Coinbuf

There have always been and are today sellers that attempt to deceive buyers that may not be informed; be it coins or vacum cleaners. TPG's have helped to level the playing field at first. But for whatever the reason TPG grading has changed from when they started. CACG is simply resetting back to the earlier standards. So I see is as CACG is a return to the consistency that TPG'S had at inception. Now will the marketplace like that is the question.

I doubt it's fake, just that the photos are juiced and taken in a way to hide any flaws or issues.

Yes Denver Coins, aka (or may still be used) Canyon City Coins, and I think there may have been another name this seller has used in the past on ebay.

The extra metal in the numeral 5 is a die chip. Technically it is an error but so minor that it has no or very limited value, die chips are extremely common on the mid 50's cents here is a definition of a die chip. "Definition: A small piece (less than 4 square millimeters) that falls out of the die face and has no direct connection to the design rim. The missing piece leaves a void in the die face into which coin metal flows. As a result, the coin shows a featureless lump in the affected area. A die chip can be connected to a die crack or it can be freestanding. Die chips frequently develop within narrow interstices in the design, such as the gap between the letters of LIBERTY. Hence the so-called “BIE” errors."

The seller is known to doctor, alter the ebay photos to portray problem coins as better than they are, look at the background the coin is sitting on, way over saturated. How many of this sellers raw coins that you have purchased in the past have you had graded by NGC or PCGS? How did the TPG's grades line up with the price you paid? I would love to see one of this sellers coins both with the ebay auction photos and the photos from NGC or PCGS, please post one or a few if you have them. I could not even begin to guess the coin's worth from photos that I know are heavily altered, I would need real unaltered photos to make that determination.

That would be a lucky break for you.

I know the seller, I very much doubt it will look like that in hand.

Welcome to the forum, but we will need some photos to help.

I agree with this being a lamination error, much larger than those on the two in your other post.

The 48 is a lamination error, same with the 47-S which has a partial retained lamination, both are nice finds.

I agree, from your photo it does appear to be a dried glue covering that part of the coin.

Gerry Fortin has a nice mumps example listed in his inventory/daily blog.

Thanks, that is an interesting bit to read, I agree with you that it seems more like some less than honorable folks that were looking to profit from the gullibility of some market participants. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

@Lem E is correct, this is a $4 gold Stella, it was sold by a firm called Leonard Auctions located in Chicago. Here is a link to their site where you can see the coin. Linky

Not an error, as already stated that could have been from a coin rolling machine, or perhaps from another coin that was pressed into the surface of this coin.

I have not read that article, however I do not see how he could have used 1985 as a reference point given that neither PCGS nor NGC began operations until 1986. Again, not having read the article I am flying blind here but the only grading services at that time would have been some of the very early grading firms that are mostly all out of business like ACG, ANACS (under ANA ownership until 1989), Blanchard, Hallmark, and a couple of others. I was not buying coins in slabs back then; I did not buy my first slab (my 09-SVDB in a rattler PCGS holder) until 1999. I own some of those older slabs, and with the exception of ACG most of those I mentioned were graded pretty conservatively, comparing to what we see leave the grading rooms today anyway. And everything is relative, for me market grading happened more recently, after NGC and PCGS began operations, that is why you see old early holders of both NGC and PCGS sell for so much in recent years, because those coins were (or at least are considered to be) graded far more conservatively than coins are graded today. But JA has been in the numismatic business side for a long time and so perhaps for him there may have been a "shift" in grading that I am/was not aware of. So for me when I reference market grading I'm talking about grading as it has changed from a more conservative tighter ANA biased standards of the late 80's to early 2000's, to the far more loose grading that is seen in today's grading room. Just a couple of knuckleheads new to the forum, the kind that show up with outrageous claims of owning millions dollar coins and then immediately start to fight with members who give them correct information. I just cannot have any respect for people like that.

All the photos show the same thing, common worthless strike doubling. If you like it keep it, but it's not valuable and not worth sending to NGC.

Welcome to the forum, and I wish you the best of luck, but the chances that your coin receiving a straight grade are very low in my opinion. If you like that look that is fine, but there is nothing original looking about the coin. Also, this section of the forum is for member that are selling or looking to buy coins. Posts like yours should be posted in the newbie or US/world coins sections of the forum. I have flagged a mod, so they move it to the appropriate area, please do not start a new thread as that will only get confusing if this one gets moved.

One cent, it says so right there on the reverse. Ok I could not resist, a coin in that condition, obviously circulated and with a corrosion spot on the reverse, is truly only worth a few cents, maybe up to 25 cents to the right person, more likely less than 10 cents to the majority. If you had a red book you would easily be able to determine which coins are low mintage and might be worth a premium vs the common and low value coins, which is really the bulk of 21st century coins.

If you plan to collect coins you need one. If your plan is to not get one and ask a billion questions that can easily be answered by using a simple reference book, like a red book, you might find that some members (myself included) will become tired and may start to ignore your posts. Give a man a fish fed him for a day, teach a man to fish and he can feed himself, a Guide Book of United States Coins, commonly referred to as a red book (due to the red cover) is an invaluable tool for a coin collector. I've been collecting for 40+ years and still use my red book often.

Because it was minted at Philadelphia. Do you have a copy of the red book?

You have the common large date of which millions were minted. Search for a small date if you like, so far there have only been two found after 40 years, you have better odds of winning the lottery than finding a SD.

My thoughts are basically the same as they have been all along with regards to CACG, I have only made one submission for grading. But from my results and those that I have read about, CACG is grading much closer to the historical ANA standards and less like the top two TPG's who are all-in on market grading. There have been a few entertaining threads recently on the PCGS forum with a very recently former PCGS grader weighing in on those discussions, his comments and thought processes make it very clear just how much PCGS has embraced market grading. Oddly while NGC did some damage to its reputation by being the first to embrace market grading, I would say that PCGS leads the charge in that respect today. While it is far too early to make any long-term calls, as I explain in my comments above CACG's grading is not like the big two. CACG does put a stronger emphasis on not rewarding rub, be it from circulation of from stacking/cabinet friction, with MS grades which is a very different strategy than the big two. Likewise unoriginal surfaces are not rewarded at CACG where the big two have been prone to looking the other way in the past. That is not to say that there will be zero MS coins with rub in a CACG MS holder, nothing is ever 100%. And it is way too early to know if CACG will be able to continue to adhere to these standards moving forward or for how long. But I for one am happy to see a TPG service that values originality and unmolested surfaces over the many processed and worked on coins that you see. I 100% agree with you that the coin hobby/business has been heavily financialized and that has in part been facilitated by market grading. In all honesty, the people we see like mustacheman, and vasquez are the products of this financialization, and that is partly why I give them no quarter or respect. People like them do not present, to me at least, that they are here to learn or collect only strip-mine.

I'd prefer not to be punished on two forums. But yes I'm sure that they would receive a warm welcome there too.

I will be surprised if any update is ever reported. Not that one is really needed, the reply to his request on the ask NGC section tells us all we really need to know.