Coinbuf

There was a lot of back and forth and photos being posted to that thread with lots of commentary so yes threads that long can get confusing as side discussions or sideways comments can make it difficult to follow the main thrust. And yes there is (imo) going to be some variation in quality and grade between the crossover legacy coins and coins that are simply graded on the coin's merits, lets dig a bit deeper to find out why. Let's go back and revisit the initial purpose of the CAC bean, as I said before the point of the bean was a way for JA to have an in hand pre review and identify (sticker) coins that he would like to buy and resell. Thus, he was not grading those P or N coins, simply picking out coins that he felt were the best so that when or if they showed up for sale he would attempt to purchase those coins. So because the goal was different for beaning, there must be a few market graded coins from both P and N which have received a bean, and the reality is that there could end up being Legacy coins (those coins that can be identified with the L on the label) that might grade lower if cracked out and sent in raw. Now I think the number of coins that will fall into this middle area is going to be small, as I think JA has been very consistent in not awarding beans to slider coins that do not hold up to his standards of uncirculated condition. But during the past 16 years that the bean factory has been operating basic statistics suggest that there have to be a few market graded coins which have slipped thru and received a bean but would be graded lower if submitted raw to CACG. Those are the coins that will be confusing and will be the coins that the CACG haters will look for and use to demonstrate inconsistencies in CACG grading. I don't see this as stranger, and I think you are taking a few examples and blowing them out of proportion. The sticker factory has only reviewed a very tiny percentage of coins that are eligible to be reviewed and of course we have no real idea of just how many have failed for surface issues like rub. Let's not forget that both N and P have been churning out market graded coins for at least a couple of decades if not three even. So that means there is a huge number of coins out in the marketplace where CACG might disagree with the market grades and downgrade if the submitter allows them to, many of which have never been seen by CAC for a bean.

To my eye it looks like a small piece of lint that could have landed on the coin during the encapsulation of the coin, that has happened before. Are you sure it is metal and is on the coin inside the plastic? I ask because I have seen a few instances where someone had something on the outside of the plastic but mistook it for being on the coin, those proof surfaces can sometimes cast shadows and trick the eye.

You can add PCGS world coins to your inventory if you use the old registry system found at this link. Old registry system It's a bit clunky to add world coins but everything you need is there. The old system uses the same login name/password as you use here. You can add any coin, US or world, certified by any company, raw, token, whatever you have by using the old system which allows you to use that as an on-line data base of all your coins. As you already know you cannot use anything but NGC graded coins in the NGC competitive world registry, however, in the old system you can setup custom sets and use any coin in your inventory. Hope that helps.

Welcome to the forum, your photo is slightly out of focus and I cannot tell what you are looking at. Perhaps someone else can.

That thread was started a couple of weeks ago and I do not recall every comment, but from my memory your statement is incorrect. I do not recall a single comment where anyone claimed to have sent a beaned P or N coin for crossover that was downgraded. If you want to sift back through that thread and find one I welcome your correction, every coin that Rexford (the guy who claims to have been a grader at PCGS) posted had not previously been beaned. And the one PCGS coin with a bean that I recall him posting was posted as a reference example not as an example of a beaned coin crossed at a lower grade. My opinion is that every coin that Rexford posted which was downgraded by CACG had to have been submitted raw or as cross at any grade and none of those he posted were previously beaned. When you submit coins for crossover (at any TPG) you have the option to choose cross at grade only (or higher) or at any grade. Some people like to roll the dice and will chose cross at any grade, but that is a gamble and one that doesn't always pay off as we know. Notice that the guy in the video never identifies how those coins were submitted, nor does he ever mention that any of those coins in the video were previously beaned. What I do know is that none of the CACG holders he shows in the video has the "L" on the label to signify that these were previously beaned coins (called legacy coins at CACG) submitted for crossover. So those coins in that video were not previously beaned and either cracked and sent raw or submitted as cross at any grade, as that information was not supplied in the video we don't know. I do not remember seeing a single example posted anywhere of a previously beaned coin submitted for crossover that was downgraded or refused to cross at grade. I just know that it can happen if the coin has changed or turned in the holder since it was seen and given a bean.

Yes it is true that JA has expressed that opinion on the CAC forum, and it is not just the cost of the sticker review, postage both ways can be quite expensive even for a group of low or modest value coins. In the beginning most were selective in what was sent to CAC, however, as the market for beaned coins has picked up and prices for even rather pedestrian coins with a bean have risen, many have begun to send in everything but the kitchen sink to see what sticks. While I cannot say this for sure, I have a feeling that this may have played a small role in JA's decision to open a TPG. My unsubstantiated conclusion was further validated recently when CACG announced a very low priced economy grading tier for Morgan and Peace dollars of $15 per coin for coins with a valuation under $500. Yes it is true that for any wealthy collector the cost of a bean (including the shipping) is of little concern or consequence, however, JA's rational shows just how much he cares and is concerned with the average joe type of collectors, imo. No that is incorrect, a coin with a bean will cross at the same grade (or potentially higher) unless the coin has degraded in the holder. This is most likely to be the case with copper which may have changed color, example, the holder says the coin is red but the coin has clearly mellowed and is now a red brown color. While less likely but also possible a silver or gold coin that could also have turned in the holder since it was stickered. That is the only reason a P or N graded coin with a bean would be rejected for direct cross, and this is not a change that has been the case since CACG started operations. Yes that thread ats and the comments from a former P grader in the thread was very reviling and pulled the curtain back on TPG market grading. I have no doubt that JA knew CACG's stance on rub would "rub" some dealers and collectors the wrong way.

