Henri Charriere

@zadok a/k/a The Great Zadok. Three observations: 1). your personality is more buoyant when you resort to the use of upper-case, i.e., Capital letters, however sparingly; 2). the universe of all coins ever "minted" is infinite. It only seems natural that one TPG would consult their Californian counterpart on USA-produced coins. (I suspect @MarkFeld would may know more about this.); and 3). Yet another [two-part] hoard of gold coins was discovered in France but they date back nearly 500 years as noted in a dispatch from CNN which @RWB was kind enough to provide elsewhere. The name Herostratus and the gravity of the arson he committed is generally unknown to the public. My use of his name, "stricken from every pylon," etc. is entirely literary license considering the crime occurred centuries before Roosters were minted -- but thanks for the warning ⚠️ 🐓

Nothing personal, but as a matter of form [and simple etiquette] one ought not, may not, baldy state, "X is wrong." The suggested approach is using neutral qualifiers and less offensive language or re-stating the matter entirely. I know you are world-famous for being direct, and have even stated you'd rather be right than nice, and that is your prerogative, but the charge, You are Wrong, is unambiguous, loaded and leaves the aggrieved party with little face-saving measure. It just isn't done in the rarefied circles you continue to find yourself in. The only instance I can recall -- and this was before my time and yours, I believe 1929, was when Robet Ripley in his first hard-cover book, RIPLEY'S BELIEVE IT OR NOT! devoted an entire page entitled "Lincoln was WRONG!," I no longer have the book but recall he based his claim on a line deep in the text of the Gettysburg Address, which read, "The world will little note, nor long remember, what we say here...." Probably not as eye-catching as his claim on another page, headed: "Abraham Was Not a Jew!, but controversial nonetheless. Everything you've set out to do for yourself in life you've already done, with distinction. You're in the enviable position of having nothing left to prove -- except complete a few unfinished projects. I'd like you to consider a more kinder and gentler you. 🐓

FINALLY, TWO (2) 20-FRANC GOLD ROOSTERS GRADED MS-68! By a series of curious chances too fantastic to have been foreseen, I stumbled upon the NGC Census while researching something else, and discovered much to my amazement that at least two Roosters, a 1908 and a 1912, both so-called "restrikes" likely minted in the 1950's and 1960's, were quietly and without fanfare, awarded the never bestowed upon any Rooster (1899-1914) the much-coveted, thus far highest grade MS-68, recently. With the recent news reported by French wire services referencing the discovery of two separate mini-hoards of coins, one of which apparently contained over a hundred of what we refer to as Mint State Roosters, among other coins, it is my belief, borne by an explosion of newly-certified coins [and new owners] on the NGC Set Registry that overtures were made by thus far unknown buyers who managed to acquire them for their potentially great numismatic value. Both appear on the census but have not been added to anyone's Set Registry. Yet. The hour is late and I am tired. I will check the figures presented by PCGS tomorrow. And to think, I was ready to throw in the towel. I predict @Alex in PA. and @MAULEMALL -- who both dislike Noo Yawkuz, 🐓's, and me -- will be tickled pink by this news! Man, I love ❤ this place!

[I, too, am filing this away for future reference.] 😉

Consider, if you will, my quandary: purchasing a coin graded by NGC as MS-66 and gratuitously described as a "frosty gem" minus any mention of a thumbprint so clearly delineated as to enable the FBI's Latent Print Division to determine the identity of the careless handler. In a phone call to the owner, I objected to an allegedly Mint State Brilliant Uncirculated, "frosty gem," bearing indisputable evidence of human mishandling, a sign of circulation. The seller offered to take the coin back which I declined because the "damage" was done not by him or his firm but a TPGS. Upshot: I assured him I would do nothing to sully his long unblemished record -- and kept my promise. To detract from the detraction, I will adopt the Antiques Roadshow/Pawn Stars approach to divestiture and resolutely maintain the coin in question was strongly rumored to have been recovered as a good luck piece from the personal effects of noted architect Stanford White when he was shot by Hary Kendall Thaw on the rooftop of the old Madison Square Garden over the latter's fixation on the alienation of affections of Florence Evelyn Nesbitt, a/k/a The Girl in the Velvet Swing," over 100 years ago.

