Just Bob

PCGS Coin Facts will give you two or three pictures of coins in each grade, I believe. According to a thread,( since removed,) on the CU forum, they used to have multiple pictures. This was changed because Laura Sperber, (also since removed) complained about people resubmitting coins and the pictures of the same coin showing up with different grades. She claimed that this evidence of grade inflation was ruining her business, and should be taken off the internet. Many people disagreed, not just because they wanted to have more pictures for research purposes like yours, but they believed that dishonesty was not the best policy.

@DWLange That should get his attention.

Yes. Look for him on an upcoming episode. (Actually, I had to look that up. I had no idea what MST3K meant.)

That one looks like it has been in a fire. Pretty colors, though.

Before you go, would you mind pointing me to the thread in which I said that something looked "funny" about your coin? I have been back through this thread, your other 3 threads, and all of my posts for the last two months, and I can't seem to find it. Thanks.

SPAMBOT

OP, did you miss this part of the explanation?: If PCGS and NGC use different designations, and attribute world coins differently, how could they possibly include both company's coins in their registry? Can you imagine the confusion if, for example, NGC recognized varieties that PCGS did not, or vice versa. Or, if one company called a variety by one name, and the other company used a different name? Or if one company declared that a certain coin type existed, but the other company did not agree? If different standards are used - which they are - the amount of cross-referencing, footnoting, and explanations necessary would be staggering. And, that does not even take into account different standards used in grading, which, I am told, do actually exist. So, is NGC expected to change their grading standards to match their competitor, or should there be a (constantly-updated) chart that compares NGC grades to their PCGS equivalent? And, if the grades are different, which company's standards are used to rank the coins?

Numismatic author Roger Burdette states that these "SMS" coins were not specially made coins, but were early strikes from fresh dies. If that is the case, then the dies were likely later used to coin normal business strikes, and coins from these dies would then be found in circulation or in regular mint sets. In any case, if you send these coins to NGC for authentication and attribution, Mr. David Lange, research director at NGC, will be the one who looks at them. He is a member of this chat board, and can be reached by PM. If I were in your shoes, I would first orient all of my pictures to show the letters and numerals right side up, so that he does not have turn turn his head to compare your photos with known examples, and then send him a PM with a link to this thread.

It is hard to tell from the pictures, but the whole coin looks "off." I don't think it is real.

It could be a mint error, such as a "struck-through," but it also could be damaged. Can you post a picture? That might help us tell what is going on.

You don't think that maybe misleading the OP into thinking his $35 coin is worth $5,000 is more damaging than hurting his ego? The coin is a VF.

Yes, I can clearly answer your question. A key date coin, like your 1916D, is a prime candidate for counterfeiting. As Kurt said, there are thousands of them out there. A careful buyer would most likely want to either see the coin in person, or have it authenticated by a reputable third party. I was not stating or implying that YOUR coin was counterfeit. I was referring to key date coins in general. Neither was I accusing you of attempting fraud. Clear enough?

I can't imagine anyone with any knowledge of coins buying the 1916D just from a picture, especially one that is not very clear. It is a key date, so is likely to be counterfeited. I would be very surprised if you were not required to have it authenticated before anyone on this forum would take a chance on it. Unless, of course, you can find someone who likes to gamble. The same thing applies to the coins that you posted in another thread. The pictures are not clear enough, and the coins are too valuable, to take that kind of risk.

I think you should go with this one:

What can we do? It is only a drop in the bucket, I know, but, on this forum, we can continue to provide accurate information and guidance, and try to confront and correct misinformation and ignorance. The areas that needs to be addressed the most, Youtube, Facebook, Etsy, etc. are areas that are outside my realm. The only one I use is Youtube, and that is only to watch things like old Carol Burnette bloopers and other comedy videos. I wouldn't even know how to begin to make a video, but it seems like that may be what is needed. Maybe an abundance of accurate videos would help to counteract the ones that are full of error. I definitely agree with you about the overabundance of willful ignorance, though. It gets downright discouraging sometimes.

I'm sorry, but I am confused by this thread. You got an answer from someone on another forum, who stated that PCGS had changed their designation on a number of coin types over the years. That seems like a perfectly reasonable explanation, to me. You also apparently did not feel the need to contact PCGS to answer your question. So, I guess I am wondering: What additional information were you hoping to get from this thread?

Although I will admit to being nice, I don't recall ever having suggested that "we all just try to get along." In fact, I do not feel that way at all. There are definitely posters on here, past and present, with whom I did/do not get along, and there are undoubtedly some who feel the same about me. I have no problem calling out, arguing with, chastising, ignoring, or refusing to respond to anyone who comes on here and tries to push misinformation, lead newbies astray, act stupid, or otherwise make a nuisance of themselves. And, I certainly expect others to do the same to me.

Thank you for that info. As I stated earlier, if the graders knew who submitted the coins, it may affect their objectivity. It would be nice to hear from someone at NGC on this matter, just to be sure. Has the green label venture been successful so far?

Keep us informed.

First, welcome to the forum, and thank you for joining in the discussion. Does the above statement mean that NGC graders know that the coins they are grading were submitted by your company? Or is that information just for the people handling the paperwork?

When I saw the title of the thread, and the name of the author, I had a feeling it would be entertaining. I wasn't disappointed. You gotta love crazy.

Good job on that last set of pictures. Your coin does not appear to be one of the overdates. It looks to be, as Woods stated, simply a worn Indian cent, worth a dollar or two. There is no "lion mark," and all of the other marks are just circulation marks. Ignore the white circles in the above pics. They are just showing circulation hits - nothing more. Some people see all sorts of things on coins, the same way people see shapes in clouds. It's a phenomenon called pareidolia, and it is has gotten quite common on coin forums recently.

To be honest, I can't tell anything from your pictures. Can you take a straight-on shot?

It definitely does not look like Snow-1/FS-301. On that one, the bottom of the "7" is visible below the "8." (picture below) Clear pictures of Snow-2, 1888/887 are harder to find online . In fact, I couldn't find any pictures that were clear enough to re-post, but Heritage, Great Collections, and David Lawrence all have pictures of coins they have sold. Your coin does not appear to match that variety, either. Snow-3 with the left edge of the "1" between the denticles, has been reported, but is controversial, and is not listed on the Fly-in Club site. Here is the description of Snow-2 from Rick Snow's book: " Repunching can easily be seen inside the upper loops of the 8's. The top right point of the 7 is very bold inside the upper loop of the last 8. A small die line extends out from the first pearl. The discovery specimen showed a reverse die crack extending vertically from the rim at 7:00." Link to Heritage Link to DLRC

I don't post pictures of my Roosevelt Dimes very often, so here goes one: OK - two.