<< <i>3) .................................................. If a coin that was previously sent through Secure Plus is sent in again, raw or in the holder, it will be matched via the scan and the photographs will be compared as well by the verifier. >>
So I am clear. Coins that are submitted raw to PCGS for grading are matched against the Secure Plus data for previous submissions? That would be nice and certainly a great feature to know that all coins submitted to PCGS are imaged. I am sure that that you meant that it only applies to coins submitted for secure plus service, are checked against the PCGS database for prior submission.
<< <i>4) If it turns out that during grading we missed somethingon any submission it will be covered by our guarantee. PCGS has the best guarantee in the businesss, hands down. >>
What if.... something was missed that would normally cause a coin to have a lower grade but it was missed. This is very ambiguous. I need to read the guarantee. have patience with me.. I'm a newbiee with alotta noobness.
<< <i>5) If you are buying an expensive coin Secure Plus is the best protection you can get. >>
So, If my Secure Plus coins are stolen. They won't be noticed/found - if they are cracked out and submitted raw to PCGS unless they are re-submitted under the secure plus program as evidenced by the OP's situation... I think this is what happened..
*He didn't like the MS65 designation and thought it had good chance of going higher under a resubmission.
*He cracked it out and submitted it raw under the standard grading service.
*During the grading process, an opinion formed that the coin met the criteria of a Genuine Code.
*The OP is not happy with the new grade and has to send the cracked slab as proof?
The way I am understanding everything read here and on the PCGS program. The OP needs to send coin back as a submission under the Secure plus program and then.... provided he didn't alter the coin in anyway - it will be flagged because it matches up with data previously created during the original submission. They will then double/triple verify everything is the still the same and re-holder it with the same designitions. They have to under this program, the way I understand it... he certainly doesn't need to send the old holder as proof!
<< <i>Fingerprinting is not currently done with non-SP service but many expect it will be routine down the road and the backdoor will be closed. Lance. >>
With Iris identification and finger print security scans and images that have been in existence for awhile. I am surprised now that I think about it, that this isn't already a fine tuned industry standard.....that this should be a simple process for all coins submitted for grading. PCGS annual sales is huge in comparison with the cost of the hardware and software that already exists.
I mean, that a complete Iris Recognition program and hardware start at $2500.
Fingerprint systems are only a hundred bucks for a cheap one!!
I guess the biggest issue is how a large volume of coins would be handled in a production environment during the actual imaging in a safe manner... In other words the potential for human error with dropping/scratching/oils/moisture/pollutants/microscopic scratches from gloves/sneezing/coughing/human skin cells and dander/etc.etc.etc. the same concerns they have to deal with on a regular basis. Isn't the California area full of experts on dealing with "clean" rooms???
What am I missing here? Why isn't this seemingly relative simple process already in existence?
I need to go take a break, do some yardwork or something.
<< <i>Stewart you need to clarify some issues here, your silence speaks volumes, most of which may be negative. >>
I think it should be noted that if our(the boards) assumptions are correct(aren't they always )about it being Stewart's 1856 coin that he was acting as a proud(add a point) collector and not wearing his profit seeking dealer hat. IMO it takes some of the nefarious implications out of his actions.
Sorry but it is the weekend. I will now respond and answer your questions.
The coin in question (1857 Flying Eagle) was in a very old holder,either blue or green,as an MS 65 and I submitted this coin under the PCGS Secure program at the Boston ANA in August. The cost was $125. It came back as an MS 65 in a Secure holder. I believed the coin was better than an MS 65 and at least an MS 65+ and perhaps an MS 66.
At the Baltimore coin show I cracked the coin out of the Secure holder and sent it in regular service as a raw coin. My cost was $50 +postage
I just got the grade back via an e mail and I am pissed off. I believe the coin is absolutely not altered nor tooled and PCGS erred in their evaluation. When I give the coin back to PCGS they will confer the coin is 100% exactly as it was when originally encapsulated in the Secure holder in Boston.
Why wasn't it re-submitted raw under the secure plus tier? Wouldn't it then have supposedly been matched against the database (& guaranteed either the same grade, an upgrade, or a check)?
<< <i>Why wasn't it re-submitted raw under the secure plus tier? Wouldn't it then have supposedly been matched against the database (& guaranteed either the same grade, an upgrade, or a check)? >>
Even if it matched the database, the coin still could have been damaged subsequent to the crackout.
Remember, the PCGS guarantee is 100% GONE as soon as a coin is cracked out, so even if the scanner recognized it as the same coin, it wouldn't be covered under the guarantee. That why it would seem to make zero sense to crack a secure plus coin in order to send it back for a secure plus regrade.
Sure, it makes sense to crack a secure plus coin to send under the regular service in order to avoid the scan and try to get a more independent look at your coin, but you also lose the previous grade and all guaranty of that grade.
IF nothing was done to the coin and is returned in a secure PCGS holder with a grade then and how in the name of heaven did in come backed tooled or damaged if it in fact there is none.
