In our opinion a couple of small spots were tooled off the surfaces. Either we missed the tooling first time through (when it was submitted via Secure Plus), or the tooling was done after the coin was cracked out of the Secure Plus holder. Occasionally we do make mistakes - so I am not making any accusations - only pointing out that these are the only possibilities. We should be able to determine what happened if we get the coin back and send it through Secure Plus again.
That is the only way this issue can be factually resolved.
If PCGS made a mistake we will cover it with our guarantee - which is the best in the business.
Don, this implies that whenever a coin that has previously been in a Secure Plus holder has been removed from one, so long as nothing has been done to the coin (toning, tooling, cleaning, etc.), the coin is still covered by the PCGS guarantee, whether the coin is or is not currently in a holder. Is this so?
<< <i>Why has this matter been taken onto the public forum stage here?
Seems to be a beef between Mr. Blay and PCGS......and should be conducted privately instead of using the forum as a sounding board and jury. >>
I think this thread was started to put pressure on PCGS to do what Blay considers to be the right thing. It'll be interesting to see how this is finally resolved assuming there won't be some confidentiality agreement as part of any settlement.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>In our opinion a couple of small spots were tooled off the surfaces. Either we missed the tooling first time through (when it was submitted via Secure Plus), or the tooling was done after the coin was cracked out of the Secure Plus holder. Occasionally we do make mistakes - so I am not making any accusations - only pointing out that these are the only possibilities. We should be able to determine what happened if we get the coin back and send it through Secure Plus again.
That is the only way this issue can be factually resolved.
If PCGS made a mistake we will cover it with our guarantee - which is the best in the business. >>
There's still a chance, however remote, that this new technology may turn up a false positive. Request the SP holder back, or, shall we say, what's left of it. Run that SP serial number through your SP database to turn up the SP coin correlated with that SP serial number. As a redundant measure, that would eliminate all possibilities of error.
<< <i>In our opinion a couple of small spots were tooled off the surfaces. Either we missed the tooling first time through (when it was submitted via Secure Plus), or the tooling was done after the coin was cracked out of the Secure Plus holder. Occasionally we do make mistakes - so I am not making any accusations - only pointing out that these are the only possibilities. We should be able to determine what happened if we get the coin back and send it through Secure Plus again.
That is the only way this issue can be factually resolved.
If PCGS made a mistake we will cover it with our guarantee - which is the best in the business. >>
There's still a chance, however remote, that this new technology may turn up a false positive. Request the SP holder back, or, shall we say, what's left of it. Run that SP serial number through your SP database to turn up the SP coin correlated with that SP serial number. As a redundant measure, that would eliminate all possibilities of error. >>
The coin is unique enough that they could probably find the info just from the description. I doubt they need the SP label.
<< <i>Why has this matter been taken onto the public forum stage here?
Seems to be a beef between Mr. Blay and PCGS......and should be conducted privately instead of using the forum as a sounding board and jury. >>
To put pressure on PCGS? To let off steam? Both? >>
It is a valid experience a consumer had with a corporation's service. It clearly displays the subjectivity involved in coin grading, and has generated discussion along those lines. Personally I don't see any direct fault on either side of the experience, it is simply the nature of the beast.
<< <i>In our opinion a couple of small spots were tooled off the surfaces. Either we missed the tooling first time through (when it was submitted via Secure Plus), or the tooling was done after the coin was cracked out of the Secure Plus holder. Occasionally we do make mistakes - so I am not making any accusations - only pointing out that these are the only possibilities. We should be able to determine what happened if we get the coin back and send it through Secure Plus again.
That is the only way this issue can be factually resolved.
If PCGS made a mistake we will cover it with our guarantee - which is the best in the business.
Don, this implies that whenever a coin that has previously been in a Secure Plus holder has been removed from one, so long as nothing has been done to the coin (toning, tooling, cleaning, etc.), the coin is still covered by the PCGS guarantee, whether the coin is or is not currently in a holder. Is this so? >>
We shall see.
I guess it is a judgment call based upon how good the information stored from the previous SP scan is. i.e. Is it detailed enough to show the points in question and to make a comparison with the coin in hand?
<< <i>Has anyone ever submitted a PCGS Secure coin in the holder and got an upgrade ? Not to my knowledge
That is why I cracked the coin out of the Secure holder and sent it in regular service and also to get the DDO designation. >>
Stewart,
Clearly you are a collector of means and skill with few peers. However, why should PCGS absolve you of the risk associated with cracking out a coin, when, by your own admission, your intent was at least in part to upgrade the coin by doing an end-around the SP service? The possibility that PCGS missed the (possible) tooling the first time does not absolve you of the risk, nor should it, in my opinion.
Just trying to understand your justification here, because it seems to me that you're asking to have your cake and eat it too -- hardly a defensible position from where I sit -- but perhaps I've misinterpreted.
Just wondering...Mike
Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
<< <i>In our opinion a couple of small spots were tooled off the surfaces. Either we missed the tooling first time through (when it was submitted via Secure Plus), or the tooling was done after the coin was cracked out of the Secure Plus holder. Occasionally we do make mistakes - so I am not making any accusations - only pointing out that these are the only possibilities. We should be able to determine what happened if we get the coin back and send it through Secure Plus again.
That is the only way this issue can be factually resolved.
