Nutmeg Coin

This should be in the for sale section IMO.  Alternatives are keeping coins with packs so humidity is low.  

All the puttied coins they put in holders that cost them so much back around 2009 especially were huge errors, and they tried to pass the buck by suing the coin doctors.  Check out their "warranty claims" page on their statistics page where they show what they are paying out on sour coins.  NGC should have something like this.  

Or if the guy had gotten the coin back, did not discuss it online or other proveable place and then run the "PR65 RB" cent on ebay, with less than great pictures and it had sold well over $10K, what would PCGS' liability have been then?

And PCGS wanted the coin doctors to be responsible for their pre-submission "work":  http://www.coinlink.com/News/commentary-and-opinion/coin-rarities-related-topics-the-pcgs-lawsuit-against-alleged-coin-doctors/

I don't recall NGC doing that.   You wonder ultimately where responsibility lies, with the collector?

If the owner of the under $100 coin gets a coin valued at $40K, it should be charged at their high value price, so that would be just one trigger.

This is what Mr. Salzberg said about their software:   If a grading service has software that flashes that you just graded a 1944 Walker in MS 68, the pressure is there for the final grade to be lowered to protect the first coin’s value, maintaining the perception that that service’s coins are worth more.  https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/2259/

22 hours ago, robec1347 said:

I know for a fact NGC makes mechanical errors.

I sent in two 1999-S silver proof sets to be graded.

Virtually every quarter and half dollar is mislabeled. Both halves say Connecticut, one Pennsylvania quarter is correct while the other says fifty cents. Both Georgia's say New Jersey. Both Connecticut's say Georgia. One New Jersey's says Pennsylvania, the other says fifty cents. Both Delaware's are correct.

I sold one set to a forum member. I eventually cracked the quarters and placed them in a Dansko album. I still have the Kennedy with the mislabeled insert.

That's different, and I have had similar things happen, like a $5 Lib. put into a $10 label holder.  When I noticed it getting done and "shipped" I notified Angel about the error and he rectified it and still shipped it out the same day.

The difference here is huge.  A $75 coin graded as a $40K one, the software I'm sure is designed to flag major errors like that.

I doubt that NGC would ever make an error like that.

I apologize if this was discussed on the NGC forums:  https://www.cointalk.com/threads/ebay-still-a-cherrypickers-paradise-2017.290909/

How would NGC resolve an issue like this?  It looks like PCGS insisted the owner of the likely falsely graded 09 vdb coin return it immediately.  

The Red Book is vital and fairly comprehensive guide to US coins, I know dealers who don't consider coin a "variety" unless it is in there.

From what I have seen the Blue Book is just rock bottom pricewise, maybe the same % under Red Book year to year, so they just print the same propaganda to give false hope that buyers could get no problem coins for those prices. At least the Farmer's Almanac has some poetry and prose that make it interesting.

"Not worth a Continental".

Every coin stands on its own merits regardless of whether the top experts agree it is "all there" for grade. I would think that allowing CAC, "eagle eye", etc. coins in from PCGS would have been a reasonable accommodation. For me the business decision would come down to risk management and if CAC or another company is willing to back up grades with money then that should be enough IMO.

What a can of worms. Why are you only bringing up Heritage? What about the other major auction houses?

 

Btw, I have made up to 5 fold profits from Heritage coins before without even regrading. So yeah.

 

What do you mean by 5 fold profits, that seems abit vague can you be more specific?

 

Thanks, HT

 

Not that hard on a few exceptional items that are under-graded like AU58 coins that could go significantly higher.

 

As for HA in general, they are one of the largest auction companies but from what I have seen on varied experiences of consignors, many of their experiences are not good and if you did a thorough search of legal problems HA has had over the years it is hard to see how they could operate in more consumer friendly states like CA or NY; TX seems to protect large businesses at the cost of some aggrieved consumers. And on a coin fraud case I brought up with first HA then PNG due to their non-responsiveness, if the large money interest like HA wants to play by their own rules good luck getting any justice.

 

Although I have many disagreements with the way the PNG handles complaints, if you are referring to the Double Eagle coin that you referenced in previous threads, then the PNG and Heritage were correct to handle the matter in the way that they did.

 

Your money was stolen by a scammer; the coin was not actually stolen from you. That is a critical distinction. Moreover, based on the sketchy scans that he sent you of the item, I doubt the fraudster ever owned the coin. He likely ripped the image from somewhere else, in which case, Heritage would have no basis to interfere with the sale of its consignor's private property. The PNG would have been correct in dismissing the complaint/not acting.

