gmarguli

59 minutes ago, MarkFeld said:

Like it or not, when I graded at NGC from 1991-1998, I very rarely used magnification stronger than 5-10 power.

Next you'll be saying that you didn't spend 2-3 minutes per coin to grade it. 

They are manly just different words for the same thing. Acceptable is doing something that does not significantly alter the metal (ex. dipping). Not acceptable is doing something that significantly alters the metal (ex. rubbing which causes hairlines). 

2 hours ago, Just Bob said:

 When it comes to this particular series, do you feel more confident in the expertise of  one TPG over another? 

I think that both TPG are highly knowledgeable with regard to these coins. 

2 hours ago, VKurtB said:

If both TPG's involved are among "the big two", our hosts and the four-letter "word" starting with "P", you have a real conundrum. If either is ANACS or ICG, trust me, they're wrong and the one from the "big two" is right. If neither is among the "big two", your story has wasted my time.

The TPG involved are Accugrade & NNC.  

Actually, the two involved are NGC & PCGS, but I won't say which one said counterfeit or genuine. I also think that you underestimate the knowledge at ANACS and the network of outside experts they use. 

1 hour ago, Greenstang said:

Why not post a photo of both sides of one or two of the coins you thought were counterfeit and graded genuine and see what some of our members think. I know that I would certainly like to see them as I have an interest in counterfeits.

They aren't my coins. 

For now, let's just say this is a hypothetical... 

A regular consignor sends me coins to slab and sell. Occasionally some PCGS/NGC slabs are included that he submitted on his own. Included in one batch were several coins in flips from one of the TPG with inserts saying the coins are counterfeit. While not my area of expertise, one I leaned toward genuine and all the others I felt were likely counterfeit. 

These coins are heavily counterfeited and this is common knowledge throughout the industry and would be of zero surprise to the TPG graders. They've graded a few hundred to several thousands of each type. They would likely closely examine these. 

The consignor asked me to submit them to the other TPG. I said waste of money as they appear counterfeit, but he said if the original TPG made a mistake on even one of them, it was worth it. I submitted them as he wished.

I was expecting a bunch of bodybags. I was even mentally prepared for the one I thought was genuine to come back counterfeit. After all, not my area and one TPG already said counterfeit. The results recently came in and the other TPG called every single one of them genuine. 

What would you do in this situation? One set of experts said counterfeit. Another set of experts said genuine (and now backs it with a money back guarantee). FYI, the total value of the coins is probably around $10,000. 

There is a PCGS AU50 for sale right now at $9250. The coin is in an older PCGS slab and appears like could possibly upgrade a little. 

Your coin has a lot of problems, but doesn't look bad considering everything going on with it. Given the rarity of this piece, I'd guess you'd get 50%-60% of a problem free example, so if it comes back AU, somewhere around $5,000. 

14 hours ago, Martac said:

I’ve also read about the kind of “frosty” luster these coins can/should have and feel that I could interpret that characteristic to this piece as well, if that adds to the positives, I’m unsure.

But if one would put all questionable aspects (like fake, cleaned, prev. mounted etc) aside, how would you otherwise judge the quality? In comparison to some other pieces, my own gut tells me that it’s condition is promising.

Without inspecting it in person (and Dahlonega gold dollars being far out of my area of expertise), the coin looks authentic. Gut feeling is that it was probably placed in jewelry when it was uncirculated. Since then it has been worn, polished, and probably cleaned in an ultrasonic cleaner many times. Not to mention that someone likely tried to hide some damage above the ES in States by tooling it. I suspect that if submitted, you would get AU Details. 

Since it sounds like you want it graded and you want to sell it, a place like Great Collections is pretty easy to use and has auctions running non-stop. They'll have it graded for you and auction it off. You'll net 100% of hammer (they keep the 10% buyers fee). They get decent prices. Nothing against Heritage, they do a great job and will probably get a slightly higher price, but they charge a 20% buyers fee, so the company in Hamburg needs to have an agreement to get 107% of hammer. Also, it will take longer for you to get the sale proceeds with them. Their auctions are more sporadic. 

12 hours ago, RichieRich2020 said:

Frankly I'm done responding...

12 hours ago, RichieRich2020 said:

infact I'm starting to think I'm making a fool...

Fixed that for you... 

12 hours ago, RichieRich2020 said:

And so with that being said please take care but do keep an eye out for the results of the coin after it is sent to one of the grading company to determine if it was environmental damage or a altered coin...