This isn't good for either party. One is right and the other is wrong.
Pat Vetter,Mercury Dime registry set,1938 Proof set registry,Pat & BJ Coins:724-325-7211
...i think i hear the kool-aid jingle song being played in the back-ground.
"government is not reason, it is not eloquence-it is a force! like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master; never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action." George Washington
<< <i>one VERY important point being missed here is....
IF nothing was done to the coin and is returned in a secure PCGS holder with a grade then and how in the name of heaven did in come backed tooled or damaged if it in fact there is none. >>
I do agree with this sentiment...
but I have given my original post in this spot some thought...
all this crap ain't worth the effort...
back to coin collecting for me...
Re: Slabbed coins - There are some coins that LIVE within clear plastic and wear their labels with pride... while there are others that HIDE behind scratched plastic and are simply dragged along by a label. Then there are those coins that simply hang out, naked and free
<< <i>I cracked out an ms 65 Flying Eagle cent out of a PCGS Secure holder. It came back in a genuine holder (98) because of tooling or altered surfaces.
Now I have to send it back with the Secure tag stating the grade as MS 65. It will then be placed back in an MS 65 holder.
I just don't get it
Stewart Blay >>
without reading any farther in this thread then this first post ;
it will be great if they put it back in the 65 holder - on the other hand ..........
if they do that, then it undermines the whole enchilada ,
and so much for all that B.S about grades changing at any time , even possible body bags and further B.S about Hall and Willis saying once you crack it out -the guarantee is void
.........now , let me read the whole thread and see if I gotta come back to this and edit and apologize
<< <i>Are there any COIN collectors left…or is it slab-land, speculation and fast buck hopefuls? >>
For guys playing the registry game, for the most part, yes, it is.
Assuming the coin was not messed with between submissions, it shows you the inconsistencies with any grading, no matter how formalized. Live by the slab, die by the slab.
There is no "AT" or "NT". We only have "market acceptable" or "not market acceptable.
How a coin can go from a 65 secure plus holder to tooled/altered surfaces is insane. I can see it grading lower or higher but that? Its either PCGS got it wrong somewhere or the coin was played with after it was cracked. In either case you win some and you lose some .
This is how I interpret this thread and I am confident others agree and see it the same way.
Coin owner cracks out a coin he thinks will upgrade.
Results come back and they're worse than he expected. Submitter is bitterly dissapointed.
Submitter comes to the PCGS coin message board to publicly rant and complain about the results, in the process showing everybody else he's an immature drama queen with a sense of entitlement.
Downgrades happen daily to the best of the best numismatists and although they aren't happy about downgrades they learn to accept reality and move on. They don't go on the forums and groan about it. Mr. Blay isn't a newbie so he should learn to do what the professionals do, move on and quit being such a crybaby.
I can see no possible way a coin deemed as "tooled" by a professional grader gets back into a graded holder ; furthermore
I see no way how the PCGS guarantee applies here either ........ that would mean any S.P graded coin , even if broken out and presented raw to PCGS- if found to exactly match
the original scanned fingerprint .......would have to fall under the grading guarantee .
No way is PCGS gonna open up that can of worms: no matter what the heck the status of the submitter is- be he a Home Run hitter or merely a bench warmer ............
How dare Stewart have a life outside the forum! He should be here promptly to answer our questions. He must not be a serious collector.
I see a lot of jealousy, pot shots, and unfair remarks here. We see threads with people unhappy with their grades all the time and the standard suggestion is to send it in again. In this case, because of the high profile, the secure plus complications (which Stuart clearly understands but most of the respondents here don't), and the pure ugly jealousy, there are a lot of other opinions being put forth.
He will resubmit and he will get it back into a 65 holder. Wouldn't it be funny if it has actually graded 66 and Willis had the Genuine email sent to him to yank his chain. I'm glad it isn't the 56 we are talking about.
Finally, for those who think the coin which has been not bodybagged once should never be allowed back into a holder, I submit this coin which I have posted here before. This coin got an old fashioned bodybag for altered surfaces (same code as Stuart got):
The almost unanimous advice is to resubmit. It will probably make it into a holder. But I've never gotten around to it.
Some things can be debated but lets at least get our definitions straight:
code 94 - Altered Surfaces - this means we have found a foreign substance on the surface
code 98 - Damaged - there are a number of reasons why the coin might be damaged. The reason is now printed on the cert.
The following damage descriptions are some of the more common that may be indicated on your 98 graded insert.
1. Graffiti (significant distracting etchings- occasionally net graded on early coins) 2. Planchet streak removed (usually found on gold coins) 3. Spot(s) removed (leaving some form of damage that is evident) 4. Surfaces tooled (major metal movement- whizzing, lasering, tooling) 5. Machine damage (either: counting machine or coin wrapping machine) 6. Rim damage (either: rim gouge or test cut) 7. Surface damage (either: large gouge/scrape, drill or chop mark) 8. Mount removed (located on either the edge or surface of coin)
Most code 94 coins can be fixed simply by removing the foreign material. Code 98 coins have been physically damaged.