I disagree; but there is a larger question of whether their stolen numismatic item feature is working or has ever worked. I made worthwhile queries on this, and Mr. Brueggeman said he would look into and get back to me that the fraud would not give the consignor of the fraudulent item clear title, as well as other conditions he signed when consigning it. The Coin World advertiser definitely had it so you are wrong on that count guaranteed. I consider it extremely irresponsible for contacted parties to fail to even provide an answer, but that is the way many lawyers and certain "professionals" operate, only respond if their financial gain is advantaged. It really comes down to ethics and the golden rule, treating others as you would want to be treated. If a large numismatic company wants to play by their own rules without providing reasonable responses to their conduct the hobby will be damaged.

Actually I finally heard back from HA through the PNG as Mr. Brueggeman made an inquiry even as he is recovering from back issues. (Update 10-27)

What a can of worms. Why are you only bringing up Heritage? What about the other major auction houses?

 

Btw, I have made up to 5 fold profits from Heritage coins before without even regrading. So yeah.

 

What do you mean by 5 fold profits, that seems abit vague can you be more specific?

 

Thanks, HT

Not that hard on a few exceptional items that are under-graded like AU58 coins that could go significantly higher.

As for HA in general, they are one of the largest auction companies but from what I have seen on varied experiences of consignors, many of their experiences are not good and if you did a thorough search of legal problems HA has had over the years it is hard to see how they could operate in more consumer friendly states like CA or NY; TX seems to protect large businesses at the cost of some aggrieved consumers. And on a coin fraud case I brought up with first HA then PNG due to their non-responsiveness, if the large money interest like HA wants to play by their own rules good luck getting any justice. (Finally heard back from HA after going through PNG)

Bidding is up soon: http://coins.ha.com/itm/roosevelt-dimes/1964-d-10c-ms68-full-bands-pcgs/a/1238-3703.s

Back around 1999 Mr. Nachbar at Baltimore had a large hoard of Roosevelt dimes, original rolls for not much over the GS price before those prices appreciated, but you had to buy the whole thing. Who says there isn't a Santa Claus in numismatics?

"The standard for the rare coin industry" . The standard of what?

And maybe in the interest of the sunlight of the truth and a free and open awareness of numismatics they will link this forum discussion thread to the HA listing.

I was impressed by the enthusiasm of "Wondercoin" in his specialty, which changes my opinion somewhat of the registry/modern phenomenon.

I was speaking to a dealer yesterday about this coin who has been in the business over 50 years. He said he wouldn't be able in good faith to sell coins like this due to the fact that he is willing to buy back any coin he sells. At least high value coins with CAC stickers have an active bid level.

$10K is insane for that coin, nearly 8 ounces of gold for a common date Roosevelt dime!

Since the seller is a top expert (I am on PCGS' prestigious "Board of Experts" having been hand picked as PCGS' top (outside) modern coin expert at the time. If you love Mint State Roosevelt Dimes (as I do), you are talking to the right guy!) it must be a one of a kind coin.

Were these coins that NGC called "brilliant uncirculated" all coins that would have gotten a clean MS grade? This was one: http://i.imgur.com/0kkoAQh.jpg Did they only offer this option for Morgans?

NutmegCoin...would love to see good pictures of the whizzed coin.

I have only seen one whizzed coin before - raw - and it had an odd sheen to it.

The coin was too clean for the wear on its devices.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Here's a old friend coming back home. Sold this in 2011 - a friend bought it at

the Heritage ANA auction - but my friend upgraded it with a 66; I couldn't let this

one slip thru my fingers. It came out of a great collection - and the date is a semi-

key of Phila Halves.

 

Images by MessyDesk

 

 

286,637

http://i.imgur.com/odq8oGe.jpg http://i.imgur.com/yvSyNpd.jpg

When ICG sent it back as an AU55 whizzed, I spoke with Skip one grader there and he gave me the run-down on the whizzing process. I saw it as a toned and lightly cleaned coin.

Barber halves in XF and above can be tough to find and tougher to discern whether they have been cleaned or not.

One came back for ICG as AU55 details whizzed; both myself and one of the sharper dealers in the state missed that.

I don't like the metric system with all the hoopla it has been heralded with; the same goes with changing the current system; if it's not broken don't fix it.