If PCGS made a mistake we will cover it with our guarantee - which is the best in the business. >>
There's still a chance, however remote, that this new technology may turn up a false positive. Request the SP holder back, or, shall we say, what's left of it. Run that SP serial number through your SP database to turn up the SP coin correlated with that SP serial number. As a redundant measure, that would eliminate all possibilities of error. >>
The coin is unique enough that they could probably find the info just from the description. I doubt they need the SP label. >>
There's a difference between resolving a doubt to a probability and resolving a doubt to a certainty. There were 17,450,000 of these coins minted in 1857. Were this my business on the line, I think I'd opt for the latter means, if available, as the precedent-setter on establishing my policy towards resolving this particular kind of doubt. In fact, I think I'd require that from my customer.
<< <i>Has anyone ever submitted a PCGS Secure coin in the holder and got an upgrade ? Not to my knowledge
That is why I cracked the coin out of the Secure holder and sent it in regular service and also to get the DDO designation.
Coin GUy1 - Why would I want to put pressure on PCGS ??? To let off steam ???? Speak for yourself
Stewart >>
Stewart, forget that nonsense, do you have the SP slab with the little SP code number on it? If you do, send it in, along with the coin. In your case, you haven't yet suffered any money damages, as nothing has yet transacted on the coin. In the next case, who the hell knows? There may be thousands, perhaps even tens of thousands of dollars on the line. You should send them that slab, if you still have it, as the only issue, here, is, what went wrong on the grading? Understand, PCGS wants to get to the bottom of that issue, as much as you do; in fact, probably even more so, as this is their proprietary technology on the hot seat. Help them out, and to establish a fair and reasonable policy towards addressing this issue, in the future. At present, that technology is in its infancy, and this issue is precedent-setting. Realize that's the only reason you haven't got any knee-jerk answers, as yet (there are none). And, I'll be a monkey's uncle, if, in the end, they don't exceed your expectations, in the way they take care of you.
I haven't read the entire thread and I'm not going to either, simply because cracking out high graded coins for resubmission in an attempt to achieve yet an even higher grade is nothing more than a test pilot pushing the envelope in an experimental plane. Sometimes even the most experienced test pilots crash and burn.
<< <i>In our opinion a couple of small spots were tooled off the surfaces. Either we missed the tooling first time through (when it was submitted via Secure Plus), or the tooling was done after the coin was cracked out of the Secure Plus holder. Occasionally we do make mistakes - so I am not making any accusations - only pointing out that these are the only possibilities.
We should be able to determine what happened if we get the coin back and send it through Secure Plus again.
That is the only way this issue can be factually resolved.
If PCGS made a mistake we will cover it with our guarantee - which is the best in the business. >>
Mr Willis,
I come to this level of collecting with a fresh set of eyes and a reasonable amount of intelligence. I have 50 years of life and consumer experience, zero experience with the mechanics of serious coin collecting.
I am extremely disappointed that this issue even exists given todays technology coupled with the monetary value of the materials CU & PCGS provide related services for. Especially when considering that Publicly traded, Collectors Universe, PCGS et. al. is at $40 m revenues 300 employees..etc etc ...ref. hoovers.com
I can buy an Iris Identification hardware and software system for less than the cost of this coin in this thread. The technology to image materials for use of identification and subsequent recognition has been around for a decade. Material Identification Using Laser Spectroscopy and Pattern Recognition Algorithms for example.
Rhetorically. If we can body scan people in airports please explain why isn't this already a well oiled finely run machine...... Do you need someone to crack a whip or what? From a consumer customer service viewpoint. Why does this thread even exist? Make Mr. Blay whole, delete this thread and get your acts together!
I have just read hundreds of very passionate posts from people who have been involved with coins for as long as I have been alive and I can't believe that regardless of what ever has transpired that there has been any debate about this service. Something is very wrong with this picture.
Simply - If the coin is resubmitted under the Secure Plus program and it is found to match the original data exactly then it should be reholdered with all the same information as it had from the original submission. NO QUESTIONS ASKED period
NEWPORT BEACH, Calif., March 25 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Collectors Universe, Inc. (Nasdaq: CLCT), a leading provider of value-added authentication and grading services to dealers and collectors of high-value collectibles, today announced that its coin division, Professional Coin Grading Service (PCGS), has launched PCGS Secure Plus™, a new high-tech grading process that has been designed to increase the confidence of collectors and dealers, and has introduced a new grade designation that potentially can increase the value of selected coins.
The PCGS Secure Plus process uses laser scanning to help detect coins that have been artificially enhanced since their last certification and can also be used to help identify stolen coins. Additionally, PCGS can now designate deserving, superior-quality coins as "Plus" within their respective grades, an important distinction when there are big differences in value between one grade point and the next.
Developed after extensive software and hardware development and testing in partnership with Coinsecure, Inc. of Palo Alto, California, the PCGS Secure Plus service digitally captures a unique "fingerprint" of each coin that is then entered into a permanent database. "PCGS Secure Plus will introduce a new level of confidence and security in the coin collecting market," said PCGS President Don Willis. "We believe that PCGS Secure Plus addresses several of the leading issues affecting the industry today.
PCGS Secure Plus is a patent-pending process, wherein a coin is laser scanned, imaged and registered in a permanent database. Every coin has its own identifying characteristics. Coins are like snowflakes at the micron level; they are very different from each other. If a coin has been previously registered in our database using the Secure Plus process, it will be identified whenever it's again scanned by us, making it possible to detect enhancements that may have been made since the coin was last registered with us.
<< <i>In our opinion a couple of small spots were tooled off the surfaces. Either we missed the tooling first time through (when it was submitted via Secure Plus), or the tooling was done after the coin was cracked out of the Secure Plus holder. Occasionally we do make mistakes - so I am not making any accusations - only pointing out that these are the only possibilities.
We should be able to determine what happened if we get the coin back and send it through Secure Plus again.
