Will it Slab? Grade Opinions? 1822 Large Cent

[MarkFeld]

I think it will get unfairly body-bagged......

Why?

I think it has been recolored.

Thanks James. If you feel that way, why would you say "unfairly" with respect to "body bagged"?

Because an enormous number of recolored copper coins have been certified by PCGS in the past.

 

I once bought seven PCGS encapsulated large cents out of a Superior auction. Six of them were, in my opinion, recolored, and three of those six were for sure recolored because they had a known provenance, and when previously sold, were "still cleaned". Curiously, I sent just one of them in for grading at NGC (at a customer's request), and NGC bagged it for artificial color (which I expected).

 

If a company is going to accept "some" recolored copper coins, and reject others, there ought be at least some rationalization as to why.

James, thanks for your reply. I have just one more question/point and after that will let you rest

 

If some recolored coins are accepted/graded, while others are rejected, aren't the former unfairly accepted/graded, while the latter are fairly rejected?

[1798CentCollector-migratio]

I'd have to say this 1822 cent looks all-day -original to me. It's got a few detractions, but I like it's overall appeal

 

I have no idea what goes on in the mind of TPG grader when it comes to early copper.

I became even more disillusioned with the consistency and/ or competence of TPG early copper grading last week when I received a top 10 Condition Census Draped Bust cent back BB'd from PCGS due to "altered surfaces" !! This coin was absolutely original IMO and in the opinion of Bill Noyes and 3 other most knowledgeable copper dealer experts.. - and after seeing many of the Husak coins that had obvious problems, i.e., recolored, porosity, corrosion in PCGS holders.

 

Fortunately, the grades assigned to the Husak coins mostly reflected a net grading approach in line with the equivelent EAC net grade. I don't specifically know it's the case, but, I would have credit this to some level of collaboration with Heritage and Husak.

[MarkFeld]

.... and after seeing many of the Husak coins that had obvious problems, i.e., recolored, porosity, corrosion in PCGS holders.

 

Fortunately, the grades assigned to the Husak coins mostly reflected a net grading approach in line with the equivelent EAC net grade. I don't specifically know it's the case, but, I would have credit this to some level of collaboration with Heritage and Husak.

 

I'm confused, as those two comments sound contradictory to me. In viewing the lots, I believe I observed some of the former. I am not aware of and I doubt the latter, however, especially considering that the coins were in TPG holders, having been previously bought as such.

[James_OldeTowne]

I think it will get unfairly body-bagged......

Why?

I think it has been recolored.

Thanks James. If you feel that way, why would you say "unfairly" with respect to "body bagged"?

Because an enormous number of recolored copper coins have been certified by PCGS in the past.

 

I once bought seven PCGS encapsulated large cents out of a Superior auction. Six of them were, in my opinion, recolored, and three of those six were for sure recolored because they had a known provenance, and when previously sold, were "still cleaned". Curiously, I sent just one of them in for grading at NGC (at a customer's request), and NGC bagged it for artificial color (which I expected).

 

If a company is going to accept "some" recolored copper coins, and reject others, there ought be at least some rationalization as to why.

James, thanks for your reply. I have just one more question/point and after that will let you rest

 

If some recolored coins are accepted/graded, while others are rejected, aren't the former unfairly accepted/graded, while the latter are fairly rejected?

I think not, because we all know that the TPGs cannot be consistent in this regard. If it is a known fact that many copper coins are so well recolored that nobody can distinguish them from original, it would make more sense to me simply to accept all coppers, whether seemingly 100% original or recolored, and merely make a deduction in grade for the fact that it has been recolored, assuming it appears to be.

 

After all, if you pay PCGS for a grade opinion, you should get a grade opinion!

 

(And the same goes for NGC.)

 

ANACS, by the way, DOES give a grade opinion even on recolored copper. I don't think it's too much to ask that the two premier grading services meet the level of service provided by their much smaller competitor.

[Catbert]

AU-50

 

I don't know. This coin shows a lot of wear on the face and in the hair to rate that grade, but perhaps that is slab grading for copper. My guess is that EAC grading would give it a VF-30 or a 35.

 

As a follow up, your EAC estimate was also Doug Bird's opinion, but he also said he thought the TPGs would grade higher (but again, did not ask him his opinion on whether it would be slabable - what a word!).

