• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Alert !!! 1942/41 Dime NGC EF-40 Listed on eBay

Started by reid1836,

58 posts in this topic

reid1836

reid1836

Posted
Posted

Buyer Beware ! There is a 1942/41 NGC EF-40 Mercury Dime listed on eBay that I`m 99.9999999999 % certain is a replacement coin. I cannot see any chance what so ever that NGC would have graded this coin EF-40 even on their worst day. It`s a VG 10 at best ! You can see some apparent tampering around the sealed edges of the case. Some poor uneducated person is about to be taken to the cleaners on this one. Current bid as of this writing is $620.00. So here you go a word to the wise (beware and be aware ! ). :whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jgrinz

jgrinz

Posted
Posted

I dont think there is a problem with the holder myself as I have a few that look funny but are in fact sealed and not tampered with.

 

I have a problem with the coin grading myself

 

Let us know what you think of the grade Mark and what there response is on the holder

 

thx

 

 

oh yeah here is the link

 

Mercury Dime in Question

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BillJones

BillJones

Posted
Posted

Unfortunately there are a great many key date coins that the TPGs have over graded through the years in the circulated grades. This example is a little worse than normal. Usually the VG coins end up in VF holders.

 

The TPGs watered down the standards for coins like Indian cents and Mercury dimes years ago. There was no change in the ANA grading standards book, but the grading services did it any way. It’s a shame that the collectors on a budget got treated like that. Such over grading would not have been accepted in the Mint State grades.

 

Here's the link: 1942 over 2 dime

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kryptonitecomics

kryptonitecomics

Posted
Posted

I looked and even I have to admit.....that coin is far from an EF40.......is there some odd strike characteristic of the 1942/1 that would make the coin appear to be a lower grade becuase of weaknesses related to the strike? I haven't heard of it....and I see a ton of wear on that coin......but I thought I would ask hm

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
I looked and even I have to admit.....that coin is far from an EF40.......is there some odd strike characteristic of the 1942/1 that would make the coin appear to be a lower grade becuase of weaknesses related to the strike? I haven't heard of it....and I see a ton of wear on that coin......but I thought I would ask hm
My guess is that it's an over-graded coin and that the holder has not been tampered with. I reached the seller and made him/them aware of this thread.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kryptonitecomics

kryptonitecomics

Posted
Posted
I looked and even I have to admit.....that coin is far from an EF40.......is there some odd strike characteristic of the 1942/1 that would make the coin appear to be a lower grade becuase of weaknesses related to the strike? I haven't heard of it....and I see a ton of wear on that coin......but I thought I would ask hm
My guess is that it's an over-graded coin and that the holder has not been tampered with. I reached the seller and made him/them aware of this thread.

 

That was my guess as well....just giving NGC the benefit of the doubt.....or at least trying too. Someone should make them aware of that coin as I don't think even they would want that coin in one of there EF40 holders hm

 

For what it's worth....I don't see any slab tampering..... (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EZ_E

EZ_E

Posted
Posted
Unfortunately there are a great many key date coins that the TPGs have over graded through the years in the circulated grades. This example is a little worse than normal. Usually the VG coins end up in VF holders.

 

The TPGs watered down the standards for coins like Indian cents and Mercury dimes years ago. There was no change in the ANA grading standards book, but the grading services did it any way. It’s a shame that the collectors on a budget got treated like that. Such over grading would not have been accepted in the Mint State grades.