That is the only way this issue can be factually resolved.
If PCGS made a mistake we will cover it with our guarantee - which is the best in the business. >>
Mr Willis,
I come to this level of collecting with a fresh set of eyes and a reasonable amount of intelligence. I have 50 years of life and consumer experience, zero experience with the mechanics of serious coin collecting.
I am extremely disappointed that this issue even exists given todays technology coupled with the monetary value of the materials CU & PCGS provide related services for. Especially when considering that Publicly traded, Collectors Universe, PCGS et. al. is at $40 m revenues 300 employees..etc etc ...ref. hoovers.com
I can buy an Iris Identification hardware and software system for less than the cost of this coin in this thread. The technology to image materials for use of identification and subsequent recognition has been around for a decade. Material Identification Using Laser Spectroscopy and Pattern Recognition Algorithms for example.
Rhetorically. If we can body scan people in airports please explain why isn't this already a well oiled finely run machine...... Do you need someone to crack a whip or what? From a consumer customer service viewpoint. Why does this thread even exist? Make Mr. Blay whole, delete this thread and get your acts together!
I have just read hundreds of very passionate posts from people who have been involved with coins for as long as I have been alive and I can't believe that regardless of what ever has transpired that there has been any debate about this service. Something is very wrong with this picture.
Simply - If the coin is resubmitted under the Secure Plus program and it is found to match the original data exactly then it should be reholdered with all the same information as it had from the original submission. NO QUESTIONS ASKED period
NEWPORT BEACH, Calif., March 25 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Collectors Universe, Inc. (Nasdaq: CLCT), a leading provider of value-added authentication and grading services to dealers and collectors of high-value collectibles, today announced that its coin division, Professional Coin Grading Service (PCGS), has launched PCGS Secure Plus™, a new high-tech grading process that has been designed to increase the confidence of collectors and dealers, and has introduced a new grade designation that potentially can increase the value of selected coins.
The PCGS Secure Plus process uses laser scanning to help detect coins that have been artificially enhanced since their last certification and can also be used to help identify stolen coins. Additionally, PCGS can now designate deserving, superior-quality coins as "Plus" within their respective grades, an important distinction when there are big differences in value between one grade point and the next.
Developed after extensive software and hardware development and testing in partnership with Coinsecure, Inc. of Palo Alto, California, the PCGS Secure Plus service digitally captures a unique "fingerprint" of each coin that is then entered into a permanent database. "PCGS Secure Plus will introduce a new level of confidence and security in the coin collecting market," said PCGS President Don Willis. "We believe that PCGS Secure Plus addresses several of the leading issues affecting the industry today.
PCGS Secure Plus is a patent-pending process, wherein a coin is laser scanned, imaged and registered in a permanent database. Every coin has its own identifying characteristics. Coins are like snowflakes at the micron level; they are very different from each other. If a coin has been previously registered in our database using the Secure Plus process, it will be identified whenever it's again scanned by us, making it possible to detect enhancements that may have been made since the coin was last registered with us. >>
So, you suggest/demand the following?: Even if the coin was given a grade it didn't deserve when it was first evaluated under the secure plus tier, if it is subsequently cracked out of the holder, later re-submitted and still matches the secure plus scan, it should again be given that grade it doesn't deserve.
I find that idea as, or more disturbing, than you seem to feel about the coin not automatically being re-holdered if it matches the previous scan.
<< <i>In our opinion a couple of small spots were tooled off the surfaces. Either we missed the tooling first time through (when it was submitted via Secure Plus), or the tooling was done after the coin was cracked out of the Secure Plus holder. Occasionally we do make mistakes - so I am not making any accusations - only pointing out that these are the only possibilities. We should be able to determine what happened if we get the coin back and send it through Secure Plus again.
That is the only way this issue can be factually resolved.
If PCGS made a mistake we will cover it with our guarantee - which is the best in the business. >>
Don - the above quote seems to contradict your previous quote earlier in this thread - "Anyone who cracks out a coin knows full well that all guarantees are voided".
Can you clarify your position? This seems to suggest a vary large expansion of the PCGS guarantee - that SP coins are eligible for your guarantee even out of the holder. Is this true? Thanks.
While I have no doubt this will be resolved favorably to both parties, the following seems controlling and unequivocal and should provide extreme comfort to submitters:
"...Every coin has its own identifying characteristics. Coins are like snowflakes at the micron level; they are very different from each other. If a coin has been previously registered in our database using the Secure Plus process, it will be identified whenever it's again scanned by us, making it possible to detect enhancements that may have been made since the coin was last registered with us..."
<< <i>As an aside, I'm not convinced that a coin that has had spots removed is automatically unworthy of a grade. >>
Apparently PCGS and NGC concur, based on such coins being in their holders. I am admittedly presuming that they were aware of at least some of the ones I have seen, at the time they graded the coins.
Has anyone ever submitted a PCGS Secure coin in the holder and got an upgrade ? Not to my knowledge
Yes many times over. How many times do we have to say this?
Don - the above quote seems to contradict your previous quote earlier in this thread - "Anyone who cracks out a coin knows full well that all guarantees are voided".
No, there is no change in the PCGS guarantee. If you crack a coin out, you lose the guarantee. That much is black and white. On the other hand I intend to defend the integrity of our Secure Plus process which seems to be in question here which is particularly strange since the coin was deliberately not submitted through Secure Plus.
If Stewart resubmits the coin through Secure Plus for grading we will compare the coin to the original Secure Plus image after which we will decide what to do.
<< <i>Has anyone ever submitted a PCGS Secure coin in the holder and got an upgrade ? Not to my knowledge
Yes many times over. How many times do we have to say this?