But I thought you said that TPG grading was too expensive? I'll help you out. Send it in to NGC and when you've proven us all wrong and it comes back Experimental Finish, I will not only pay your grading fees, but I'll give you $10,000 for the coin. 

This guy is a troll. There is a thread from him started back in 2018 and recently resurrected on CoinTalk where he is asking about this coin. He dismissed the opinion of Fred Weinberg that it wasn't an error.

10 hours ago, VKurtB said:

I have heard, and I have no reason to dispute it, that all modern coin grading at both major firms is done by the newest, least experienced graders. That particular "hell" can be called "earning your stripes".

To be fair, moderns take the least amount of experience to grade. The odds of one being counterfeit are near zero. Extremely few are altered. The grade range is fairly small. The least experienced graders should be grading them.

Extremely few will ever be sent back in for grade review due to overgrade. The average collector couldn't split hairs on the grades, so they will never know if it is over or under graded. And if caught in the marketplace, a mistake in the grade is almost not worth sending back to the TPG. For most coins the difference between a PR69 and PR70 is only a few dollars. It's perfect for less experienced graders.

And I have been told that the TPG hell is the bulk department. One grader told me of his horror when his next grading assignment was a box with hundreds of mint state Franklin halves. It wasn't just the grading, but the need to look at the bell lines for FBL. 

Was looking forward to taking advantage of this special. Unfortunately, two posts over 3 weeks on the ASK NGC without an answer forces me to submit them to the competition. 

Had been looking to see if NGC would grade an India Gujarat 1/6 Tanka from AH941 (1535). I picked up a dozen of these in gem condition with nice colorful toning around the rims. 

On 6/18/2020 at 2:19 PM, RWB said:

Computer assisted coin grading is highly applicable to the stuff put out by US and other mints as "commemoratives," bullion pieces and the like. It would also be extremely profitable by reducing human contact, time and error to a minimum. Those pallets of Silver Eagles and the like could be examined and slabbed in hours not weeks.

Such systems could also enforce standards for everything from proof-like to the mess of "uncirculated" pseudo-grades.

Fully agree that on stuff where eye appeal is not a factor that computer grading could work. However, I'm not sure if there would be any cost or time savings.

Computer Grading: The TPG pays someone to take the coins out of the tubes, load the coins into a tray, load the tray into the computer, waits for the computer to grade them, and removes the tray before it moves to the sealing room. I suspect that unlike the original computer that took 3 minutes to grade a coin, with modern processor speed and high speed cameras it could be done in a couple of seconds. 

Human Grader: Takes coins out of tubes and grades them in a couple of seconds and then puts them on trays based on grade. Off to the sealing room. 

The modern bulk graders aren't exactly paid a lot of money to begin with. I know one TPG hired a person who knew nothing about coins and trained them to grade ASE. Realistically there is only about 3 grades for them. 

For some coins PCGS uses two clear discs that hold the coin in between and then the discs are placed in a gasket. I assume this would work for fragile coins. I seem to recall seeing something similar with an NGC slab, but I'm not 100% positive. 

My favorite State Quarter: 1999 Delaware PCGS PR70 @ $17,250

10 years later an example sells for: 1999 Delaware PCGS PR70 @ $384

The nice thing about both coins is they both come with haze and spots, which are highly sought after on PR70s. 

3 hours ago, sonz said:

i was hoping to get a dissent answer about my coin but all i can read is useless answer im a newby about coins so i join in this topic hoping to get an answer but all i get is joke answers 

The coin appears genuine. The missing details is common. This design variety across all the denominations are known for having a ton of blunders from over dates, over mint marks, misspellings, etc. 

Given the condition of your coin, it would not be worth having it graded. Current catalog is $32 in XF and $60 in UNC with the retail price in those grades probably $10 and $30. The condition of your coin falls in between those two grades. 

First off, they are different type coins. The 1921 was struck in a higher relief and therefore hair detail is frequently missing. The other date Peace dollars were struck in lower relief. 

Looking at the 1921, it appears to have nice satiny luster, very few visible marks, and decent original toning that I suspect looks better in person. The hair does not exhibit any signs of any wear. Other than the rim ding, it looks like a very nice coin. 

Looking at your coin (which I have attached), while there may be more hair detail, there is clearly wear on several of the high points on both sides and the surfaces show numerous contact marks and hairlines consistent with light wear.

Your coins looks like a typical lightly circulated example. The 1921 looks like a very nice mint state example. 