RWB - (Roger) I am a coin collector first and have been so for more than 50 years. I am an astute collector of copper coins who appreciates originality and preservation.
Don Willis - When I sent this coin in for Secure grading in Boston my reason was because it is an 1857 Double Die Obverse S-4 variety. I was told at the time that variety attribution was not possable for show grading.
I have seen the three 1857 S-4 DDO MS 65 cents and considered mine finer.I chose to send the coin in for regrading anyway.
When I sent the coin in at the Baltimore show i paid an extra $24 for variety attribution. This fact was not reflected in the assigned grade with code 98
Do we really care that Stewart did not get his upgrade? >>
I did not interpret Mr. Blay's original post as being angry about not getting an upgrade but rather as confusion as to the classification of the coin in question as having modified surfaces after having been fingerprinted by the PCGS Secure protocol.
I might also add I do not understand the animosity the original post seems to have engendered. It seems a valid question that when answered/understood will benefit PCGS, Mr. Blay and other collectors that may choose to use the PCGS service.
1) Stewart cracked the coin out of a Secure Plus holder.
2) Stewart submitted the raw coin for grading and attribution.
3) Stewart submitted the coin through our Standard Service - NOT - Secure Plus.
4) The coin was graded code 98 - Surface Tooling - and attributed as an S-4.
Anyone who cracks out a coin knows full well that all guarantees are voided. PCGS has no idea what happens to a coin out of the holder. You can send in all the inserts you want after the fact but that means nothing.
If the coin had been sent in through Secure Plus it would have been recognized and compared to the previous submission. Secure Plus was not used in this case. Again, cracking a coin out and sending it back through Secure Plus does not guarantee it will not be body bagged. As I have said previously we have caught several coins that have been cracked out of Secure Plus holders and doctored in some way before being sent back in.
To repeat: This coin was not sent back through Secure Plus. This entire story has nothing to do with Secure Plus or how it works.
The actual story is very simple. If you want to play the crackout game, that is, if you think that cracking a coin out and resubmitting it gives you a better chance of an upgrade, then go for it but don't complain about the results, especially if you are a dealer. PCGS provides a safe and effective way of resubmitting your coins while never compromising your guarantee - it's called a Regrade - and it does work.
1) Stewart cracked the coin out of a Secure Plus holder.
2) Stewart submitted the raw coin for grading and attribution.
3) Stewart submitted the coin through our Standard Service - NOT - Secure Plus.
4) The coin was graded code 98 - Surface Tooling - and attributed as an S-4.
Anyone who cracks out a coin knows full well that all guarantees are voided. PCGS has no idea what happens to a coin out of the holder. You can send in all the inserts you want after the fact but that means nothing.
If the coin had been sent in through Secure Plus it would have been recognized and compared to the previous submission. Secure Plus was not used in this case. Again, cracking a coin out and sending it back through Secure Plus does not guarantee it will not be body bagged. As I have said previously we have caught several coins that have been cracked out of Secure Plus holders and doctored in some way before being sent back in.
To repeat: This coin was not sent back through Secure Plus. This entire story has nothing to do with Secure Plus or how it works.
The actual story is very simple. If you want to play the crackout game, that is, if you think that cracking a coin out and resubmitting it gives you a better chance of an upgrade, then go for it but don't complain about the results, especially if you are a dealer. PCGS provides a safe and effective way of resubmitting your coins while never compromising your guarantee - it's called a Regrade - and it does work. >>
<< <i>The actual story is very simple. If you want to play the crackout game, that is, if you think that cracking a coin out and resubmitting it gives you a better chance of an upgrade, then go for it but don't complain about the results, especially if you are a dealer. PCGS provides a safe and effective way of resubmitting your coins while never compromising your guarantee - it's called a Regrade - and it does work. >>
Thank you Don for stating the obvious and common sense. Everybody should remember this quote before starting similar style threads.
<< <i>So does this mean the secure plus machine can't catch what a human grader can? >>
It's tangential questions like this that require explaining the Secure Plus service.... (thus dragging the SP service into the thread)
Secure Plus is an COIN RECOGNITION system.
It answers the question: "Have I Seen This Coin Before?"
Once the digital recognition file is first made and a photography type picture of the coin are stored, the digital recognition file can be used to recognize the coin if it is resubmitted in the future. The photography type picture is used By A Human to compare with the coin in Hand to look for AT / AS / Tooling / Etc. alterations.
>> Humans STILL Have To Do the Grading and AT / AS / Tooling grade work <<
There is also an added benefit of the harder to counterfeit slab inserts.
1) Stewart cracked the coin out of a Secure Plus holder.
2) Stewart submitted the raw coin for grading and attribution.