Don - the above quote seems to contradict your previous quote earlier in this thread - "Anyone who cracks out a coin knows full well that all guarantees are voided".
No, there is no change in the PCGS guarantee. If you crack a coin out, you lose the guarantee. That much is black and white. On the other hand I intend to defend the integrity of our Secure Plus process which seems to be in question here which is particularly strange since the coin was deliberately not submitted through Secure Plus.
If Stewart resubmits the coin through Secure Plus for grading we will compare the coin to the original Secure Plus image after which we will decide what to do. >>
Just for the record, I've received an upgrade through SP. Blay might not want to believe it, but it does happen. Heck, at Baltimore I got a 2-fer (MS63-65) on a Saint submitted through regrade.
If I've learned anything by reading this thread I've learned that Don W. sure has a lot of patience and courtesy in spending his time dealing with a non issue that the OP tried to inflate beyond reason. The folks who've been around the block in this industry don't cry (for more than a few minutes) about bad submission results and the OP , considering he's no newbie, shouldn't either.
Follow me on Twitter @wtcgroup Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
"If I've learned anything by reading this thread I've learned that Don W. sure has a lot of patience and courtesy in spending his time dealing with a non issue that the OP tried to inflate beyond reason. The folks who've been around the block in this industry don't cry (for more than a few minutes) about bad submission results and the OP , considering he's no newbie, shouldn't either. "
....that part about patience and courtesy ; that's something we could all learn from the President of PCGS .
I thank him for having the fortitude to personally come onto these type of threads and make things understood and right .
If I've learned anything by reading this thread I've learned that Don W. sure has a lot of patience and courtesy in spending his time dealing with a non issue that the OP tried to inflate beyond reason. The folks who've been around the block in this industry don't cry (for more than a few minutes) about bad submission results and the OP , considering he's no newbie, shouldn't either.
"If Stewart resubmits the coin through Secure Plus for grading we will compare the coin to the original Secure Plus image after which we will decide what to do."
Don Willis would have done well as a Federal Court Judge because he managed to "cut through" all the "red herrings" and get RIGHT to the bottom line. Once the coin goes through Secure Plus, the technology will guide PCGS to the next step. Until then, there is really nothing to talk about here at all. Stewart may be content with the outcome when there is an outcome.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
<< <i>...defend the integrity of our Secure Plus process ... >>
it is more like defending the integrity of PCGS grading in general.
This is a human thing.
And I find it odd that so many openly question the variations in PCGS grades to the point of freely cracking out and resubmitting at cost repeatedly, however they think a SP grade is locked in. It has been stated many, many times that the same PCGS humans do the grading yet still the belief continues that the grade is locked in.
Perhaps people see a grade on a one of a kind coin and question it. Because it is one of a kind, and everyone knows who owns it, and what coin it is, and the current grade would they then think the grade can never change, even if disagreed with? Would this mean a unique coin's grade can't change because the TPG will remember it and always give it the same grade?
It's the same kind of thinking behind the belief that SP grades can't change. Just because PCGS remembers it doesn't mean the can't change the grade.
If Stewart resubmits the coin through Secure Plus for grading we will compare the coin to the original Secure Plus image after which we will decide what to do.
I don't get this. He bet on the inside straight and lost. There is NOTHING to do. Are the rules different for different submitters? We know the stock market is rigged. We know the bond market is rigged. Politics are rigged. Are coins rigged too? Is there nothing sacred? You crack out a coin and take your chances. Send him a box of kleenex and be done with it.
There is no controversy on SP. He didn't submit it through SP on purpose. He lost. End of story. He is experienced enough to know this.
<< <i>Wei: I've been known to "cry" for a couple hours about a very bad grading result, so I still need to work on getting that down to a couple minutes!
Wondercoin >>
Okay, maybe a few minutes isn't quite long enough but you know what I mean...
We've all had our bad moments. I've never cried over a bad order but I have yelled, gotten depressed and even knocked over a bourse table, but like I've stated the folks who know the deal may get mad for a few moments but in short time they realize that getting mad won't get their coins graded higher. We certainly don't mope about it on a message board.
Follow me on Twitter @wtcgroup Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
<< <i>Has anyone ever submitted a PCGS Secure coin in the holder and got an upgrade ? Not to my knowledge
Yes many times over. How many times do we have to say this?
Don - the above quote seems to contradict your previous quote earlier in this thread - "Anyone who cracks out a coin knows full well that all guarantees are voided". >>
Don, through all of "this," I think, and commend, you for the manner in which you have handled yourself.
If I could follow up on one thing......of all the coins that have been resubmitted for a regrade while in a Secure Plus holder to date, what percentage have actually gotten an upgrade?
I mean, are we talking less than 5 percent? 10? 25?
Comments
Seems to be a beef between Mr. Blay and PCGS......and should be conducted privately instead of using the forum as a sounding board and jury.
That is the only way this issue can be factually resolved.
If PCGS made a mistake we will cover it with our guarantee - which is the best in the business.
Don, this implies that whenever a coin that has previously been in a Secure Plus holder has been removed from one, so long as nothing has been done to the coin (toning, tooling, cleaning, etc.), the coin is still covered by the PCGS guarantee, whether the coin is or is not currently in a holder. Is this so?
<< <i>Why has this matter been taken onto the public forum stage here?
Seems to be a beef between Mr. Blay and PCGS......and should be conducted privately instead of using the forum as a sounding board and jury. >>
To put pressure on PCGS? To let off steam? Both?
<< <i>Why has this matter been taken onto the public forum stage here?
