Options
PCGS Reconsideration thoughts.
Clackamas1
Posts: 774 ✭✭✭✭✭
I have 8 coins that I really want to get imaged for my sets, I thought about doing regrades but since all of them are CAC I figured it would be best to do reconsideration. A couple of them are top pops, and 1 is a 1/1 no CAC. I really just want the truview but if they are going to get cracked why not reconsideration. BTW - I am puzzled on why not regrade but one of the best in the business who is a friend said - do - not on CAC coins because you may not get it back.
0
Comments
The Reconsideration service has very few downsides if you are looking to preserve the holder. However, if you simply want images then you can ship the coins to PCGS and ask for TrueViews only. In my experience, it is best to contact the photography department first and then write "DO NOT CRACK SLABS-IMAGES ONLY!" several times on the submission form and I also put sticky notes on each coin that said the same thing.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Some of the slabs are like 30 years old and just roached.
I could be wrong, but if you pay for Reconsideration and they don’t upgrade, they may not reholder them.
From what you say, just pay for Reholder Service with True View. Low cost, new holder, True View, and it retains the same cert number, so you’ll get your CAC stickers automatically reapplied. As @TomB says, you should still write plenty of notes to retain the same cert numbers.
If you choose Regrade, several people have had success with sending detailed photos and a paper trail to CAC in NJ when you send them these coins with new cert numbers. Me, I’d be nervous, but as noted, others have had success. But no automatics!
Steve
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
I have had 100% success in crossovers with CAC at the same grade. I did document well. The coins are not generic, kinda well known, e.g top of the heap. These coins too are the cream, I have a couple of them that are CAC that I think are undergraded and it kills me. I have a 64+ 1868 S 25C.
That coin has toned nicely in the last 15 years. It is a 67+ technically. BTW it is a POP 1/4 which is total BS because most of those above are crack certs that have never been repatriated.
Recon is the way to go for CAC coins because it's (usually) worth losing the sticker if the coin upgrades. However, you want to make sure you specifically request in-slab trueviews for coins that do not upgrade (you might not get the in-slab photos otherwise). Although I'm sure your purpose is probably for the registry, sending the coins to CMQ for $20 each will get you VERY high quality slab photos and possibly a CMQ sticker.
CMQ will take high-res slab photos of coins that don’t sticker?
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
Did I stutter?
Yes, the photos are made available to the submitter but do not show up for a coin lookup.
It depends on how much risk you want to take, and how much effort you want to put into this.
A conservative strategy would be sending to PCGS for Reholder, then to CAC for Resticker, then back to PCGS for Reconsideration. This is probably what I would do, especially if I highly valued the CAC approval.
A risky strategy is just sending them all for Regrade and rolling the dice. You could get a bigger upgrade than you might on Reconsideration, but you could also lose CAC stickers even on coins that don’t upgrade.
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
Lol. Good to know. I was thinking of sending a few their way and that’s a nice added value for a few that I don’t have any professional photos of.
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
Just drool here...wow!
That coin is in DLH's territory!
Just an FYI, under reconsideration if the coins don't upgrade, no Trueviews taken. I found this out the hard way. $ 1K worth of hard.
I think if you specifically request in-slab TV's for the no-upgrades they will take them. No reason why they shouldn't. I'm guessing they just don't by default because an in-slab TV is not quite as good as a raw photo.
Thanks this is the dilemma - that coin is a technical 67+ - shit it is actually a 69. It was dipped, no doubt, but it is a CAC PCGS 64+. It is clearly the finest known of the the date/mint. Don't get me wrong it is still a 30K coin. But it irks me that the grade is not what it should be. Mind you I own a bunch of top pops for the era. This one coin just gets me boiling. I really don't care about the money delta; I will be dead when it is sold - I just want the coin to be honored.
This sounds very expensive and high risk, sending high value coins through the mail system three times is going to cost a lot and the risk of theft is enough that I would not.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
Objectively, the risk of theft/loss is probably under 1%. In my experience probably under 0.2%. But I know some people have worse luck, maybe I am lucky. Either way, by the math it's not rationale to make decisions based on risk of theft with these odds, particularly with registered mail where risk of mishap is probably under .01%.
For a lousy TV, too much risk for me.
Understand that the op would have these insured, so it is not the monetary loss I would be worried about, if these went missing how would you ever replace them? It's the risk of losing something that is irreplaceable that would give me pause.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
Serious question. Will pcgs still do through-slab shots now that Phil is gone?
I do not want them, some of my 30+ year slabs are so roached they would be awful to get imaged.
Sure, I'm still wondering the answer to this question though.
Also, drive up the street and I'll polish the slabs for you. A little headlight polish works wonders on those old slabs.
Does that really work?
I use Novus #2, then#1. Works good with a little elbow grease. Just don't rub the hologram off!
Not just for TrueViews—I believe OP's desire was for upgrades. And like @ProofCollection mentioned, using Registered Mail has an extremely low risk. And personally, I drop my all submissions to PCGS at shows throughout the year, to eliminate even that risk (and cost).
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
I submitted three groups at the ANA in Pittsburgh under reconsideration. CS rep. knew my priority was Trueviews. I had the boxes checked on my form. When the coins were returned, no Trueview pictures. When I called, I was told no pictures unless the coins upgraded which I wasn't told by the CS rep at Pittsburgh. Our hosts did make it right. Just had to send them back in. They were great about it, I couldn't be happier about the service I received. To the OP, just make sure you know what you're getting.
Here's an example of a coin in an OGH, severely undergraded but I didn't want to re-holder. The slab face was really scuffed in the central area over the coin. I wanted a picture so I used a very light amount of Meguiar's PlastX on it and it turned out nice and clear. Here's the resulting Trueview through the slab.
If your coins are in holders that are "30 years old and just roached" then Reconsideration might not be the best option unless you make an effort to clean up the slab and increase visibility and clarity first. After all, Reconsideration looks at the coin through the PCGS plastic first and if PCGS cannot see the coin well then they are not likely to give it any benefit of the doubt when it comes to a grade.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Excellent observation, Tom!
Good point, I did not think about that aspect.