3) Stewart submitted the coin through our Standard Service - NOT - Secure Plus.
4) The coin was graded code 98 - Surface Tooling - and attributed as an S-4.
Anyone who cracks out a coin knows full well that all guarantees are voided. PCGS has no idea what happens to a coin out of the holder. You can send in all the inserts you want after the fact but that means nothing.
If the coin had been sent in through Secure Plus it would have been recognized and compared to the previous submission. Secure Plus was not used in this case. Again, cracking a coin out and sending it back through Secure Plus does not guarantee it will not be body bagged. As I have said previously we have caught several coins that have been cracked out of Secure Plus holders and doctored in some way before being sent back in.
To repeat: This coin was not sent back through Secure Plus. This entire story has nothing to do with Secure Plus or how it works.
The actual story is very simple. If you want to play the crackout game, that is, if you think that cracking a coin out and resubmitting it gives you a better chance of an upgrade, then go for it but don't complain about the results, especially if you are a dealer. PCGS provides a safe and effective way of resubmitting your coins while never compromising your guarantee - it's called a Regrade - and it does work. >>
Mr. Willis,
Thank you for the concise and informative recap of the situation. Could you please answer the following questions so that all of us can be on the same page?
1. The only time that a coin will be scanned is when it is sent in for the Secure Plus service. Even if a coin has been previously submitted through the SP servce, once cracked, there is no comparison made to the previous scan unless the coin is resubmitted using the SP service. Are these correct statements?
2. If Stewart (on any other person obviously) would resubmit the subject coin in the current Genuine holder to PCGS via the Secure Plus service, it would be scanned and compared to the database of coins previously processed through SP. If the coin was found to be an exact match to when it was first graded through SP (i.e. no alterations), I am assuming that either the coin would return to a 65 holder (indicating the Genuine grade was wrong) or it would not (indicating the original 65 grade was wrong). Given the latter case, would there be any guarantee from PCGS that would apply?
If I submitted a coin labeled "Doubled die obverse" for Secure Plus and had to pay a $24 attribution fee on top of the grading fee. And didn't get an upgrade. (Are they still grading Flying Eagle Cents MS66?)
If I then broke the coin out and sent it in raw expecting an upgrade and didn't get it. And got it back as a no-grade to boot!
If I now had to send it in again and hope someone who can actually grade it correctly sees it, just so it gets back in the original holder, unattributed.
Yup, I'd be mad. But I wouldn't air my frustration here.
To me, the main point in this 'experiment' is that there is obviously a very fine line (according to PCGS) between an ms65 and a 'Genuine' coin (tooled surface).
THAT, my friends, strikes fear into my heart!!
"Gold is money, and nothing else" (JP Morgan, 1912)
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
<< <i> The actual story is very simple. If you want to play the crackout game, that is, if you think that cracking a coin out and resubmitting it gives you a better chance of an upgrade, then go for it but don't complain about the results, especially if you are a dealer. PCGS provides a safe and effective way of resubmitting your coins while never compromising your guarantee - it's called a Regrade - and it does work. >>
It works very well, indeed. Several of my coins were sent for regrading and came back where I felt they should be. Why crack it out I never understood, just send it in in the holder. Otherwise you risk exactly what happened here!!
Gang: gee, I want to respond in so many ways here...but I think I am just going to say, that the frustration level is very high at both PCGS and with us collectors on the day to day game of getting our coins graded. There is not one person here who has not felt Stewarts pain no matter how the coin or what the coin was submitted. It takes a lot of fun and enjoyment out of collecting AND COST A LOT OF MONEY. Just look at the forum. It’s loaded with I hoped for’s. I thought the grade was at least a, It should have been graded this and I got that instead, etc. And programs like Secure Plus, have not helped this. In fact, it’s only elevated it! Does PCGS need to do a cutomer survey????????
WS
Proud recipient of the coveted PCGS Forum "You Suck" Award Thursday July 19, 2007 11:33 PM and December 30th, 2011 at 8:50 PM.
First, I'd like to say that my interpretation of the OP's event is that of a coin that was once in a Secure Plus holder, was cracked out, and resubmitted through the standard service. During the discussion, however, several questions have arisen about the nature of Secure Plus that bring up some questions. Below is how I understand it. Please chime in if I am mistaken.
So if a Secure Plus coin gets cracked out and resubmitted through SP service, the options are:
1) The coin gets scanned and recognized as being identical (or close enough) and is still regraded. Graders agree with or upgrade from previous and either holder it same or actually upgrade it.
2) Coin gets scanned and recognized as being identical (or close enough) and is regraded, wherupon the graders identify a problem, like tooling, that was missed the first time around. PCGS must then buy back the coin.
3) Coin gets scanned and is recognized as having been doctored in some fashion. Bodybag.
Of course, the scanner and the person operating it and reviewing the results must be beyond reproach, or perhaps a conflict of interest could arise. When a Secure Plus coin subsequently gets bodybagged, are the scanner results available to a third party for review?