[Or a former boxer professional with a missing tooth and, hence, gap-toothed smile.]

This is why I refer to you as the Great Zadok! 👍

CAC gem gold, as opposed to what, the spot price of gold which, continues to hiccup at various resistance levels at $1800 and change? Unless circumstances dictate otherwise, I would wait until it exceeds $2000. How will you feel if it hits 3, 4 or even $5000?

@RWB Respectfully, can all the attributes considered in evaluating a coin be reduced to numbers, plus signs and stars? I maintain they cannot. I don't recall ever examining a coin and not wondering how was this grade determined. ***** ***** I earlier made a comment regarding the competency of U.S. TPGS and their European counterparts which I believed would be suppressed or challenged. Neither happened which is just as well because I do not have a definitive answer. No one bothered to ask me how I could tell whether the coin I have the most familiarity with, the Rooster, was encapsulated here or overseas. It used to be if you asked anyone where U.S. currency was made, you'd get a standard response: the BEP in Washington, D.C. Then Fort Worth, Texas was commissioned and the microprinted letters FW would be a dead giveaway. On encapsulations PCGS-graded in Paris -- this is strictly speculation on my part brought about in part by a collector who objected to the catalog classification, Gad-1064 or Gad-1064a, [an abbreviation of Viktor GADOURY] which appears on their labels and not, to my knowledge, on coins slabbed here which merely read "France." I do not know if NGC encapsulations bear a similar such distinguishing characteristic because I purchased all eight (8) I own, as featured on my Set Registry, with the lofty label "The Herostratus Hoard," at post position 8 or 9, directly from sources in the U.S. On this aspect of grading, I welcome fact or speculation from any source. 🐓

One could argue that my sample size is statistically insignificant -- and they would be right, but, pardon the poor analogy, if you were interested in Sicilian pizza 🍕 and perhaps some authentic cannoli pastry-to-go, would you go to a fine Italian restaurant or a local Mexican taco joint? 🌮 😉

Forget all the On-Site reporting. This little tidbit should have been Banner Headline News. Popular Post ➕ Plus. Herewith, the opening paragraph of "The Archer-Shee Case," [of a small boy in serious trouble with the British Empire; a story with a denouement that does credit to all parties concerned.] "FROM time to time, since the turn of the century, there has issued from the press of a publishing house in London and Edinburgh a series of volumes called the Notable British Trials, each volume dedicated to some case in the criminal annals of England or Scotland. Each would contain not only the testimony of witnesses, the photographs of exhibits, the arguments of counsel, the dicta from the bench, and the verdict of the jury, but also an introductory essay nicely calculated to enthrall those readers who collect such instances of human violence, much as other madmen collect coins or autographs or stamps." - Alexander Woollcott, 1946 Whether transmitted by infection or contagion, I will defer to the medical experts. I merely wish to acknowledge and express my heartfelt gratitude to you for honoring us all with your participation, albeit covert, in the formal certification process.

[Unsolicited editorial comment... What you refer to as a 2020-S is actually a 2020-(S). I know. I know. But when you receive it and look at the label, that is what's going to be on it. Probably one of the few instances in numismatic history when the use of parentheses have never been more important and collectors will buy a coin strictly for the label.] 🐓

I have had to really root through my heavy artillery chest to find this gem suitably disturbing to foist upon the coin collecting aficionados among us... I make the following claim without supporting evidence of any kind. As regarding Roosters 🐓 only -- Moderators gird your loins for this outrageous remark: The grading of high-tier coins, such as MS-67, as practiced by the European counterparts of U.S. TPGS is far superior due to the sheer volume and experience of evaluating coins more commonly available and evaluated locally by native experts most familiar with them. "I know you're not suggesting the expertise of TPG as practiced by PCGS stateside, does not equal that of the services it performs in Paris?" Yes, and not even our own @VKurtB and @Alex in PA. have greater fonts or growling dogs to emphasize that little-known fact more than I have! 😉

Clean coins, or cleaned coins? A difference of cataclysmic proportions. The Mint sells clean, uncleaned, oftentimes "brilliant uncirculated" coins, right?

"You cannot serve both God and mammon." The only country that appreciates, treasures and worships its past is India 🇮🇳 although that is now changing. [Out of respect for the Guidelines -- and an abundance of caution, I won't state my position on the worship of idols.] 😉

There are two sides to every story and histories tend to be written by the victors...

