Threshold for Off-Metal Strike designation
Boosibri
Posts: 12,663 ✭✭✭✭✭
Wanted to get the collective opinion on a Chilean Peso I've been going back and forth with NGC about.
The coin is proof-like and noticeably lighter than the standard 0.5 silver regular issue (I'll measure it next time it's out of the holder). I sent it to NGC with notes on the submission form, and they graded it as a business strike.
I pushed back, they took it as a mechanical error and ran an XRF. Result: 75% copper, 5% nickel, 20% silver. They then put it right back in a business strike holder.
I pointed out again that this matches Pn47, the copper-nickel pattern listed in Krause for this issue. Their position is that the composition isn't off enough to note the variation.
My read is that the composition difference, plus the fact that Krause already documents it as a pattern, is enough to disqualify it as a business strike. Do you agree, or am I off base being annoyed with NGC?
Comments
Are there PL business strikes known within the surviving population? And if so, do either service grade and designate a business strike as a PL? Are all of the surviving patterns PL?
Personally, I would be annoyed… mainly because the evidence points to the coin being the pattern. I suppose I would further investigate the basis for NGC’s position in an effort to understand it. Seems if NGC is asserting the composition is not off enough to note the pattern… even though it is the composition of the pattern… there should be other known examples.
There is a general frustration when it comes to numismatic circumstances such as this one you are trying to set straight.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
With your piece being partly silver, it doesn’t qualify as Pn47, but it could deserve a new KM number. That said, I think it’s unreasonable to expect NGC to designate it as a pattern if they can’t figure it out, but you should at least ask them to note the composition and weight on the label. I’d be surprised if they refused to do that much.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
They did also refuse that on the second trip to Sarasota
Latin American Collection
That is unfortunate… my response was more geared to establish that your coin likely has the attributes of a pattern or some type of special strike and not a business strike.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Does the NGC grading office hold anyone's professional opinion in high regard? Might an experts endorsement be persuasive. Good luck. Peace Roy
BST: endeavor1967, synchr, kliao, Outhaul, Donttellthewife, U1Chicago, ajaan, mCarney1173, SurfinHi, MWallace, Sandman70gt, mustanggt, Pittstate03, Lazybones, Walkerguy21D, coinandcurrency242 , thebigeng, Collectorcoins, JimTyler, USMarine6, Elkevvo, Coll3ctor, Yorkshireman, CUKevin, ranshdow, CoinHunter4, bennybravo, Centsearcher, braddick, Windycity, ZoidMeister, mirabela, JJM, RichURich, Bullsitter, jmski52, LukeMarshall, coinsarefun, MichaelDixon, NickPatton, ProfLiz, Twobitcollector,Jesbroken oih82w8, DCW
Maybe it is time to see what PCGS has to say about about the coin. I wish you good luck.
The piece is sensibly a pattern the way it's described.
They "could" be thinking about 1933-35 Peru soles that were surreptitiously debased... but probably that's way, way beyond the scope of their knowledge.
Pics would help.