Comments
<< <i>I don't envy Stewart's position considering he has a raw coin that currently is in limbo. >>
I don't have any sympathy for him. He's in a number chasing competition. The coins just come along for the ride.
<< <i>3) .................................................. If a coin that was previously sent through Secure Plus is sent in again, raw or in the holder, it will be matched via the scan and the photographs will be compared as well by the verifier. >>
So I am clear. Coins that are submitted raw to PCGS for grading are matched against the Secure Plus data for previous submissions? That would be nice and certainly a great feature to know that all coins submitted to PCGS are imaged. I am sure that that you meant that it only applies to coins submitted for secure plus service, are checked against the PCGS database for prior submission.
<< <i>4) If it turns out that during grading we missed something on any submission it will be covered by our guarantee. PCGS has the best guarantee in the businesss, hands down. >>
What if.... something was missed that would normally cause a coin to have a lower grade but it was missed. This is very ambiguous. I need to read the guarantee. have patience with me.. I'm a newbiee with alotta noobness.
<< <i>5) If you are buying an expensive coin Secure Plus is the best protection you can get. >>
So, If my Secure Plus coins are stolen. They won't be noticed/found - if they are cracked out and submitted raw to PCGS unless they are re-submitted under the secure plus program as evidenced by the OP's situation... I think this is what happened..
*He didn't like the MS65 designation and thought it had good chance of going higher under a resubmission.
*He cracked it out and submitted it raw under the standard grading service.
*During the grading process, an opinion formed that the coin met the criteria of a Genuine Code.
*The OP is not happy with the new grade and has to send the cracked slab as proof?
The way I am understanding everything read here and on the PCGS program. The OP needs to send coin back as a submission under the Secure plus program and then.... provided he didn't alter the coin in anyway - it will be flagged because it matches up with data previously created during the original submission. They will then double/triple verify everything is the still the same and re-holder it with the same designitions. They have to under this program, the way I understand it... he certainly doesn't need to send the old holder as proof!
<< <i>Fingerprinting is not currently done with non-SP service but many expect it will be routine down the road and the backdoor will be closed.
Lance. >>
With Iris identification and finger print security scans and images that have been in existence for awhile. I am surprised now that I think about it, that this isn't already a fine tuned industry standard.....that this should be a simple process for all coins submitted for grading. PCGS annual sales is huge in comparison with the cost of the hardware and software that already exists.
I mean, that a complete Iris Recognition program and hardware start at $2500.
Fingerprint systems are only a hundred bucks for a cheap one!!
I guess the biggest issue is how a large volume of coins would be handled in a production environment during the actual imaging in a safe manner... In other words the potential for human error with dropping/scratching/oils/moisture/pollutants/microscopic scratches from gloves/sneezing/coughing/human skin cells and dander/etc.etc.etc. the same concerns they have to deal with on a regular basis. Isn't the California area full of experts on dealing with "clean" rooms???
What am I missing here? Why isn't this seemingly relative simple process already in existence?
I need to go take a break, do some yardwork or something.
Signed,
Disillusioned
<< <i>Stewart you need to clarify some issues here, your silence speaks volumes, most of which may be negative. >>
I think it should be noted that if our(the boards) assumptions are correct(aren't they always
Why have we heard nothing more from Stewart?
Hi Guys,
Sorry but it is the weekend. I will now respond and answer your questions.
The coin in question (1857 Flying Eagle) was in a very old holder,either blue or green,as an MS 65 and I submitted this coin under the PCGS Secure program at the Boston ANA in August. The cost was $125. It came back as an MS 65 in a Secure holder.
I believed the coin was better than an MS 65 and at least an MS 65+ and perhaps an MS 66.
At the Baltimore coin show I cracked the coin out of the Secure holder and sent it in regular service as a raw coin. My cost was $50 +postage
I just got the grade back via an e mail and I am pissed off. I believe the coin is absolutely not altered nor tooled and PCGS erred in their evaluation. When I give the coin back to PCGS they will confer the coin is 100% exactly as it was when originally encapsulated in the Secure holder in Boston.
Stewart Blay
<< <i>Why wasn't it re-submitted raw under the secure plus tier? Wouldn't it then have supposedly been matched against the database (& guaranteed either the same grade, an upgrade, or a check)? >>
Even if it matched the database, the coin still could have been damaged subsequent to the crackout.
Remember, the PCGS guarantee is 100% GONE as soon as a coin is cracked out, so even if the scanner recognized it as the same coin, it wouldn't be covered under the guarantee. That why it would seem to make zero sense to crack a secure plus coin in order to send it back for a secure plus regrade.
Sure, it makes sense to crack a secure plus coin to send under the regular service in order to avoid the scan and try to get a more independent look at your coin, but you also lose the previous grade and all guaranty of that grade.
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 700
IF nothing was done to the coin and is returned in a secure PCGS holder with a grade then and how in the name of heaven did in come backed tooled or damaged if it in fact there is none.
This isn't good for either party. One is right and the other is wrong.
...i think i hear the kool-aid jingle song being played in the back-ground.
<< <i>one VERY important point being missed here is....
IF nothing was done to the coin and is returned in a secure PCGS holder with a grade then and how in the name of heaven did in come backed tooled or damaged if it in fact there is none. >>
I do agree with this sentiment...
but I have given my original post in this spot some thought...
all this crap ain't worth the effort...
back to coin collecting for me...
<< <i>I cracked out an ms 65 Flying Eagle cent out of a PCGS Secure holder. It came back in a genuine holder (98) because of tooling or altered surfaces.
Now I have to send it back with the Secure tag stating the grade as MS 65. It will then be placed back in an MS 65 holder.
I just don't get it
Stewart Blay >>
without reading any farther in this thread then this first post ;
it will be great if they put it back in the 65 holder - on the other hand ..........
if they do that, then it undermines the whole enchilada ,
and so much for all that B.S about grades changing at any time , even possible body bags and further B.S about Hall and Willis saying once you crack it out -the guarantee is void
.........now , let me read the whole thread and see if I gotta come back to this and edit and apologize
<< <i>Are there any COIN collectors left…or is it slab-land, speculation and fast buck hopefuls? >>
For guys playing the registry game, for the most part, yes, it is.
Assuming the coin was not messed with between submissions, it shows you the inconsistencies with any grading, no matter how formalized. Live by the slab, die by the slab.
<< <i>Are there any COIN collectors left…or is it slab-land, speculation and fast buck hopefuls? >>
There are still a few of us.
Though many less than there used to be
a cracked out coin ..........? all bets are off
Coin owner cracks out a coin he thinks will upgrade.
Results come back and they're worse than he expected. Submitter is bitterly dissapointed.
Submitter comes to the PCGS coin message board to publicly rant and complain about the results, in the process showing everybody else he's an immature drama queen with a sense of entitlement.
Downgrades happen daily to the best of the best numismatists and although they aren't happy about downgrades they learn to accept reality and move on. They don't go on the forums and groan about it. Mr. Blay isn't a newbie so he should learn to do what the professionals do, move on and quit being such a crybaby.
I see no way how the PCGS guarantee applies here either ........ that would mean any S.P graded coin , even if broken out and presented raw to PCGS- if found to exactly match
the original scanned fingerprint .......would have to fall under the grading guarantee .
No way is PCGS gonna open up that can of worms: no matter what the heck the status of the submitter is- be he a Home Run hitter or merely a bench warmer ............
I see a lot of jealousy, pot shots, and unfair remarks here. We see threads with people unhappy with their grades all the time and the standard suggestion is to send it in again. In this case, because of the high profile, the secure plus complications (which Stuart clearly understands but most of the respondents here don't), and the pure ugly jealousy, there are a lot of other opinions being put forth.
He will resubmit and he will get it back into a 65 holder. Wouldn't it be funny if it has actually graded 66 and Willis had the Genuine email sent to him to yank his chain. I'm glad it isn't the 56 we are talking about.
Finally, for those who think the coin which has been not bodybagged once should never be allowed back into a holder, I submit this coin which I have posted here before. This coin got an old fashioned bodybag for altered surfaces (same code as Stuart got):
The almost unanimous advice is to resubmit. It will probably make it into a holder. But I've never gotten around to it.
Enjoy your weekend,
Jerry
the simple and concise solution to this post is that PCGS stand by the words of their Presidents (past and present) ;
" If a coin is cracked out , all bets are off "
surely PCGS will not bend the rules because the submitter has significant industry clout
code 94 - Altered Surfaces - this means we have found a foreign substance on the surface
code 98 - Damaged - there are a number of reasons why the coin might be damaged. The reason is now printed on the cert.
The following damage descriptions are some of the more common that may be indicated on your 98 graded insert.
1. Graffiti (significant distracting etchings- occasionally net graded on early coins)
2. Planchet streak removed (usually found on gold coins)
3. Spot(s) removed (leaving some form of damage that is evident)
4. Surfaces tooled (major metal movement- whizzing, lasering, tooling)
5. Machine damage (either: counting machine or coin wrapping machine)
6. Rim damage (either: rim gouge or test cut)
7. Surface damage (either: large gouge/scrape, drill or chop mark)
8. Mount removed (located on either the edge or surface of coin)
Most code 94 coins can be fixed simply by removing the foreign material. Code 98 coins have been physically damaged.
From the PCGS website: Grading Codes defined
Don, You didn't address my other thought that maybe you sent Stewart the 98 e-mail to pull his chain.
"no more arguements"
RWB - (Roger) I am a coin collector first and have been so for more than 50 years. I am an astute collector of copper coins who appreciates originality and preservation.