I'm sorry but your coin looks nothing like an as new mint state 1881-O Morgan dollar looks like. Your coin has seen some circulation and/or mishandling in its past and would grade either low AU and possibly cleaned and is worth $30-$40 far less than the grading fees. On the positive side by posting this before you attempted to have it graded you have saved yourself the fees and the anguish of getting the bad news on the grade later.

I'm not really sure what your point is, the Sheldon scale goes from 1 to 70 for both MS and proof.

Welcome to the forum, this section of the forum is for members to buy and sell items, you should use the newbie or US/world sections when seeking advice. I have flagged the mods to have this thread moved to an appropriate area, please do not make a new duplicate thread as that will only be confusing. First and very important is do not attempt to improve or clean any of the coins, that could easily ruin any collector value the coin may have. Second it is not possible to answer your question in any detailed way without more information, are you a collector or did you just buy this lot out of the blue, what dates, what countries, what denominations, circulated or mint state? All that information and more will be needed, in the absence of additional information all anyone can do is give you some very basic and general advice. I suggest that you look for any coin shops around you, contact that shop(s) and see if they are able to review your coins, not every small coin dealer has the expertise to do an evaluation of world coins. Remember that you will need to pay for this service so inquire how much that will cost. If you are not a collector something that surprises many non-collectors is that even very old coins do not always equate to expensive coins. Said another way, just because a coin is old does not mean it is automatically valuable, this is especially true with many world coins. I say this so that you don't have your hopes up to high and are disappointed with a much lower valuation. As a result many old coins, both US and world, are not worth sending to a TPG like NGC for grading. If you post some clear in focus cropped photos of a few of the coins you have I'm sure that one of the world coin collectors or dealers that are members of the forum can help you with both identification and a ballpark valuation.

Two grading opinions separated by 5 grade points.

Proof coins are not given the strike qualifiers like full steps, full bands, or full bell lines because proof coins are specially struck and are expected to show all full details just as the design was drawn. Proof coins that are lacking a full and complete strike could be graded lower due to a weak strike, but that is not a given. Most modern proof coins are given a lesser grade due to slight imperfections, hairlines, milk spots, or minor dings that happen during the handling/packaging of those coins after they are struck. There is also the dartboard theory of grading.

Your question can only be answered by one of the NGC staff, however, they do not monitor or respond to this area of the forum. I would suggest that you post this on the registry section of the forum. That area is monitored by the NGC registry staff who can reply to your question.

You are correct, NGC started to allow the CAC bean and gave those coins extra points in the registry scoring. Suddenly that just stopped with no warning or notice, one day you could add a CAC beaned coin and have the bean recognized the next you could not. Then; a bit later before the 2023 registry cutoff; all the extra CAC points were removed from each CAC approved coin under the explanation of fairness due to not being able to or not wanting to (who knows which). The NGC staff has been tight lipped on this so only they know where the disconnect between the NGC registry and CAC is and why, but it doesn't appear to be a top priority to fix, at least not imo.

Actually, I do not recall seeing any forum activity from member coin928, doesn't mean that he is not on the forum just that I don't remember the name. The one I did recognize is @Zebo who received a best classic set award.

I only recognized one name but congratulations to all the winners!!

Here is an overlay from Mad die clashes so you can see where the elements from each side can impact the other in the cases of clashing and/or indirect die transfer. As you can see there is nothing around the corner of the memorial that would cause what you are seeing on your coin. And the obv bust is not in the correct place for the anomaly under the columns, that largely rules out indirect die transfer or a clash. So, either an issue with the die (die gouge or large scrape) or occluded gas bubbles; possibly even both; are the likely culprit.

What he said ^

Welcome to the forum, hard to say for sure what happened to this coin, but it for sure didn't leave the mint in that condition. Aside from the chunks missing is spots it may have been subjected to a mild acid like muriatic pool acid or some other chemical. Damage can happen a million different ways; errors only happen at the time the coin is struck.

Several things can affect what you see or perceive as different, early strikes off fresh dies look different than middle or late stage die strikes. How a die is basined or lapped can also give a different look for the first few strikes. I would be surprised if your local dealer is an expert in such issues, but please do update us with your findings.

NGCX coins cannot be used in the NGC registry, it will be difficult for buyers to want to buy coins if using them in a registry is a part of the reason to buy. Also there is still time on both of those auctions, it is possible that the ending prices will be closer.

Welcome to the forum, this section of the forum is for members selling and buying coins, questions should be asked in the Newbie or US coin sections of the forum; I have flagged it for the mods to move this thread to the appropriate area. The most likely explanation is an end of roll blank which can result in a thin underweight planchet to start with. Then add in the wear and tear and any other abuse this might have happened in the past 100+ years and the low weight seems quite possible.

An encased cent is a very likely explanation for the look of this coin. As to the whole wrong planchet theory that will require you to spend some money on a metallurgical evaluation to sus out and prove. The more likely explanation is that it was a slightly thin, slightly underweight planchet to start with when combined with the loss of metal through wear gives you this weight.

Biased on todays melt value the Franklin half is worth $8.40 and the Ike is worth $1. No errors no extra value to either coin.

Just damaged. Blow torch or some type of heat was used to expand the clad layer, when it cooled this is what you get, not an error.

Guess that is why this all makes no sense, I have QA on ignore so I'm only seeing a tiny fraction of what has been said, thankfully. Figures, leave it to QA to dig up a thread by one of the good guys and attempt to use it for his own ego needs.