On 7/10/2020 at 12:07 PM, RWB said:

PS: "DINo" is an abbreviation for "denario."

PPS: "DINo" is an abbreviation for "dinero."

On 7/5/2020 at 6:49 AM, cowbaby said:

I could almost guarantee you I could reach in my pocket right now and send in a Jefferson nickel and get a 68-69.

Good luck with that. About 15 years ago I had a dealer approach me with thousands of original bank rolls and some mint sealed bags. There was a wide variety of dates from the late 1950's to the current day and all denominations. I bought the entire deal for very little above face as the demand for this stuff was near non-existent. I went through every coin and ended up submitting several hundred - maybe a thousand total. I made at least one pop 1 and had quite a few assorted tied for top pops. However, not a single MS69 across all denominations. Only a handful of MS68 (mainly 10c & 25c) and none were 5c. Most graded MS66-MS67. 

If you pull a Jefferson nickel out of your pocket and you grade it MS68-MS69, I'd either question my grading skills or buy a lottery ticket. 

Does CGC certify the virginity of the submitter at the same time? 

21 minutes ago, olympicsos said:

Different eras have designers of different capabilities and different visions. The only modern outside artist I see that can make the most coin collectors happy is Cassie McFarland, she designed one side of a popular commemorative coin series in 2014 and she's cute. At the same time, hobbyists don't universally agree. 

Check out a Krause Standard Catalog of World Coins 2001-Date and look at the designs of other countries. There are tons that blow away what our mint is doing. Very beautiful and detailed work. 

And I personally find the Baseball HOF coin very uninspiring. It's not a bad design or bad looking, but a ball and glove doesn't exactly have a wow factor.

4 hours ago, olympicsos said:

Here's how I see it, the US Mint is a business that needs to make money. American coin collectors generally are attracted to classic pre-1965 coins and many believe that pretty much all post-1964 coins are junk. When the US Mint comes out with a new design, it gets lamented as being modern computer generated junk; when the US Mint goes back and uses a classic design, there are too many classic designs and we need new designs. The US Mint isn't going to make the entire coin collecting hobby happy regardless of what it does. 

Well they do a pretty good job of pleasing nobody. Everything they do feels like a bad gimmick - we literally have colorized coins coming up from the mint next! Even worse, it's a bunch of PC garbage that clearly doesn't appeal to their target audience. The sales figures clearly show this. 

We've got the handicapped basketball player on the 60th (!?!?) anniversary coin, the Africanized version of Liberty, completely unknown Native Americans and their amazing contributions including doing the job they were hired for, innovators like the person who was granted the first patent (a horribly broken system that stifles innovation), first spouses, the Preamble to the Declaration of Independence - Pursuit of Flappinefs (featuring a Teletubby about to swat a butterfly with an olive branch). None of this makes me want to purchase their product. 

We've also got the copper-nickel 50c series that are guaranteed to be worth significantly less that what you paid the second you order them. For what the mint charges, they should be made out of silver. 

Also, I can only assume that whoever picks the designs absolutely hates women, because the designs they pick make the women look like some of the ugliest people ever to walk the face of the earth. 

2 hours ago, RWB said:

Lots of speculations to fit preconceived notions.

So you claim. Um, maybe you allege. 

1 hour ago, kbbpll said:

To me it demonstrates how these numismatic "myths" get perpetuated. It also seems to indicate that they could have been trying to make a "special" coin any time during a coinage run.

There is no myth to this dollar being the first one struck. It is pure wildly_fanciful_statement marketing. When pumping the grade doesn't create enough excitement, create a story around it and work your way backwards to "prove it". It's an awesome coin, but a stupid gimmick. 

10 Years from now: Up for auction the Brand/Carter 1794 $ in NGC SP67+ * CAC Early Releases. Not only the first 1794 dollar struck, but also the dollar that George Washington threw across the Potomac River where Martha Washington caught it in between her bosom. The silver plug was made from silver from the ring Marie Antoinette wore while under the guillotine. If you don't believe the story, it's up to you to prove it wrong. 

Yes, prices are strong. I've noticed it across a bunch of different venues worldwide and heard the same from dealers.

It makes sense as a lot of people are still fully employed, but lacking places to go to spend money. Add in the fact that many employed people received a stimulus check. Quite a few unemployed people are receiving higher benefits than what they were making while employed. I bet a lot of people took advantage of the mortgage forbearance even if they didn't need to. Money is flowing for a lot of people.

COVID has also allowed us time to examine our collections and see what we want to add/delete from them.