Don Willis - When I sent this coin in for Secure grading in Boston my reason was because it is an 1857 Double Die Obverse S-4 variety. I was told at the time that variety attribution was not possable for show grading.
I have seen the three 1857 S-4 DDO MS 65 cents and considered mine finer.I chose to send the coin in for regrading anyway.
When I sent the coin in at the Baltimore show i paid an extra $24 for variety attribution. This fact was not reflected in the assigned grade with code 98
Stewart
now this is all about variety attribution?
isn't that easier done by simply keeping it in the holder and not risking anything???
<< <i>huh?
now this is all about variety attribution?
isn't that easier done by simply keeping it in the holder and not risking anything??? >>
From Mr. Blay's post:
"I have seen the three 1857 S-4 DDO MS 65 cents and considered mine finer.I chose to send the coin in for regrading anyway."
So no, seemingly this is NOT "all about variety attribution".
code 98 - Damaged - there are a number of reasons why the coin might be damaged. The reason is now printed on the cert.
so did the coin get both codes ?
glad Mr. Willis enlightened us - I'm basing my comments on what appeared to be the facts ; seems the facts will change as the story plays out ......
as been said more then once here : whole issue is moot if the coin wasn't cracked out
live by crack - die by crack
Do we really care that Stewart did not get his upgrade?
<< <i>Who ever said drama queen nailed it.
Do we really care that Stewart did not get his upgrade? >>
I did not interpret Mr. Blay's original post as being angry about not getting an upgrade but rather as confusion as to the classification of the coin in question as having modified surfaces after having been fingerprinted by the PCGS Secure protocol.
I might also add I do not understand the animosity the original post seems to have engendered. It seems a valid question that when answered/understood will benefit PCGS, Mr. Blay and other collectors that may choose to use the PCGS service.
1) Stewart cracked the coin out of a Secure Plus holder.
2) Stewart submitted the raw coin for grading and attribution.
3) Stewart submitted the coin through our Standard Service - NOT - Secure Plus.
4) The coin was graded code 98 - Surface Tooling - and attributed as an S-4.
Anyone who cracks out a coin knows full well that all guarantees are voided. PCGS has no idea what happens to a coin out of the holder. You can send in all the inserts you want after the fact but that means nothing.
If the coin had been sent in through Secure Plus it would have been recognized and compared to the previous submission. Secure Plus was not used in this case. Again, cracking a coin out and sending it back through Secure Plus does not guarantee it will not be body bagged. As I have said previously we have caught several coins that have been cracked out of Secure Plus holders and doctored in some way before being sent back in.
To repeat: This coin was not sent back through Secure Plus. This entire story has nothing to do with Secure Plus or how it works.
The actual story is very simple. If you want to play the crackout game, that is, if you think that cracking a coin out and resubmitting it gives you a better chance of an upgrade, then go for it but don't complain about the results, especially if you are a dealer. PCGS provides a safe and effective way of resubmitting your coins while never compromising your guarantee - it's called a Regrade - and it does work.
"I just got the grade back via an e mail and I am pissed off "
Mr. Willis's comments ?.........My faith in PCGS has been amply reinforced
<< <i>Please review the facts of this story:
1) Stewart cracked the coin out of a Secure Plus holder.
2) Stewart submitted the raw coin for grading and attribution.
3) Stewart submitted the coin through our Standard Service - NOT - Secure Plus.
4) The coin was graded code 98 - Surface Tooling - and attributed as an S-4.
Anyone who cracks out a coin knows full well that all guarantees are voided. PCGS has no idea what happens to a coin out of the holder. You can send in all the inserts you want after the fact but that means nothing.
If the coin had been sent in through Secure Plus it would have been recognized and compared to the previous submission. Secure Plus was not used in this case. Again, cracking a coin out and sending it back through Secure Plus does not guarantee it will not be body bagged. As I have said previously we have caught several coins that have been cracked out of Secure Plus holders and doctored in some way before being sent back in.
To repeat: This coin was not sent back through Secure Plus. This entire story has nothing to do with Secure Plus or how it works.
The actual story is very simple. If you want to play the crackout game, that is, if you think that cracking a coin out and resubmitting it gives you a better chance of an upgrade, then go for it but don't complain about the results, especially if you are a dealer. PCGS provides a safe and effective way of resubmitting your coins while never compromising your guarantee - it's called a Regrade - and it does work. >>
Well said, and thanks for clarifying.
merse
You got a major point, Don!!!
See below for my Unforgettable Day!!!!
<< <i>The actual story is very simple. If you want to play the crackout game, that is, if you think that cracking a coin out and resubmitting it gives you a better chance of an upgrade, then go for it but don't complain about the results, especially if you are a dealer. PCGS provides a safe and effective way of resubmitting your coins while never compromising your guarantee - it's called a Regrade - and it does work. >>
Thank you Don for stating the obvious and common sense. Everybody should remember this quote before starting similar style threads.
