zadok

Thought experiment. Let’s take a subset of the major show circuit dealer network, say the upper crust. Let’s say the dealers who set up at the IMEX show in Nashville in September. Would they believe that most of the classic coins that are worthy of slabbing or stickering have already been seen by The Big Two plus CAC? I believe they would, because they are an incestuous group of dealers who keep circulating the same slabs round and round. Now, what would a central Pennsylvania backwoods auction denizen believe/know? Yes, that there are gazillions of fresh to the market raw coins out there! Why? They SEE THEM nearly weekly. Only the relatively meager budgets of the auction attendees keep the prices down. Why don’t the owners of the coins sell them online? They don’t TRUST online anything. Many have no useable Internet service in the hills of Pennsylvania, and CERTAINLY no wireless service. There is one auction house in York County, about 8 miles north of the Maryland line that has no wireless, no cable, no dialup, nothing. Not even GPS works there. The hills are smallish but the valleys are deeeeeep. You are victims of the circles in which you travel, and not everywhere is like anywhere else. You have to go where the coins are, and the demand is not.

...ur petalitic n lepidolitic response failed alkalitically to meet the requested threshold n is therefore deemed to be of non-precious quality n is ostracised from consideration, not subject to appeal....

...im going to start looking for all the "D" coins, vastly overgraded coins in tpg holders....

...the ultimate arbiter will be the retail buyer, of course the dealers will try to influence the market to whatever is their financial advantage, but the market follows the top dollar...cac stickers still lead the current market regardless of all the counter pressures, i guess time will  tell which way the new tides will flow...i doubt many cacg coins will be broken out n resubmitted to other tpgs, but just my opinion....

...valid opinion, n u mite be correct on collectors questioning why certain coins have not been crossed, but i still believe the tpgs n the market will have to adjust to cacg rather than the other way around...one other comment, coins submitted for crossing do not necessarily get downgraded if they dont cross, one option is for return in same holder as submitted....

...the secret is too invest in the speculation....buy the next fad before everyone else decides to....

...the ultimate arbiter will be the retail buyer, of course the dealers will try to influence the market to whatever is their financial advantage, but the market follows the top dollar...cac stickers still lead the current market regardless of all the counter pressures, i guess time will  tell which way the new tides will flow...i doubt many cacg coins will be broken out n resubmitted to other tpgs, but just my opinion....

...valid opinion, n u mite be correct on collectors questioning why certain coins have not been crossed, but i still believe the tpgs n the market will have to adjust to cacg rather than the other way around...one other comment, coins submitted for crossing do not necessarily get downgraded if they dont cross, one option is for return in same holder as submitted....

What TPGS, "The  People" had long held in sepulchral awe, is going to ever admit, "Houston, we have a problem!"?  The irrepressible Mark Feld, the consummate gentleman, put his name and reputation on the line, repeatedly, to defend a dear old friend, JA, whose very integrity was being questioned and it is hardly surprising to learn, faced with a "scandal" which would impugn the reputation of an innovative company, and all who were affiliated with it, J.A., presented with the choice of explaining a conflict of interest, i.e. engaging in questionable conduct which had apparently gone on for some time -- worshipping both God and mammon with a bit of body English, fancy footwork and sleight of hand --  exercised his right instead to remain silent, excused himself, and abandoned the baby he had a hand in creating, with class, neither explaining or implicating anyone else directly.
If, as you maintain, "lower-rated but CORRECTLY GRADED coins are going into lower CACG holders," that is as tacit an admission as any that they were not correctly graded to begin with.  Hence, the outbreaks of incidences of the insidious "crackitis," the roots of which can be traced to the advent of Sheldonized grading which has since been weaponized with the advent of TPGS fueled by the insatiable thirst of investors who discovered money can be made by simply manipulating the one  factor which gives it its value.  How 'bout we call this a long overdue "market correction," and leave it at that. 
Attn: Moderator... I thank you for permitting me to express myself.  Man, I love this place!  🤣 

...oh god, where is that vomit emoji when u need it?....

This 1973 Roosevelt dime has been damaged. It is not a mint error.

Sorry to say it looks like it has been damaged by some kind of tool.

...yep especially ampex....