Let's see now, we've got to consider strike, preservation, luster (or lack thereof) color and attractiveness (or eye appeal) with no sermonizing. Just a quick appraisal and assignment of a number. Fact: this "perfectly wonderful grading system works so well," but apparently not well enough for you to rely on the professional opinions of experienced graders preferring instead to traipse the world over to examine relics personally, in hand, with the aid of a loupe while I, the self-admitting, rank amateur, received an award "for outstanding achievement in building the Best French Set [for] 2020, assembled while sitting on an old wooden chair, bad leg crossed over the good one, with a cheap, knock-off phone in my left palm letting my right thumb do all the walking -- relying on the judgment and good will of others wholly dependent on systems I am not completely in accord with. And if memory serves, it was YOU who implored ME to get with the program and "adapt" to the times. So I ask, Who's zoomin' who? and do so politely. 🤔

@Woods020 I am ashamed to say while I do not know the combatants as well as you do, everything you've said sits well with me. I suspect there are others out there with something to say but shrink at the thought of appearing to side with one against the other(s). I appreciate the free-for-alls because it tends to reveal things about individuals they themselves may be unaware of. I leave it to the Moderators to sort things out even if it affects me adversely. You win some; you lose some. And the loose cannon puts pep in your step and jut in your strut. What more can a simple coin-collecting chiffonier ask for? Man, Iove this place!

The key point here, as delineated by @MarkFeld, is post-production imperfection as opposed to pre- or concurrent production. Strong strikes and weak or non-sharp strikes do not qualify as post-production imperfections irrespective of magnification. As Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart famously opined: "I know it when I see it."

[William Herbert Sheldon was wrong? How so? Maybe Richter and his earthquake magnitude scale is wrong. Maybe the Fujita-Pearson scale of tornado intensity is suspect, too? And what about Saffir-Simpson and their hurricane wind scale? Where do we draw the line on who's wrong and what's right on the matter of scales, their limits and interpretations? AND WHAT'S WITH THE USE OF SECOND COMING TYPE TO EMPHASIZE A POINT??? 🤔

UNSOLICITED EDITORIAL I pity the fool who would crack out one of those so-called "emergency issue" ASE's cleverly dubbed 2020-(S) [and not 2020-S]. What, if anything, distinguishes this coin from any other minus a unique mintmark? This is a coin, if de-encapsulated, will forever require an explanation from its progeny as to the precise circumstances attendant to its conception.

@Numismatic, A.A.S. You bring up a good point which behooves us all to equal or better it. If someone were to ask you if you could ever possibly be the victim of a scam such as those that seem to afflict the elderly and infirm, intermittently, involving the loss of their entire life savings, you would likely state with no equivocation that such could never happen to you, correct? But the simple truth of the matter is the practiced scam artist has had an abundance of time with which to hone his craft and with a heightened sense of smell to vulnerabilities such as indecisiveness and vaccilation, chooses his weapon from a vast array with great care and strikes with precision. As it takes two to tango, he is powerless against the educated consumer with a strong resolve against those appealing for his complicity as dictated by common sense, logic and similar prior experience. Your state lottery says, You have to be in it to win it. And I have no opinion on those who do so long as they understand what gambling and casinos are in business for. I believe the vast majority of winners are the ones who stay out of them. Nothing is guaranteed in life but you'll do better if you take your time, familiarize yourself with the subject matter and deal with reputable sources with a proven track record of success. And since it is difficult for a simple person with simple tastes to win big consistently, you can always modify your expectations and learn how to minimize your losses. Very often you can come out ahead by doing absolutely nothing at all but walk away. 😉

Attn: @MarkFeld Having had an opportunity to read an article that just caught my eye following your reply, "AU-58 Coins - A Stealth Numismatic Investment - Antique Sage," it became quickly evident I have no clear understanding of the matter at hand. When I read the argument for an AU-63 or AU-64, it all made perfect sense. Grading becomes increasingly more complex when factors other than wear are considered. My focus on a single series of Mint State coins has apparently limited my exposure to the dizzying array of possibilities the grader is confronted with daily, and within time constraints. I appreciate your input! 🐓