Seems to be a beef between Mr. Blay and PCGS......and should be conducted privately instead of using the forum as a sounding board and jury. >>
I think this thread was started to put pressure on PCGS to do what Blay considers to be the right thing. It'll be interesting to see how this is finally resolved assuming there won't be some confidentiality agreement as part of any settlement.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>In our opinion a couple of small spots were tooled off the surfaces. Either we missed the tooling first time through (when it was submitted via Secure Plus), or the tooling was done after the coin was cracked out of the Secure Plus holder. Occasionally we do make mistakes - so I am not making any accusations - only pointing out that these are the only possibilities. We should be able to determine what happened if we get the coin back and send it through Secure Plus again.
That is the only way this issue can be factually resolved.
If PCGS made a mistake we will cover it with our guarantee - which is the best in the business. >>
There's still a chance, however remote, that this new technology may turn up a false positive. Request the SP holder back, or, shall we say, what's left of it. Run that SP serial number through your SP database to turn up the SP coin correlated with that SP serial number. As a redundant measure, that would eliminate all possibilities of error.
<< <i>
<< <i>In our opinion a couple of small spots were tooled off the surfaces. Either we missed the tooling first time through (when it was submitted via Secure Plus), or the tooling was done after the coin was cracked out of the Secure Plus holder. Occasionally we do make mistakes - so I am not making any accusations - only pointing out that these are the only possibilities. We should be able to determine what happened if we get the coin back and send it through Secure Plus again.
That is the only way this issue can be factually resolved.
If PCGS made a mistake we will cover it with our guarantee - which is the best in the business. >>
There's still a chance, however remote, that this new technology may turn up a false positive. Request the SP holder back, or, shall we say, what's left of it. Run that SP serial number through your SP database to turn up the SP coin correlated with that SP serial number. As a redundant measure, that would eliminate all possibilities of error. >>
The coin is unique enough that they could probably find the info just from the description. I doubt they need the SP label.
<< <i>
<< <i>Why has this matter been taken onto the public forum stage here?
Seems to be a beef between Mr. Blay and PCGS......and should be conducted privately instead of using the forum as a sounding board and jury. >>
To put pressure on PCGS? To let off steam? Both?
It is a valid experience a consumer had with a corporation's service. It clearly displays the subjectivity involved in coin grading, and has generated discussion along those lines. Personally I don't see any direct fault on either side of the experience, it is simply the nature of the beast.
Has anyone ever submitted a PCGS Secure coin in the holder and got an upgrade ? Not to my knowledge
That is why I cracked the coin out of the Secure holder and sent it in regular service and also to get the DDO designation.
Coin GUy1 - Why would I want to put pressure on PCGS ??? To let off steam ???? Speak for yourself
Stewart
<< <i>In our opinion a couple of small spots were tooled off the surfaces. Either we missed the tooling first time through (when it was submitted via Secure Plus), or the tooling was done after the coin was cracked out of the Secure Plus holder. Occasionally we do make mistakes - so I am not making any accusations - only pointing out that these are the only possibilities. We should be able to determine what happened if we get the coin back and send it through Secure Plus again.
That is the only way this issue can be factually resolved.
If PCGS made a mistake we will cover it with our guarantee - which is the best in the business.
Don, this implies that whenever a coin that has previously been in a Secure Plus holder has been removed from one, so long as nothing has been done to the coin (toning, tooling, cleaning, etc.), the coin is still covered by the PCGS guarantee, whether the coin is or is not currently in a holder. Is this so? >>
We shall see.
I guess it is a judgment call based upon how good the information stored from the previous SP scan is. i.e. Is it detailed enough to show the points in question and to make a comparison with the coin in hand?
<< <i>Has anyone ever submitted a PCGS Secure coin in the holder and got an upgrade ? Not to my knowledge
That is why I cracked the coin out of the Secure holder and sent it in regular service and also to get the DDO designation. >>
Stewart,
Clearly you are a collector of means and skill with few peers. However, why should PCGS absolve you of the risk associated with cracking out a coin, when, by your own admission, your intent was at least in part to upgrade the coin by doing an end-around the SP service? The possibility that PCGS missed the (possible) tooling the first time does not absolve you of the risk, nor should it, in my opinion.
Just trying to understand your justification here, because it seems to me that you're asking to have your cake and eat it too -- hardly a defensible position from where I sit -- but perhaps I've misinterpreted.
Just wondering...Mike
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>In our opinion a couple of small spots were tooled off the surfaces. Either we missed the tooling first time through (when it was submitted via Secure Plus), or the tooling was done after the coin was cracked out of the Secure Plus holder. Occasionally we do make mistakes - so I am not making any accusations - only pointing out that these are the only possibilities. We should be able to determine what happened if we get the coin back and send it through Secure Plus again.
That is the only way this issue can be factually resolved.
If PCGS made a mistake we will cover it with our guarantee - which is the best in the business. >>
There's still a chance, however remote, that this new technology may turn up a false positive. Request the SP holder back, or, shall we say, what's left of it. Run that SP serial number through your SP database to turn up the SP coin correlated with that SP serial number. As a redundant measure, that would eliminate all possibilities of error. >>
The coin is unique enough that they could probably find the info just from the description. I doubt they need the SP label. >>
There's a difference between resolving a doubt to a probability and resolving a doubt to a certainty. There were 17,450,000 of these coins minted in 1857. Were this my business on the line, I think I'd opt for the latter means, if available, as the precedent-setter on establishing my policy towards resolving this particular kind of doubt. In fact, I think I'd require that from my customer.
Thinking a step further, future arguments over "it's not been changed since it was out of the SP holder" could lead to lawsuits.