1792 France 5 Sol Maz-150 - PCGS MS-64 BN

1782 Ireland Halfpenny – NGC MS-66 BN

1806 Great Britain Farthing – Ex. James Watt Jr. - NGC PF-66 BN

1805 Ireland Penny Plain Edge Restrike – Ex. James Watt Jr. - NGC PF-65 BN (Very scuffed holder)

1805 Bank of Ireland 10 Pence Token - Ex. James Watt Jr. – NGC MS-65 (Very scuffed holder)

I respectfully disagree.  I was simply trying to illustrate an uncirculated Morgan dollar with a full strike and one with a somewhat weak strike.  PCGS, NGC and other reputable grading services are ostensibly all using grading standards based on those provided in the ANA grading guide. Both the 1881-S and the 1892-O are examples of the obverse master die used from 1878 to 1904 and what VAM refers to as the "C3" reverse used on all Morgan dollars dated from 1881 to 1899, as well as some 1878 (Philadelphia), all 1879 except for some 1879-S, all 1880 except for some 1880-CC and some dated 1900 and 1901 as well. Both of the coins I showed are of exactly the same design and uncirculated but of markedly different striking qualities.  
    It would likely be very difficult to find a Morgan dollar graded MS 67 that is weakly struck.   As noted by the ANA Grading Guide, 7th edition at p.22, "[a] coin which is MS-65 from a technical or numerical standpoint but which is weakly struck can be described as MS-64, MS-63, or some lower grade, without mentioning the weakness; this is the practice of most third-party grading services at present." (Compare the discussion at p. 35, which indicates that by the time of publication of that edition in 2013, grading services were sometimes giving weakly struck coins higher grades.)  The 1892-O shown above, which is in an older NGC holder, isn't heavily bagmarked and has decent luster. The MS 62 grade likely resulted in part from the weakness of its strike.
    I avoid uncirculated and lightly circulated coins that are weakly struck and have very few in my collection. I also usually have only one coin of each issue. If you want to illustrate pieces of the same date and mint and graded by the same grading service that have different striking characteristics, I can't accommodate you. I do, however, have an 1891-O (same era and mint as the 1892-O) that is unusually well struck for that issue, which is said to be overall the worst struck in the entire Morgan dollar series. (It is not, however, a full strike like the 1881-S.) NGC recently graded it MS 61, presumably due to the heavy marks on Liberty's face. I've posted it on the forum recently, but you can use it for comparison with the 1892-O if you prefer:


 

So that readers can see what this topic refers to, here are photos of (1) an 1881-S Morgan dollar graded MS 67 by PCGS that is fully struck, as is typical for most early "S" mint Morgan dollars and (2) an 1892-O Morgan dollar graded MS 62 by NGC with weakness at the centers, as is frequently seen on "O" mint issues of the early to mid 1890s:

Well seeing we are making corrections wasn't the title of your book (From Mine to Mint). Roger?

...i think that u partially misunderstand the CAC implications...not all coins, in fact many coins, with CAC stickers r not submitted for upgrades...the presence of the sticker suffices n the implication is understood, having the coin in an upgraded holder isnt required to monetarily benefit from the sticker...some may not understand fully but in some instances i have purchased certified coins in grades ms64 n ms65 non-stickered n broken the coins out n resubmitted to the other tpg in hopes of getting the coins graded one grade lower n then submitted to CAC if i thought the coin warranted a sticker, the monetary advantage outweighs the costs involved...the same can be true on crossing over coins n specifying acceptance of a one grade reduction in grade...of course this is only profitable if the value of the coin is high enuf to start with....

...783,682...aug 23 1998...19 dec 2023...3....

...or lady liberty could have gone to her cosmologist late in the year n used a thicker base coat, im sure its in the archives somewhere....

I never thought of the problems that fake US coins could create in a different country. Folks there may not be able to spot a fake as easy as those in the US. Even those in the US may not be aware of the changes in dies over the past 100+ years. The look of the OP fake has been around for many years and Lincolns image is really poor.

...it wasnt originally called "duck" correct name was "doek"...which was a high quality linen fabric, cotton duck was introduced to coattail on the associated quality of doek with a lesser quality fabric, cotton, hence cotton duck...much like the jewelry industry calling gray quartz, smoky topaz...a verbal commercial slight of hand practice....

...or lady liberty could have gone to her cosmologist late in the year n used a thicker base coat, im sure its in the archives somewhere....

...making my head hurt....