 

Here's the link: 1942 over 2 dime

 

This practice tees me off to no end. If the CAC could do something about that then it would be a wonderful thing. Did I mention how this really pi$$es me off?! :mad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
reid1836

reid1836

Posted
  • Author
Posted
That is a bad grade for sure. I would call it VF-25, although it is a nice, original coin.
VF-25 ??????????? Would you happen to be in the market for a 16-D, 21, 21-D 42/1- D, or similiar 42/1. If so please let me know. Being experienced dealer yourself and having a good working knowledge of coins, I would have no quams about selling you as many similiar items as your bank account could withstand . VF anything ! What a joke ! How many full sticks on the fasces do you see ? How about horizontal or the non-existent diagonal bands ? Just curious as to what grading reference you used to arrive at a vf grade without these crucial elements being present( B&D, A.N.A.,PHOTO GRADE, Mr. Rogers grading of U.S. Coins ....... ???????). Wait , let me guess. The ? years of experience grading coins right, but no actual bound and printed reference though. Opinions vary I suppose.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EZ_E

EZ_E

Posted
Posted
I`m with EZ on this one !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Thank you. It is unjustified fraud, that's all there is to it. And it's double jeopardy to the collector.

 

I used to be very good at grading Mercs when I was collecting them but stopped because of this very reason. Even raw, common dates are routinely overgrade by at least a grade. I gave up on upgrading my set because I got tired of sending them back.

 

I grade this coin a solid fine is all. It is a great coin without the plastic. As it is, it is just ego fodder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EZ_E

EZ_E

Posted
Posted

And if the CAC were to place one of their approval stickers on an obviously overgraded key date coin then they are just a fraudulent as the services are.

 

rantrant

Link to comment
Share on other sites
physics-fan3.14

physics-fan3.14

Posted
Posted
Question, is there a chance that this is a counterfeit NGC slab? As usual the pictures are too small to examine the labels well.

 

This was my first thought, but you are the slab expert here, not me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Conder101

Conder101

Posted
Posted

I haven't jumped to it but I do have to wonder about it as a possibility considering how far off this piece seems to be.. I've seen some really badly blundered grading decisions holdered, and it often seems to happen on the key date pieces, but they normally aren't this far off except on low grade 16-D dimes where I have seen pieces with no rims on either side slabbed as VG-8. And that is by the major services not just fly-by-nights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gmarguli

gmarguli

Posted
Posted
My guess is that it's an over-graded coin and that the holder has not been tampered with.

 

Let's all dismiss this myth commonly found on message boards that most of the members are good graders. It just ain't true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MikeInFL

MikeInFL

Posted
Posted

Greg, How do you define "good"?

 

If a grade is subjective and opinion, how can someone's skill in grading be judged "good" or "not good"? To me, you either agree or disagree, but judgement of "good" or "not good" should be left to more objective measurements....

 

It's one thing to say that someone can predict what a TPG will grade a coin, it's another to suggest that opinions are "good" or "not good".

 

IMHO, in the end it is up to the individual to "pass" or "play" on a coin, and beauty (i.e. "grade" or "value") is in the eye of the beholder...Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ibyandsellsmith

ibyandsellsmith

Posted
Posted
Greg, How do you define "good"?

 

If a grade is subjective and opinion, how can someone's skill in grading be judged "good" or "not good"? To me, you either agree or disagree, but judgement of "good" or "not good" should be left to more objective measurements....

 

It's one thing to say that someone can predict what a TPG will grade a coin, it's another to suggest that opinions are "good" or "not good".

 

IMHO, in the end it is up to the individual to "pass" or "play" on a coin, and beauty (i.e. "grade" or "value") is in the eye of the beholder...Mike

That's what I wanted to say, Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gmarguli

gmarguli

Posted
Posted
Greg, How do you define "good"?

 

If a grade is subjective and opinion, how can someone's skill in grading be judged "good" or "not good"? To me, you either agree or disagree, but judgement of "good" or "not good" should be left to more objective measurements....

 

It's one thing to say that someone can predict what a TPG will grade a coin, it's another to suggest that opinions are "good" or "not good".

 

IMHO, in the end it is up to the individual to "pass" or "play" on a coin, and beauty (i.e. "grade" or "value") is in the eye of the beholder...Mike

 

I was just having a little fun with Mark Feld. Jokingly dismissing his opinion based on his other thread. Personally, I think the coin is greatly overgraded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing