Biggest surprises in grade submissions?
logger7
Posts: 8,442 ✭✭✭✭✭
What are the biggest surprises you've had in grade submissions?
In terms of happy surprises in grade submissions, I'd say that upgrades I've had of tough coins, such as an "O" mint $20 from AU50 to 58; or in another case from ICG50 to NGC AU55. In another case a Bust half graded AU58PL at NGC which was in a lower grade holder at a second tier service. What surprises have you had possibly also with rare varieties you did not know the coin had?
3
Comments
Well, it was a modern(ish) Panama but 1980 100 Balboas went from ANACS 66 to PCGS 69PL. Occasionally grading seems a bit "subjective", but even coins I don't have a stake in have been surprised at: raw 66-67 appearing 1970 D half getting only a 65 at hosts & these were handpicked out of MANY. Went back and compared to other at grade or +1 in slabs and still like coins but of such minimal value that they will sty where they are...
Well, just Love coins, period.
76-CC DDR T$...I expected a 50, came back a 55 and then stickered.
Too many unpleasant surprises to list but becoming less frequent.
Chopmarked Trade Dollar Registry Set --- US & World Gold Showcase --- World Chopmark Showcase
I recently got back a $5 Indian in a holder that says it's a $10 Indian. I was pleasantly surprised as I just need to find someone who buys by the label/holder and NOT the coin.
HE>I
Crappy trueviews.
I am sure the cert will be promptly deactivated now that you posted it on the forum.
I'm always surprised when my perfectly wonderful flashy ___insert coin here_____ comes back as UNC Dets.
And I can't tell why....
1794 50c I expected to see come back AU details came back AU58. Big, big, big difference $ wise.
"It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
1835 British Farthing unc to Proof at NGC
DPOTD-3
'Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery'
CU #3245 B.N.A. #428
Don
This speaks to my belief that the graders are counselled to give submitters the best and fairest shake they can...usually. But generally got better grades at NGC than PCGS. I can just hear the business manager telling the graders, "Folks, we're here to make money for the submitters, always keep that in mind. Give them the best grades you can while upholding the integrity of our service".
PCGS 58'ed the 94 50c fwiw. Though I will tell you that I was told by a good friend that one of NGC's finalizers likes to say that they're in the business of grading coins, not no-grading coins. I think the 94 50c was more the case of a very rare coin with otherwise minor issues in a submission full of awesome old type stuff so it was kinda given a pass due to the circumstances.
"It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
I think the 94 50c was more the case of a very rare coin with otherwise minor issues in a submission full of awesome old type stuff so it was kinda given a pass due to the circumstances.
This brings to mind the Dexter dollar and numerous rarities that are graded more using, shall we say, a standard relative to the age, the condition of peer coins, and provenance? I like the simpler idea of assigning a numeric grade and adding modifiers. I’ve seen currency graded in a similar manner. So the Dexter dollar might be graded “PF65 reverse graffiti”.
Probably my Pan Pac. Purchased for a price below P01, I figured it might grade as high as AU58. It graded MS63. I definitely 'spiked the football' when I saw the grade listed.
That PCGS determined that none of these proof coins warrant a Cameo designation:
Not a single one of these coins are Cameos
>
I'm not a grader; but to my eye and based on my experience in submitting coins for cameo and proof like, all of these coins had some area of "haze" on them which in my mind would have disqualified them as cameos. The TVs seem to really pick up on the so-called haze.
More knowledgeable experts will know more than I do.
Some of the pictured coins have haze on them and some of them have no haze at all (I can attest to this from seeing the coins in hand under good lighting).
Here is a 1961 Proof Dime that has some hazy spotting on the surface of the coin on both sides. If haze (including hazy spotting) precludes a coin from being awarded a Cameo designation then this dime was mistakenly graded PF65 DCAM.
What I have experienced in submitting these types of proof coins to PSCG in 2021, 2022 and 2023 is that grading and designations are truly something that one can not easily predict. Opinions vary from grader to grader; and likely from day to day, hour to hour, minute to minute and likely second to second.
The photos I posted above of coins that did not receive a Cameo designation are counter balanced by photos of coins that I thought did not warrant a Cameo or a DCAM designation but PCGS awarded the designation.
Two nice, quality RD IHC’s:
“The thrill of the hunt never gets old”
PCGS Registry: Screaming Eagles
Copperindian
Retired sets: Soaring Eagles
Copperindian
As someone from NGC said, "Everybody makes mistakes." I would not keep that coin.
Sanction, I know you’ve dumped a fair amount of money into grading those coins already, and I honestly don’t know the value bumps if they cam or dcam, but if it’s significant and worth your while I would crack the entire group and get them conserved & graded with ncs/ngc. They do a fantastic job removing the haze/milk and I think you’ll have a good chance getting cam/dcam designations on them. Then you can decide to cross &/or crack out and submit back to pcgs if you want that plastic.
NCS (in my opinion) will help a lot with those coins and get some them on the right path to cam designations. I just don’t know if you want to dump another 1-2 rounds of money to the grading services, but your problem can be fixed. All is not lost.
What I referred to as "haze" is not something I believe can be conserved or improved upon. What I was trying to say is the surfaces are inconsistent and not 100% cameo which appears to be the requirement for cameo. Again more knowledgeable experts will know more than I do.
Bought it from a wholesale guy some years ago as a “nice AU”, I assumed it would 58, maybe 62 if they were lenient when I submitted it at FUN in January:
From the same group purchase years ago, I figured the hazy blah reverse would pull this down to a 63: