You want controversy!! You can't handle the controversy!!!!!!!!!!

[EZ_E]

Well, I'm fresh out of a three day ANA grading seminar (BTW, I highly recommend it to everyone. It was truly exceptionaly!). In response to your statement concerning a MS 62 grade: MS 62 is a junk grade as well as 60 and 61. The only criteria is for the coin in question to have no break in luster. However, in this case, I agree with you. On the e-bay photo I can see no luster at all and it definitely has its "buts". I would say that it would grade AU 50 at best.

 

I personally disagree with any TGS slabbing this trial piece without any documentation or research whatsoever. By slabbing it, it is assumed that it was deemed authentic with the proper designation. I was just reading in the latest Coin World that the author of US Trial & Pattern Pieces intentionally omitted this piece from his work until PCGS slabbed it. So, credibility was arbitrarily given to this piece just because it is in plastic by a currently respected grading service.

 

Concerning TGS's slabing "non-coins": I have absolutely no problem with that as long as there is a market for it. Who ever said that it is a no-no to do so? What's the big deal? I just don't understand the argument against it.

[EZ_E]

re: my opinion is not easily swayed by the opinion of someone else who took 10 seconds to grade a coin for a $50 fee.

 

Dennis, I love that comment!!! I agree completely.

 

There was a former PCGS grader at the seminar that I recently attended. He stated that he averaged 800 coins a day. Assuming a non-interrupted eight-hour work day, this means that he devoted at most 36 seconds per coin. And this figure does not include breaks, paper work, etc.

 

The former grader, Jerry Bobbe, also stated that one of his piers graded 3500 coins in two days one time. The math in a perfect scenerio allocated a mere 16 seconds per coin. Point is: 10 seconds per coin sounds right on the money.

 

However, in their defense, I was amazed at how fast problems such as very, very minimal hairlines were spotted with a seemingly passing glance. I was very impressed with my instructor's skill! Yet, after examining hundreds of slabbed coins in the seminar, I was amazing at the quantity of overgraded coins and false atributions such as full bell lines and full split bands.

[C.Urch]

MS 62 is a junk grade as well as 60 and 61

 

Here are two pieces of MS62 "junk" I recently aquired! More "junk" for me!

 

[James_OldeTowne]

(((Concerning TGS's slabing "non-coins": I have absolutely no problem with that as long as there is a market for it. Who ever said that it is a no-no to do so? What's the big deal? I just don't understand the argument against it.)))

 

The big deal for me is this. PCGS = Professional COIN Grading Service.

 

If they want to certify trinkets, they need a new branch called PTGS.

 

And if they want to certify Chicken McNuggets, they need a branch called the PCMNGS.

 

Oh, and NGC = NUMISMATIC Guaranty Corporation, and if they want to certify collectable historic tea-bags, then there should the CHTBGC.

 

This, instead of trying to rip off the public by associating the integrity of their name with making a quick buck from a less-informed market.

 

James

[EZ_E]

RE: This, instead of trying to rip off the public by associating the integrity of their name with making a quick buck from a less-informed market.

 

I agree with that statement!

 

Clausurch, those certainly aren't junk. Nice!

[Tradedollarnut]

On the e-bay photo I can see no luster at all

 

Agreed. It appears to have a matte finish to me - thus no luster.

 

Concerning TGS's slabing "non-coins": I have absolutely no problem with that as long as there is a market for it. Who ever said that it is a no-no to do so? What's the big deal? I just don't understand the argument against it.

 

Agreed. Just like the Gobrecht die trials NGC certified - they are important links to the history of numismatics. To compare them to chicken mcnuggets is irresponsible.

 

I personally disagree with any TGS slabbing this trial piece without any documentation or research whatsoever

 

Agreed.

[James_OldeTowne]

(((Just like the Gobrecht die trials NGC certified - they are important links to the history of numismatics. To compare them to chicken mcnuggets is irresponsible)))

 

Yet you still won't enlighten why my holed trade-dollar cannot be certified.

