:

1951-S Washington Quarter MS65

The other one I will show later received a loftier grade. So stay tuned!

• Tim

@TomB said:
That 1951-S looks a lot better than MS65!

My thoughts as well.

Here is the other Washington Quarter just back from grading. It wasn't a totally bad day at the (grading) office following the MS65.

1953-S Washington Quarter PCGS MS66+

• Tim

In this week from last Sunday's GreatCollections auction. Coin has great overall luster in-hand and the reverse is very attractive, which makes up for the somewhat scratchy, less interesting obverse. MS66

@davewesen said:
I am really surprised this is only a 65

Yeah, if I thought it would have been a 65 coin, I wouldn't have sent it in. That was a disappointment. I conferred with others prior to the '51-S PC submission to get additional opinions so the return was not expected. My thinking was the '51-S and '53-S were at least 66's. My '52-S was held back because I am sure it is a 65 or less. Jason @erwindoc has been a good mentor in response to a few questions I have had. My '39-P is also close but not a good submission candidate either due to the reverse wing scratch. I have a DANSCO set without keys but also additional singles I am looking through for candidates:

1939-P

1952-S

• T

@Whitewashqtr said:
I am so confused. I sent this in raw as a 1952-S/S and it only came back as a 1952-S. The grade was as expected MS-65 but WTF. Can someone please tell me what I am missing? Is this not clearly an S/S coin? So frustrating!

Thanks

@Whitewashqtr said:

@Whitewashqtr said:
I am so confused. I sent this in raw as a 1952-S/S and it only came back as a 1952-S. The grade was as expected MS-65 but WTF. Can someone please tell me what I am missing? Is this not clearly an S/S coin? So frustrating!

Thanks

You have to mark "variety attribution" on the form and pay the extra money or they wont do it...

Yes Sir, it is!!

But I'm not crazy, am I? That's clear as day! Even in L.A.

I already received it back. They are such a pain. I really hate dealing with them. I sent them in in a PCGS box and forgot to put a note that I wanted the box back. I called them the day they received my order and they told me, "too bad, we cant find it and wont replace it". Plus, I was really unhappy with the grades I received.

Here are all the raw coins I sent in.

1939-S MS 66

1952 MS 67

1943 DDO FS-102 - MS 66
This was sitting in an NGC holder and not attributed so this was a good find.

1952-S/S or 1952-S MS-65

I've noticed less mistakes when I complete the submission form online as opposed to hand written hard copies. Which way did you submit?

@Whitewashqtr said:
Filled out the online submission form. No handwritten info of any kind. Box is clearly checked. But them charging me $9 for variety attribution. Here is a screen shot for that part of the form.

It seems you have a case to call them for a resolution and seek restitution from what you are stating.

@davewesen You have a good point. It could be that @Whitewashqtr has a variety, yes, but it does not match exactly the one recognized by PCGS. I have a similar issue with a 1907-S Barber Quarter that has two, very clear, RPM's but only one is recognized by PCGS. This means the submitter has to do some homework to be sure their variety directly matches the one recognized. The RPM might be very obvious but if it is not in Fivaz Cherrypickers, and PCGS does not have a ready-made designation, it won't get a variety label. Good point you make.

Looks more like the 502 to me

Which variety did they give the 1943? It for certain is not the FS-103. Maybe the 101 or 102

Good point Davewesen and thanks for interpreting that Sedulous. That actually makes sense that if they don't recognize it, then they can't attribute it. But it is clear and Kaleidoscope make a good point as well, it should be recognized. Clear as day. Maybe I have a one of a kind variety....lol.

In order. 68 then 67+

I would say the first coin is a 67+ and the bottom coin is a 68

This feels like a trick question.

Prior to the advent of the TPGs, I would much rather own the top coin rather than the bottom coin. However, with the value assigned to a TPG grade, I would prefer to own the MS68, whichever it might be.

The ‘53 on the top is the nicer coin IMO, but 68 seems generous given the quantity of hits on both sides, although I admit I’ve looked at very few 68s. I punched the cert# into the CAC lookup and it does not have a sticker.

@TomB said:
This feels like a trick question.

Prior to the advent of the TPGs, I would much rather own the top coin rather than the bottom coin. However, with the value assigned to a TPG grade, I would prefer to own the MS68, whichever it might be.

Or just own both then you don't have to choose. LOL