The 3 I though bagged, did. The 64 Cent, 63 Franklin and 83O dollar. I think a few years ago the 64 cent would've graded, but ever since the MS70 fiasco, I think any blue toning on copper is a no go. The 63 Franklin unfortunately looks like a liver of sulfer job and though it might be NT, it could easily be reproduced, and therefor is a no go. The 83 0, I think is the closest, and would probably grade if sent in a few times, but that type of toning I also think can be reproduced with some napkins or TP. The 64 is a joke, that coin should've graded. The 64D, should've grade as well, but I can see where the graders probably thought the toning didn't progress correctly.
Need a Barber Half with ANACS photo certificate. If you have one for sale please PM me. Current Ebay auctions
First ,in looking at it.. I thought that the 64 1c, 63 50c, & 83O 1$ wouldn't pass (the 63 & 83O looked gased) and were the most suspicious BUT the first 64 50c should've graded. Nothing about it says AT. It had the right toning color progression. I would like ask them how the coin doctors could've created that 64 50c. This was so bad that it didn't pass, that's ridiculous. Makes me not want to submit to PCGS now. Does it make a difference when someone sends in a bunch of toned coins in at one time? Do they get suspicious?
Let's start a new PROTEST thread for coins that are NT and get guinuined as AT to show people the risks of sending toners right now. Maybe they'll get so few toners and less business that they change their minds.
<< <i> The 1963 Frankie came from a Year Set......btw the Washie is a type B
>>
I passed on this set on Ebay when it was originally listed because to me the half looks completly AT....the rest that bagged look pretty good to me and most look just like coins already in holders
I had a seated half with colorful toning recently bagged for "altered surfaces." That coin sat in an envelope in my grandfather's SBD since World War II. There is no point in submitting toned coins anymore in my opinion. Unless there is some definitive way in proving "NT" or "AT," the graders seem to be erring on the side of caution.
Dead Cat Waltz Exonumia
"Coin collecting for outcasts..."
PCGS over the years has gone from one extreme to the other in regards to color. With the exception of possibly the first Kennedy I do think they got it right though. I got hammered myself on 4 indians in my last submission. I had 50+ coins and all graded except 3 of the 4 indians with some color. I wish they would as strict with dipped coins.
If I was the submitter I wouldn't be happy. You would think that collectors learn to adapt to what is and what is not acceptable to a TPG. When what is considered "acceptable" is a moving target it is upsetting. Looking at the two proof cents as well as the two halves in this thread where one graded and the other didn't is a perfect example of the problem.
How are collectors supposed to know what is "acceptable" and what is not? Just pick something and stick to it.
This brings me to another little rant... What has likely driven the TPG's to running away from color? Color started bringing big money and the coin doctors get busy making "monster toners". It seems that while a lot of folks here seem to indicate they "know" who the coin doctors are, nobody rats them out.... why? Is it better to just change what is "acceptable" and allow the small collector to deal with it?
While TPG grading like any grading is subjective, there should be some expectation of consistency.... at least that's my opinion.
the set having the toned coins with blue velvet will leave different colors on the half
the half should actually have some yellows and greens
blue and purple in the center (not the periphery) have always been the signs of 'too much heat' - which usually indicates AT
the cent probably would have made it if it was not as good looking (what is that a 67 or 68?) - they would let it go probably if it was a 64 or lower not sure if that is a pitty vote or if they are not worried about guarantee on a $5 coin
the cent also probably would have made it if it was not with such a large group of ?questionable? coins, as all coins in submission seem to get more scrutiny and borderlines go with the majority of the submission
I feel the pain, and have similar results frquently
Each coin should stand and be graded on it's own merit. It should not matter one iota what other coins it is submitted with. Also, the worry about a guarantee on a $5 or $5,000,000 should not make any difference whatsoever in assignong a grade to a coin. It is what it is.
In another thread, the question was asked "What is PCGS' greatest asset?". Some say that it's their consistency and the public's trust in their product (their professional opinion). Incidents such as this GREATLY reduce both of those in my mind, and I think, in the minds of many others as well.
Maybe the big news coming up is that they will only give grades to coins which are undisputedly MS70/PR70. Absolutely flawless. Otherwise, it's gets bagged (i.e. genuine). ---- Unless it's a great rarity, then it gets a pass, no matter what it looks like.
I am going to be unpopular and likely out of step by saying that I think that the the coins that were bagged were either obviously AT or suspect. The argument that other coins that have similar appearances have been graded as NT is true but the collector community has been clamoring to get the artists out of the business unless it is your coin or the coin of one of your mates. The best of the coin docs are very good and proof of AT sometimes requires clear identification marks that allows irrefutable change in toning. The difficulty is that many AT coins are not the rarest ones or even ones that have been previously slabbed. Some of the comments of foul play in this thread comes from people that are respected by the community and I came on late but when I looked at the coins I said to myself either no way or highly suspect. BTW I suspect that I have examples of slabbed coins that have been made but most are a little more subtle than some of these examples. Lastly, I would acknowledge that some of the bagged coins might grade on another day. This thread shows the problem that exists in the coin game. I would hope "the big one" deals with this problem. BTW I love toned coins and please do not break my windows..
the "nonsense" part of the thread and entire line of thinking with many replies is this: as a whole, our Hobby has been clamoring for years that something needs to be done, and whenever PCGS does something(such as this) all they get is an earful of complaints. the single coin from the OP's submission that seems to have gotten the most attention from replies is that Cent which looks heated, everyone seems to know that it looks AT but is unwilling to admit as much. to the contrary they do the opposite and defend its legitimacy by posting other similar looking coins which also look heated. i'd be curious to know if any of them were submitted to PCGS still in the Mint cello.