<< <i>Has anyone ever submitted a PCGS Secure coin in the holder and got an upgrade ? Not to my knowledge
That is why I cracked the coin out of the Secure holder and sent it in regular service and also to get the DDO designation.
Coin GUy1 - Why would I want to put pressure on PCGS ??? To let off steam ???? Speak for yourself
Stewart >>
Stewart, forget that nonsense, do you have the SP slab with the little SP code number on it? If you do, send it in, along with the coin. In your case, you haven't yet suffered any money damages, as nothing has yet transacted on the coin. In the next case, who the hell knows? There may be thousands, perhaps even tens of thousands of dollars on the line. You should send them that slab, if you still have it, as the only issue, here, is, what went wrong on the grading? Understand, PCGS wants to get to the bottom of that issue, as much as you do; in fact, probably even more so, as this is their proprietary technology on the hot seat. Help them out, and to establish a fair and reasonable policy towards addressing this issue, in the future. At present, that technology is in its infancy, and this issue is precedent-setting. Realize that's the only reason you haven't got any knee-jerk answers, as yet (there are none). And, I'll be a monkey's uncle, if, in the end, they don't exceed your expectations, in the way they take care of you.
I mean it, I really will.
That is why I cracked the coin out of the Secure holder and sent it in regular service and also to get the DDO designation.
Coin GUy1 - Why would I want to put pressure on PCGS ??? To let off steam ???? Speak for yourself
Stewart>>
Stewart, a client of mine has had fairly good success with re-grades of secure plus coins and they were not chopped liver
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
<< <i>In our opinion a couple of small spots were tooled off the surfaces. Either we missed the tooling first time through (when it was submitted via Secure Plus), or the tooling was done after the coin was cracked out of the Secure Plus holder. Occasionally we do make mistakes - so I am not making any accusations - only pointing out that these are the only possibilities.
We should be able to determine what happened if we get the coin back and send it through Secure Plus again.
That is the only way this issue can be factually resolved.
If PCGS made a mistake we will cover it with our guarantee - which is the best in the business. >>
Mr Willis,
I come to this level of collecting with a fresh set of eyes and a reasonable amount of intelligence. I have 50 years of life and consumer experience, zero experience with the mechanics of serious coin collecting.
I am extremely disappointed that this issue even exists given todays technology coupled with the monetary value of the materials CU & PCGS provide related services for. Especially when considering that Publicly traded, Collectors Universe, PCGS et. al. is at $40 m revenues 300 employees..etc etc ...ref. hoovers.com
I can buy an Iris Identification hardware and software system for less than the cost of this coin in this thread. The technology to image materials for use of identification and subsequent recognition has been around for a decade. Material Identification Using Laser Spectroscopy and Pattern Recognition Algorithms for example.
Rhetorically. If we can body scan people in airports please explain why isn't this already a well oiled finely run machine...... Do you need someone to crack a whip or what? From a consumer customer service viewpoint. Why does this thread even exist? Make Mr. Blay whole, delete this thread and get your acts together!
I have just read hundreds of very passionate posts from people who have been involved with coins for as long as I have been alive and I can't believe that regardless of what ever has transpired that there has been any debate about this service. Something is very wrong with this picture.
Simply - If the coin is resubmitted under the Secure Plus program and it is found to match the original data exactly then it should be reholdered with all the same information as it had from the original submission. NO QUESTIONS ASKED period
For those like me who need to understand. Here is an Original Press release announcing the Secure Plus Service
NEWPORT BEACH, Calif., March 25 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Collectors Universe, Inc. (Nasdaq: CLCT), a leading provider of value-added authentication and grading services to dealers and collectors of high-value collectibles, today announced that its coin division, Professional Coin Grading Service (PCGS), has launched PCGS Secure Plus™, a new high-tech grading process that has been designed to increase the confidence of collectors and dealers, and has introduced a new grade designation that potentially can increase the value of selected coins.
The PCGS Secure Plus process uses laser scanning to help detect coins that have been artificially enhanced since their last certification and can also be used to help identify stolen coins. Additionally, PCGS can now designate deserving, superior-quality coins as "Plus" within their respective grades, an important distinction when there are big differences in value between one grade point and the next.
Developed after extensive software and hardware development and testing in partnership with Coinsecure, Inc. of Palo Alto, California, the PCGS Secure Plus service digitally captures a unique "fingerprint" of each coin that is then entered into a permanent database.
"PCGS Secure Plus will introduce a new level of confidence and security in the coin collecting market," said PCGS President Don Willis. "We believe that PCGS Secure Plus addresses several of the leading issues affecting the industry today.
PCGS Secure Plus is a patent-pending process, wherein a coin is laser scanned, imaged and registered in a permanent database. Every coin has its own identifying characteristics. Coins are like snowflakes at the micron level; they are very different from each other. If a coin has been previously registered in our database using the Secure Plus process, it will be identified whenever it's again scanned by us, making it possible to detect enhancements that may have been made since the coin was last registered with us.
bye bye
BTW -those scanners at the airport don't id anyone, they just let the scanners see through their clothes to see if the have hidden contraband
<< <i>
<< <i>In our opinion a couple of small spots were tooled off the surfaces. Either we missed the tooling first time through (when it was submitted via Secure Plus), or the tooling was done after the coin was cracked out of the Secure Plus holder. Occasionally we do make mistakes - so I am not making any accusations - only pointing out that these are the only possibilities.
We should be able to determine what happened if we get the coin back and send it through Secure Plus again.
That is the only way this issue can be factually resolved.