[JadeRareCoin]

I was just reading in the latest Coin World that the author of US Trial & Pattern Pieces intentionally omitted this piece from his work until PCGS slabbed it. So, credibility was arbitrarily given to this piece just because it is in plastic by a currently respected grading service.

 

EZ_E, isn't that kinda sad? As a numismatic researcher, the author should be able to research and form his own conclusions. Why depend on the opinion of a TPGS who is known to "adjust" their grading/authentication opinions based upon the relationship with the submitter and/or the publicity that could be generated by making a favorable determination??

 

The point of this thread it this: is this uniface die trial the work of Felix Schlag? Does it have anything to do with the Jefferson Nickel design? When was it produced (before or after 1938)? Should it have been slabbed without any concrete evidence (i.e. documentation, initials on the piece, etc.)?

 

Solution: PCGS (or NGC for TDN) should have slabbed the thing with the following label:

 

Uniface Die Trial

Possibly Designed by Felix Schlag

Could Be Related to the Jefferson Nickel

Grade = Irrelevant

 

[Tradedollarnut]

Copied from the other thread:

 

Ok, guys, your act is wearing thin on me. Yes, you have a gripe with PCGS. But you wear your gripe rather prominently on your sleeve and it's well past the point where it's impacting this forum.

 

Why do I nitpick your comments? Because you guys appear willing to "write what you feel at the time" to further your low opinion of PCGS. And if you are willing to say whatever appeals to you at the moment, then IMO it impacts the validity of what you've said in regard to your original gripe.

 

For instance: Your use of the word pathetic. That's a rather strong word that really implies something atrocious was done in regard to those two coins. Yet you now say "As far as discrepancies in grading, I couldn't care less about that. If PCGS or NGC or ANACS is a point higher or lower, doesn't bother me." Ok, so your gripe is no longer with both coins as you initially stated, now it's just with the second coin. And yet you know darn well that all the grading services will allow a lightly cleaned older coin in their holders and that they simply net grade it without mentioning the net grade. In fact, in another thread, you appear to argue for this to occur - you state "why can't my lightly dipped 1905 Indian cent be certified by PCGS then? It's clearly a coin, but they body-bag it. Because they made an arbitrary call it's not worthy of certification." So now, using the logic of your assertion in the other thread, the second coin is ok as well. So what's pathetic? Seems to me that it just might be the fact that you "write what you feel at the time" with no regards to consistency or the facts.

 

When you stop allowing your opinions to twist in the wind and "write what you feel at the time" in order to shine the worst possible light on a particular TPG, then I will stop nitpicking what you write. Perhaps the best solution is for all of us to talk coins and not wear our negative opinions so prominently on our sleeves?

 

Why can't the holed trade dollar be certified? Because both NGC and PCGS have a policy that they won't certify damaged coins - as you well know. Give it a rest already. Some of the opinions you've put forth regarding what can or can't be slabbed or graded seem pretty far 'out there' to me.

 

 

 

[JadeRareCoin]

I agree.......let's just talk coins. I think that the Trade Dollar is the ugliest U.S. coin ever minted, second only to the SBA Dollar and the reverse of the Missouri State Quarter.

 

(relax, I am just kidding!!!)

 

 

 

 

[James_OldeTowne]

(((Why can't the holed trade dollar be certified? Because both NGC and PCGS have a policy that they won't certify damaged coins - as you well know. Give it a rest already. Some of the opinions you've put forth regarding what can or can't be slabbed or graded seem pretty far 'out there' to me. )))

 

Yes let's talk coins. Soooo, according to SOME people around here, here's the deal:

 

CERTIFIABLE: an alleged Felix Schlag trinket

NOT certifiable: a holed and expertly plugged 1794 bust dollar

 

CERTIFIABLE: death coins from the World Trade Center

NOT certifiable: a cleaned 1802 half-dime

 

CERTIFIABLE: PR-69 DCAM signature series buffalo dollars

NOT certifiable: a 1799 large cent with light reverse corrosion

 

CERTIFIABLE: PR-58 Franklin half-dollars

NOT certifiable: slightly bent 1794 half-dime

 

Some of these really are coins! Others are..... well ...... at least this post is (mostly) about coins! But I guess that the NOT certifiable "coins" I mentioned are 'out there', right?

 

James

[JadeRareCoin]

James, I am sorry, but I have to side with Tradedollarnut on this one.

 

ALL of the coins (or things) that you mentioned COULD be certified by ANY grading company. Just depends on "who" you are in the business, amongst other factors.

 

Case in point: there are (and you darn well know this) many expertly holed/plugged coins in slabs. Probably an honest mistake by the graders because some repairs are so well done.

 

Again, I agree with TDN that most grading companies will grade anything, regardless of authenticity or condition.

[EVillageProwler]

Yet you still won't enlighten why my holed trade-dollar cannot be certified.

 

There is a big difference between grading different types of trinkets and grading impaired trinkets.

 

EVP

 

[JadeRareCoin]

There is a big difference between grading different types of trinkets and grading impaired trinkets.

 

.........so you are saying that a Chicken McNugget that is not impaired should be slabbed, whereas a Chicken McNugget that has a hole at 12:00 should NOT be slabbed??

[EVillageProwler]

.........so you are saying that a Chicken McNugget that is not impaired should be slabbed, whereas a Chicken McNugget that has a hole at 12:00 should NOT be slabbed??

 

I don't see a smiley here, so I'll assume that this wasn't posted tongue-in-cheek...

 

Now I wonder if the Jade boys are merely acting stupid or really are stupid. I really hate to get "personal" and stoop to namecalling, but on this I've had enough. They behave all uppity across the street and get banned. (I'm not applying an opinion on the banishment issue.) Then, they come here all of a sudden and peddle their attitude and now their exaggerated chip against Hall, et al.

 

Now, Dennis, you know full well that I never claimed that slabbing ChMN's was a reasonable idea. I was merely pointing out to James that the discussion of what kinds of trinkets should be slabbed is a different discussion than one about slabbing problem trinkets (or, his holed TD).

 

I would ask that you not try to mess with me for two reasons. First, I like this place because I view it as a "sleepy backwater" where folks come to intellectualize about numismatics. And, I like to remain "sleepy". Second, it's simply not nice to mess with people, especially one who -- when pushed -- will respond.

 

EVP

 

[JadeRareCoin]

I like this place because I view it as a "sleepy backwater" where folks come to intellectualize about numismatics.

 

Hmmm. It seems that here in this "sleepy backwater" I was just insulted (called stupid) and threatened. Real intellectual.

 

EVP, please tell me that you were not offended by my post about McNuggets. Yes, I should have put a "wink" emoticon there, but I would hope that most people would not take me literally.

 

My post was purposely exaggerated to make a point. James has a valid point that it's not right to refuse to slab a holed/plugged 1794 dollar, but then turn right around and slab a $100,000 uniface something or other that could have been designed by Felix Schlag. Remember.....that's the whole point of this thread. ANACS and SEGS will slab damaged coins, so that kind of answers James' question for those companies, but I think he is wondering about the policies of NGC and PCGS.

 

 

 

 

[chinook]

Question:

 

If the Chicken McNuggets have BBQ sauce on them would the be AT?

[James_OldeTowne]

Now I wonder if the Jade boys are merely acting stupid or really are stupid. I really hate to get "personal" and stoop to namecalling, but on this I've had enough. They behave all uppity across the street and get banned. (I'm not applying an opinion on the banishment issue.) Then, they come here all of a sudden and peddle their attitude and now their exaggerated chip against Hall, et al.