Edited to add: Those who have been doing this for a while all know that grading is subjective. I have no problem resubmitting coins that I truly feel are nice for the grade and should be in a holder. I have never submitted the same coin three times to the same service. I will submit that coin to another service if I feel strongly about it.
WOW!! That really makes me mad to see this. They are all very gradable and nice coins. PCGS should step up and give a refund and regrade these for free. The graders in charge of these grades should be evaluated as to their abilities and all the grades they assigned should be recalled as well. I would say some graders should be let go.
If PCGS graders cannot grade toned coins then please tell us up front. I have no issues with PCG if their graders are unsure of themselves in grading toned coins. This issue really needs to be addressed by PCGS and I would hope by reading the comments here they realize there is a problem. If PCGS cannot be sure of themselves and don't want to grade toned coins then tell us. Spending hundreds of dollars in grading fees and getting back nothing for your money is very aggravating to say the least especially when the coins sent in for grading have been taken directly from Mint sets and Proof sets. PCGS can you do something for us ?
especially when the coins sent in for grading have been taken directly from Mint sets and Proof sets
i always submit coins in the Mint cello when possible and have never had a problem. as for PCGs graders and the statement if PCGS cannot be sure of themselves and don't want to grade toned coins then tell us.......................my read on "Questionable" is exactly that, they aren't sure.
the trouble is that the forum membership complains when they do it either way.
<< <i>especially when the coins sent in for grading have been taken directly from Mint sets and Proof sets
i always submit coins in the Mint cello when possible and have never had a problem. as for PCGs graders and the statement if PCGS cannot be sure of themselves and don't want to grade toned coins then tell us.......................my read on "Questionable" is exactly that, they aren't sure.
the trouble is that the forum membership complains when they do it either way. >>
I agree 110%, Questionable toning/color is just that. It doesnt mean it is AT or NT what it means is it can go either way and to cover themselves they BB cause they are unsure to be on the safe side.
<< <i>especially when the coins sent in for grading have been taken directly from Mint sets and Proof sets >>
The cello mint & proof sets can be AT'ed while still in the cello. The cello is likely gas permeable and the seams loosen with time and handling, and then there are the pinholes.
The Treasury mint sets (cardboard) are commonly "refilled" with AT coins and marketed as original. They can be very, very deceptive.
I am astounded by all the knee-jerk replies in this thread by those many posters that are spouting, "well I was going to submit these here coins, but after seeing this, I will take my business elsewhere!"
I bet 90% of those posters will be submitting to PCGS as usual as soon as they rethink/cool off.
I think it is nice that everyone is sympathetic to and supportive of Stephs plight, but the fact remains that PCGS got MOST of those RIGHT. (OK, OK it is only IMHO, and therefore not fact , but I have seen my share of AT's and I absolutely guarantee that, for example, the 1st Kennedy is AT.
"Wars are really ugly! They're dirty and they're cold. I don't want nobody to shoot me in the foxhole." Mary
<< <i>OK, OK it is only IMHO, and therefore not fact , but I have seen my share of AT's and I absolutely guarantee that, for example, the 1st Kennedy is AT
reading this astute assessment i would wonder why you would be willing to admit that you are a Coin Doctor??? >>
LOL. IMO i dont think it is wrong to AT coins in order to gain knowledge to better help you figure out what is AT or NT. As long as you have no intent to sell or try and slab these coins for profit or any other reason to mislead someone.
Comments
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
and they're cold.
I don't want nobody to shoot me in the foxhole."
Mary
Best Franklin Website
that is blasphemy.............................
Let's start a new PROTEST thread for coins that are NT and get guinuined as AT to show people the risks of sending toners right now. Maybe they'll get so few toners and less business that they change their minds.
<< <i>
The 1963 Frankie came from a Year Set......btw the Washie is a type B
I passed on this set on Ebay when it was originally listed because to me the half looks completly AT....the rest that bagged look pretty good to me and most look just like coins already in holders
<< <i>Ankur's coin is AT as well. I am 99.999% sure of that. >>
I might be .001% less sure than you.....
but I would be 99.998% sure myself.
Both are AT
<< <i>
<< <i>What's up with this?
1962 25C MS64
1964 1C PR1BN <===========
1964 50C N1
1964-D 50C N1
1963 50C N1
1954 50C MS64
1963 50C PR66
1883-O $1 N1
>>
Don't know >>
So.......thats not a typo?
The name is LEE!
Dead Cat Waltz Exonumia
"Coin collecting for outcasts..."
Big Crumbs Link
Mr Rebates Link
EBates Link
Chucknra@yahoo.com
<< <i>
<< <i>We should demand consistency.
perhaps Goldbully should send in his coin and ask for it to be placed in a Genuien holder??
Have you considered standup???
edited to add: "Hey, I won that coin from a MadMarty eBay auction....it's all his fault!"
I was going to pipe in and say I remember sending one of those toned proofs in for grading at PCGS!!
How are collectors supposed to know what is "acceptable" and what is not? Just pick something and stick to it.
This brings me to another little rant... What has likely driven the TPG's to running away from color? Color started bringing big money and the coin doctors get busy making "monster toners". It seems that while a lot of folks here seem to indicate they "know" who the coin doctors are, nobody rats them out.... why? Is it better to just change what is "acceptable" and allow the small collector to deal with it?
While TPG grading like any grading is subjective, there should be some expectation of consistency.... at least that's my opinion.
<< <i>I have a 10 coin submission ready to go out, none of them toners, they're not going now however. >>
My last non-toner submission went 12 for 13.
Empty Nest Collection
the half should actually have some yellows and greens
blue and purple in the center (not the periphery) have always been the signs of 'too much heat' - which usually indicates AT
the cent probably would have made it if it was not as good looking (what is that a 67 or 68?) - they would let it go probably if it was a 64 or lower
not sure if that is a pitty vote or if they are not worried about guarantee on a $5 coin
the cent also probably would have made it if it was not with such a large group of ?questionable? coins,
as all coins in submission seem to get more scrutiny and borderlines go with the majority of the submission
I feel the pain, and have similar results frquently
In another thread, the question was asked "What is PCGS' greatest asset?". Some say that it's their consistency and the public's trust in their product (their professional opinion). Incidents such as this GREATLY reduce both of those in my mind, and I think, in the minds of many others as well.
Maybe the big news coming up is that they will only give grades to coins which are undisputedly MS70/PR70. Absolutely flawless. Otherwise, it's gets bagged (i.e. genuine). ---- Unless it's a great rarity, then it gets a pass, no matter what it looks like.
Indeed.
I would hope "the big one" deals with this problem.
BTW I love toned coins and please do not break my windows..
Grades on the second attempt:
65 RB
66 RD
65 RB
Read what you want into this.
Edited to add: Those who have been doing this for a while all know that grading is subjective. I have no problem resubmitting coins that I truly feel are nice for the grade and should be in a holder. I have never submitted the same coin three times to the same service. I will submit that coin to another service if I feel strongly about it.
PCGS can you do something for us ?
i always submit coins in the Mint cello when possible and have never had a problem. as for PCGs graders and the statement if PCGS cannot be sure of themselves and don't want to grade toned coins then tell us.......................my read on "Questionable" is exactly that, they aren't sure.
the trouble is that the forum membership complains when they do it either way.
<< <i>especially when the coins sent in for grading have been taken directly from Mint sets and Proof sets
i always submit coins in the Mint cello when possible and have never had a problem. as for PCGs graders and the statement if PCGS cannot be sure of themselves and don't want to grade toned coins then tell us.......................my read on "Questionable" is exactly that, they aren't sure.
the trouble is that the forum membership complains when they do it either way. >>
I agree 110%, Questionable toning/color is just that. It doesnt mean it is AT or NT what it means is it can go either way and to cover themselves they BB cause they are unsure to be on the safe side.
<< <i>especially when the coins sent in for grading have been taken directly from Mint sets and Proof sets >>
The cello mint & proof sets can be AT'ed while still in the cello. The cello is likely gas permeable and the seams loosen with time and handling, and then there are the pinholes.
The Treasury mint sets (cardboard) are commonly "refilled" with AT coins and marketed as original. They can be very, very deceptive.
I am astounded by all the knee-jerk replies in this thread by those many posters that are spouting, "well I was going to submit these here coins, but after seeing this, I will take my business elsewhere!"
I bet 90% of those posters will be submitting to PCGS as usual as soon as they rethink/cool off.
I think it is nice that everyone is sympathetic to and supportive of Stephs plight, but the fact remains that PCGS got MOST of those RIGHT. (OK, OK it is only IMHO, and therefore not fact , but I have seen my share of AT's and I absolutely guarantee that, for example, the 1st Kennedy is AT.
and they're cold.
I don't want nobody to shoot me in the foxhole."
Mary
Best Franklin Website
reading this astute assessment i would wonder why you would be willing to admit that you are a Coin Doctor???
<< <i>OK, OK it is only IMHO, and therefore not fact , but I have seen my share of AT's and I absolutely guarantee that, for example, the 1st Kennedy is AT
reading this astute assessment i would wonder why you would be willing to admit that you are a Coin Doctor???
LOL. IMO i dont think it is wrong to AT coins in order to gain knowledge to better help you figure out what is AT or NT. As long as you have no intent to sell or try and slab these coins for profit or any other reason to mislead someone.