If PCGS made a mistake we will cover it with our guarantee - which is the best in the business. >>
Mr Willis,
I come to this level of collecting with a fresh set of eyes and a reasonable amount of intelligence. I have 50 years of life and consumer experience, zero experience with the mechanics of serious coin collecting.
I am extremely disappointed that this issue even exists given todays technology coupled with the monetary value of the materials CU & PCGS provide related services for. Especially when considering that Publicly traded, Collectors Universe, PCGS et. al. is at $40 m revenues 300 employees..etc etc ...ref. hoovers.com
I can buy an Iris Identification hardware and software system for less than the cost of this coin in this thread. The technology to image materials for use of identification and subsequent recognition has been around for a decade. Material Identification Using Laser Spectroscopy and Pattern Recognition Algorithms for example.
Rhetorically. If we can body scan people in airports please explain why isn't this already a well oiled finely run machine...... Do you need someone to crack a whip or what? From a consumer customer service viewpoint. Why does this thread even exist? Make Mr. Blay whole, delete this thread and get your acts together!
I have just read hundreds of very passionate posts from people who have been involved with coins for as long as I have been alive and I can't believe that regardless of what ever has transpired that there has been any debate about this service. Something is very wrong with this picture.
Simply - If the coin is resubmitted under the Secure Plus program and it is found to match the original data exactly then it should be reholdered with all the same information as it had from the original submission. NO QUESTIONS ASKED period
For those like me who need to understand. Here is an Original Press release announcing the Secure Plus Service
NEWPORT BEACH, Calif., March 25 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Collectors Universe, Inc. (Nasdaq: CLCT), a leading provider of value-added authentication and grading services to dealers and collectors of high-value collectibles, today announced that its coin division, Professional Coin Grading Service (PCGS), has launched PCGS Secure Plus™, a new high-tech grading process that has been designed to increase the confidence of collectors and dealers, and has introduced a new grade designation that potentially can increase the value of selected coins.
The PCGS Secure Plus process uses laser scanning to help detect coins that have been artificially enhanced since their last certification and can also be used to help identify stolen coins. Additionally, PCGS can now designate deserving, superior-quality coins as "Plus" within their respective grades, an important distinction when there are big differences in value between one grade point and the next.
Developed after extensive software and hardware development and testing in partnership with Coinsecure, Inc. of Palo Alto, California, the PCGS Secure Plus service digitally captures a unique "fingerprint" of each coin that is then entered into a permanent database.
"PCGS Secure Plus will introduce a new level of confidence and security in the coin collecting market," said PCGS President Don Willis. "We believe that PCGS Secure Plus addresses several of the leading issues affecting the industry today.
PCGS Secure Plus is a patent-pending process, wherein a coin is laser scanned, imaged and registered in a permanent database. Every coin has its own identifying characteristics. Coins are like snowflakes at the micron level; they are very different from each other. If a coin has been previously registered in our database using the Secure Plus process, it will be identified whenever it's again scanned by us, making it possible to detect enhancements that may have been made since the coin was last registered with us. >>
So, you suggest/demand the following?: Even if the coin was given a grade it didn't deserve when it was first evaluated under the secure plus tier, if it is subsequently cracked out of the holder, later re-submitted and still matches the secure plus scan, it should again be given that grade it doesn't deserve.
I find that idea as, or more disturbing, than you seem to feel about the coin not automatically being re-holdered if it matches the previous scan.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
World Collection
British Collection
German States Collection
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
And someone as experienced as Stewart should know that. He took a risk. He lost. Then he cries. Publicly.
<< <i>In our opinion a couple of small spots were tooled off the surfaces. Either we missed the tooling first time through (when it was submitted via Secure Plus), or the tooling was done after the coin was cracked out of the Secure Plus holder. Occasionally we do make mistakes - so I am not making any accusations - only pointing out that these are the only possibilities. We should be able to determine what happened if we get the coin back and send it through Secure Plus again.
That is the only way this issue can be factually resolved.
If PCGS made a mistake we will cover it with our guarantee - which is the best in the business. >>
Don - the above quote seems to contradict your previous quote earlier in this thread - "Anyone who cracks out a coin knows full well that all guarantees are voided".
Can you clarify your position? This seems to suggest a vary large expansion of the PCGS guarantee - that SP coins are eligible for your guarantee even out of the holder. Is this true? Thanks.
merse
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
"...Every coin has its own identifying characteristics. Coins are like snowflakes at the micron level; they are very different from each other. If a coin has been previously registered in our database using the Secure Plus process, it will be identified whenever it's again scanned by us, making it possible to detect enhancements that may have been made since the coin was last registered with us..."
<< <i>The saga continues. This is more exciting than the Langbord trial. >>
I called it. See my second post in the Longacre Returns thread.
At the time I made that post this thread was still on the first page.
--Jerry
and yea.. i read this whole thread.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>As an aside, I'm not convinced that a coin that has had spots removed is automatically unworthy of a grade. >>
Apparently PCGS and NGC concur, based on such coins being in their holders. I am admittedly presuming that they were aware of at least some of the ones I have seen, at the time they graded the coins.
"most coins that collectors consider undergraded are actually silently net graded for a problem that the collector doesn't recognize"
This statement is so true:
And someone as experienced as Stewart should know that. He took a risk. He lost. Then he cries. Publicly.
<< <i>As an aside, I'm not convinced that a coin that has had spots removed is automatically unworthy of a grade. >>
Only if they notice...
Yes many times over. How many times do we have to say this?
Don - the above quote seems to contradict your previous quote earlier in this thread - "Anyone who cracks out a coin knows full well that all guarantees are voided".