 

PLEASE demonstrate where we are peddling an attitude of an "exagerrated chip against Hall" ! Are you saying that we've excessively denounced the man, called him a liar, trounced his reputation, attacked his personal integrity, etc? I will go back right now and delete such posts, because that's not my intent.

 

By the way, I don't claim not to be stupid, but occasionally, I manage to do something non-stupid. Dennis told me I did once.

 

James

[Wihlborg]

Question:

 

If the Chicken McNuggets have BBQ sauce on them would the be AT?

 

chinook,

 

It would probably depend upon whether it looked 'market acceptable' or not.

 

John

 

[JadeRareCoin]

Question:

 

If the Chicken McNuggets have BBQ sauce on them would the be AT?

 

Chinook, you are darn lucky that you put a winky face after your post. Otherwise I would have to insult you and even threaten you!!

[C.Urch]

It would probably depend upon whether it looked 'market acceptable' or not.

 

Barbeque sauce on a Chicken McNugget is by definition market acceptable! Other market acceptable condiments are hot mustard, soy sauce and ketchup. Mayonaise on the morsel would be AT as well as Horseradish sauce.

(Side note)...Cheese sauce would not only make the McNugget AT but it would also be body bagged as Whizzed!

[TonerGuy]

Are you saying that we've excessively denounced the man, called him a liar, trounced his reputation, attacked his personal integrity, etc? I will go back right now and delete such posts, because that's not my intent.

 

Ah, c'mon don't stop now, I was just starting to really enjoy that part of your posts. It's quite entertaining to watch Hall get ---

 

Michael

[dakra]

So why can't this coin be graded/slabbed? PCGS Q&A

 

 

-Dave

[Dry]

So why can't this coin be graded/slabbed? PCGS Q&A

 

 

-Dave

 

[MAULEMALL]

So why can't this coin be graded/slabbed? PCGS Q&A

 

 

-Dave

[Oldtrader3]

With respect to "Junk" coins (MS62's). Here is a "junk" (MS62), 1863 Proof Seated Dollar (see attachment) that I happen to own and like. Too bad that I can't afford "quality" coins (just kidding Victor)! However, this piece of junk was over $3 grand (from Legend)!

 

Note: The coin has proof fields, but they did not scan.

[Leothelion]

It's amazing how MS62 moderns look like craap but the classics look great.

 

Leo

[EZ_E]

Guys, just to clarify my "junk" grade statement:

 

Certainly didn't mean to step on toes but it is a fact in third party grading. (And just because I went to a little seminar does not qualify me as an expert but it did familiarize me with a little insider knowledge)

 

I think that the term "junk" is what is insulting to people. Perhaps that is the wrong choice of words and based upon some images shown, I would agree that it is not an appropriate term. However, when a coin (or non-coin, James ) fails to meet the mark of at least a ms 63 grade, then it is categorized in the ms 60 - 62 range. That is why many collectors would prefer a choice AU 58 over a ms 60-62 because it lacks the hits and ticks of their low ms brethren.

[Architecht]

Question:

 

If the Chicken McNuggets have BBQ sauce on them would the be AT?

 

ROFLOL!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

 

HAHAHAAHA

 

ahem...

 

yah.

 

Sorry. Carry on.

 

Arch

[Oldtrader3]

I think that my problem with the "junk" appellation (for MS62) is with the attitude of some dealers who teach some of these seminars. They do not seem to respect we, wee, unimportant, unenlightened peasants (read customers)who work for a living and save meaningful sums of our pitiful incomes. All this to buy the most expensive coins that we can afford and keep some of these magnificent, omnipotent specimins of the coin dealer population in business. To have these same high and mighty potentates label as junk the (MS62) coins that they charge us such significant prices for makes me want to retch. I would prefer that, instead of selling coins to me, to have them bask in their reflected glory using the full length mirrors that they must have in their homes.

 

(Attached) is another wretched, piece of junk (MS62) Type III, gold dollar shown only to make you consider striking yourself blind as you gaze upon this wretched MS62 coin that should have never seen the light of day.