<< <i>So does this mean the secure plus machine can't catch what a human grader can? >>
It's tangential questions like this that require explaining the Secure Plus service....
(thus dragging the SP service into the thread)
Secure Plus is an COIN RECOGNITION system.
It answers the question: "Have I Seen This Coin Before?"
Once the digital recognition file is first made and a photography type picture of the coin are stored, the digital recognition file can be used to recognize the coin if it is resubmitted in the future. The photography type picture is used By A Human to compare with the coin in Hand to look for AT / AS / Tooling / Etc. alterations.
>> Humans STILL Have To Do the Grading and AT / AS / Tooling grade work <<
There is also an added benefit of the harder to counterfeit slab inserts.
<< <i>Please review the facts of this story:
1) Stewart cracked the coin out of a Secure Plus holder.
2) Stewart submitted the raw coin for grading and attribution.
3) Stewart submitted the coin through our Standard Service - NOT - Secure Plus.
4) The coin was graded code 98 - Surface Tooling - and attributed as an S-4.
Anyone who cracks out a coin knows full well that all guarantees are voided. PCGS has no idea what happens to a coin out of the holder. You can send in all the inserts you want after the fact but that means nothing.
If the coin had been sent in through Secure Plus it would have been recognized and compared to the previous submission. Secure Plus was not used in this case. Again, cracking a coin out and sending it back through Secure Plus does not guarantee it will not be body bagged. As I have said previously we have caught several coins that have been cracked out of Secure Plus holders and doctored in some way before being sent back in.
To repeat: This coin was not sent back through Secure Plus. This entire story has nothing to do with Secure Plus or how it works.
The actual story is very simple. If you want to play the crackout game, that is, if you think that cracking a coin out and resubmitting it gives you a better chance of an upgrade, then go for it but don't complain about the results, especially if you are a dealer. PCGS provides a safe and effective way of resubmitting your coins while never compromising your guarantee - it's called a Regrade - and it does work. >>
Mr. Willis,
Thank you for the concise and informative recap of the situation. Could you please answer the following questions so that all of us can be on the same page?
1. The only time that a coin will be scanned is when it is sent in for the Secure Plus service. Even if a coin has been previously submitted through the SP servce, once cracked, there is no comparison made to the previous scan unless the coin is resubmitted using the SP service. Are these correct statements?
2. If Stewart (on any other person obviously) would resubmit the subject coin in the current Genuine holder to PCGS via the Secure Plus service, it would be scanned and compared to the database of coins previously processed through SP. If the coin was found to be an exact match to when it was first graded through SP (i.e. no alterations), I am assuming that either the coin would return to a 65 holder (indicating the Genuine grade was wrong) or it would not (indicating the original 65 grade was wrong). Given the latter case, would there be any guarantee from PCGS that would apply?
Thank you in advance for your reply.
Jeff
<< <i>What I still don't get is how a MS65 secure plus coin could come back BB'd, unless the owner damaged or messed with it. >>
That is only 1/2 of it Barry.
Will the same coin now go back into a 65 holder once it is Xray'd, fingerprinted, sniffed and strip searched?
If I submitted a coin labeled "Doubled die obverse" for Secure Plus and had to pay a $24 attribution fee on top of the grading fee. And didn't get an upgrade. (Are they still grading Flying Eagle Cents MS66?)
If I then broke the coin out and sent it in raw expecting an upgrade and didn't get it. And got it back as a no-grade to boot!
If I now had to send it in again and hope someone who can actually grade it correctly sees it, just so it gets back in the original holder, unattributed.
Yup, I'd be mad. But I wouldn't air my frustration here.
THAT, my friends, strikes fear into my heart!!
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
<< <i>
The actual story is very simple. If you want to play the crackout game, that is, if you think that cracking a coin out and resubmitting it gives you a better chance of an upgrade, then go for it but don't complain about the results, especially if you are a dealer. PCGS provides a safe and effective way of resubmitting your coins while never compromising your guarantee - it's called a Regrade - and it does work. >>
It works very well, indeed. Several of my coins were sent for regrading and came back where I felt they should be. Why crack it out I never understood, just send it in in the holder. Otherwise you risk exactly what happened here!!
WS
So if a Secure Plus coin gets cracked out and resubmitted through SP service, the options are:
1) The coin gets scanned and recognized as being identical (or close enough) and is still regraded. Graders agree with or upgrade from previous and either holder it same or actually upgrade it.
2) Coin gets scanned and recognized as being identical (or close enough) and is regraded, wherupon the graders identify a problem, like tooling, that was missed the first time around. PCGS must then buy back the coin.
3) Coin gets scanned and is recognized as having been doctored in some fashion. Bodybag.
Of course, the scanner and the person operating it and reviewing the results must be beyond reproach, or perhaps a conflict of interest could arise. When a Secure Plus coin subsequently gets bodybagged, are the scanner results available to a third party for review?
Empty Nest Collection