No, there is no change in the PCGS guarantee. If you crack a coin out, you lose the guarantee. That much is black and white. On the other hand I intend to defend the integrity of our Secure Plus process which seems to be in question here which is particularly strange since the coin was deliberately not submitted through Secure Plus.
If Stewart resubmits the coin through Secure Plus for grading we will compare the coin to the original Secure Plus image after which we will decide what to do.
<< <i>Has anyone ever submitted a PCGS Secure coin in the holder and got an upgrade ? Not to my knowledge
Yes many times over. How many times do we have to say this?
Don - the above quote seems to contradict your previous quote earlier in this thread - "Anyone who cracks out a coin knows full well that all guarantees are voided".
No, there is no change in the PCGS guarantee. If you crack a coin out, you lose the guarantee. That much is black and white. On the other hand I intend to defend the integrity of our Secure Plus process which seems to be in question here which is particularly strange since the coin was deliberately not submitted through Secure Plus.
If Stewart resubmits the coin through Secure Plus for grading we will compare the coin to the original Secure Plus image after which we will decide what to do. >>
Just for the record, I've received an upgrade through SP. Blay might not want to believe it, but it does happen. Heck, at Baltimore I got a 2-fer (MS63-65) on a Saint submitted through regrade.
If I've learned anything by reading this thread I've learned that Don W. sure has a lot of patience and courtesy in spending his time dealing with a non issue that the OP tried to inflate beyond reason. The folks who've been around the block in this industry don't cry (for more than a few minutes) about bad submission results and the OP , considering he's no newbie, shouldn't either.
Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
"If I've learned anything by reading this thread I've learned that Don W. sure has a lot of patience and courtesy in spending his time dealing with a non issue that the OP tried to inflate beyond reason. The folks who've been around the block in this industry don't cry (for more than a few minutes) about bad submission results and the OP , considering he's no newbie, shouldn't either. "
....that part about patience and courtesy ; that's something we could all learn from the President of PCGS .
I thank him for having the fortitude to personally come onto these type of threads and make things understood and right .
I agree! Nicely put, Wei.
Don Willis would have done well as a Federal Court Judge because he managed to "cut through" all the "red herrings" and get RIGHT to the bottom line. Once the coin goes through Secure Plus, the technology will guide PCGS to the next step. Until then, there is really nothing to talk about here at all. Stewart may be content with the outcome when there is an outcome.
Wondercoin
Wondercoin
<< <i>Has anyone ever submitted a PCGS Secure coin in the holder and got an upgrade ? Not to my knowledge
Yes many times over. How many times do we have to say this? >>
Until it is on Myth Busters
<< <i>Ahhh - another tradedollarnutism:
"most coins that collectors consider undergraded are actually silently net graded for a problem that the collector doesn't recognize" >>
Word.
<< <i>...defend the integrity of our Secure Plus process ... >>
it is more like defending the integrity of PCGS grading in general.
This is a human thing.
And I find it odd that so many openly question the variations in PCGS grades to the point of freely cracking out and resubmitting at cost repeatedly, however they think a SP grade is locked in. It has been stated many, many times that the same PCGS humans do the grading yet still the belief continues that the grade is locked in.
Perhaps people see a grade on a one of a kind coin and question it. Because it is one of a kind, and everyone knows who owns it, and what coin it is, and the current grade would they then think the grade can never change, even if disagreed with? Would this mean a unique coin's grade can't change because the TPG will remember it and always give it the same grade?
It's the same kind of thinking behind the belief that SP grades can't change. Just because PCGS remembers it doesn't mean the can't change the grade.
I don't get this. He bet on the inside straight and lost. There is NOTHING to do. Are the rules different for different submitters? We know the stock market is rigged. We know the bond market is rigged. Politics are rigged. Are coins rigged too? Is there nothing sacred? You crack out a coin and take your chances. Send him a box of kleenex and be done with it.
There is no controversy on SP. He didn't submit it through SP on purpose. He lost. End of story. He is experienced enough to know this.
<< <i>Wei: I've been known to "cry" for a couple hours about a very bad grading result, so I still need to work on getting that down to a couple minutes!
Wondercoin >>
Okay, maybe a few minutes isn't quite long enough but you know what I mean...
We've all had our bad moments. I've never cried over a bad order but I have yelled, gotten depressed and even knocked over a bourse table, but like I've stated the folks who know the deal may get mad for a few moments but in short time they realize that getting mad won't get their coins graded higher. We certainly don't mope about it on a message board.
Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
Now you are scaring me!!
Wondercoin
<< <i>Has anyone ever submitted a PCGS Secure coin in the holder and got an upgrade ? Not to my knowledge
Stewart >>
That is, to me, an interesting question. Does anyone know the answer to it?
<< <i>
<< <i>Has anyone ever submitted a PCGS Secure coin in the holder and got an upgrade ? Not to my knowledge
Stewart >>
That is, to me, an interesting question. Does anyone know the answer to it? >>
Yes, the answer is a resounding yes. A number of people have affirmed so in his thread and on multiple previous occasions on the forum.
<< <i>Has anyone ever submitted a PCGS Secure coin in the holder and got an upgrade ? Not to my knowledge
Yes many times over. How many times do we have to say this?
Don - the above quote seems to contradict your previous quote earlier in this thread - "Anyone who cracks out a coin knows full well that all guarantees are voided".
>>
Don, through all of "this," I think, and commend, you for the manner in which you have handled yourself.
If I could follow up on one thing......of all the coins that have been resubmitted for a regrade while in a Secure Plus holder to date, what percentage have actually gotten an upgrade?
I mean, are we talking less than 5 percent? 10? 25?
Thanks!