[BillJones]

When you think about the TPG grading on early copper coins, for some of us, is harder that it is for early gold and silver. An early silver coin can be dipped white and look totally unnatural and that’s perfectly OK. It gets graded. Here’s and example. I've owned this coin for over 20 years, and it has toned down a bit since I bought.

 

 

An early gold coin can be dipped out to an unnatural bleached out white-gold color and also be graded. I don't own any screeming examples of that sort of coin because I really dislike the look ...

 

BUT, for some of us, an early copper coin will get body bagged even when it has great eye appeal and ranks in the condition census for the variety in a grade of AU-50 or better.

 

The grading services do net grade early copper coins. I know that becasue I have seen them. But seems like they only do it for certain customers, and it's been my experience that PCSG is more forgiving and NGC.

 

Overall early copper and slabs are like oil and water. The only reason I've bothered with slabbed early copper has been for my registered type set. Otherwise if I were a big really copper collector, I would be just as happy with raw coins. In that market raw coins are more popular.

[1798CentCollector-migratio]

.... and after seeing many of the Husak coins that had obvious problems, i.e., recolored, porosity, corrosion in PCGS holders.

 

Fortunately, the grades assigned to the Husak coins mostly reflected a net grading approach in line with the equivelent EAC net grade. I don't specifically know it's the case, but, I would have credit this to some level of collaboration with Heritage and Husak.

 

I'm confused, as those two comments sound contradictory to me. In viewing the lots, I believe I observed some of the former. I am not aware of and I doubt the latter, however, especially considering that the coins were in TPG holders, having been previously bought as such.

 

My disappointment was at seeing some of the Husak coins with obvious problems holdered ablbeit "net graded" and the "original" coin I had submitted BB'd with altered surfaces. Personally, I'm glad that PCGS holdered them and "net graded" them. Dispite the problems, many of these coins were great rarities.

 

The Husak coins were raw and holdered after Heritage received them- they were not already residing in the TPG holders. Almost all of Husak's coins were high Condition Census pieces and Noyes had already published both the sharpness and net grades of most of the coins in his census. Borkhardt had a chance to grade the coins. PCGS's grades were almost right on target with both the Noyes and Heritage's EAC net grades and many of the "problem" coins that had significantly higher sharpness grades. For example, the S-149 - Noyes graded the coin VF 25 net VG 10. Heritage graded the coin VG 10 and the PCGS grade was VG 10. My observations were that the average, average plus, and choice coins were graded by PCGS more in line withthe typical TPG standards and the problem coins were "net" graded and curiously close to the Noyes/Bland and EAC grades. Coincidence??

 

 

 

 

[MarkFeld]

Thanks for the clarification.

[MikeInFL]

As long as the PVC just right of the seventh star is not active, you shouldn't have a problem having it slabbed.

 

Hi Pat!

 

Is that PVC, or could it be a spot of corrosion?

 

Curiously yours...Mike

 

On early copper, especially brown copper, if the spot is green,such as the one shown, I think PVC.

 

If the spot is blackish/dark brown or a dark gray, I think corrosion.

 

Pat,

 

Thanks for the response!

 

I'm going to respectfully disagree with you on this one -- at least in theory. To me, that color green smacks of the color of copper sulfate, and I believe it could be a spot of corrosion.

 

It could also be PVC, as it often shows up as this color green, but the coloration alone doesn't lead me to believe that is necessarily is.

 

A quick dip in acetone would likely identify which one it is (PVC would dissolve, corrosion would not), but in the meantime, perhaps a more experienced copper collector than you or I could pipe up on this issue....

 

Respectfully submitted....Mike

 

p.s. blood red is another color of copper corrosion in addition to green and black/brown and grey.

[CarolinaCollector]

As you know, this date is tough to find in higher grades...

 

James may be right about recoloring, but I still like the coin. I would gladly replace the F-15 example in my set with this example.

[Catbert]

Just an update to this old thread.

 

I did sent the 1822 large cent in August to NGC and it came back XF45.

[bsshog40]

Way to go Catbert!!

[MikeInFL]

Just an update to this old thread.

 

I did sent the 1822 large cent in August to NGC and it came back XF45.

 

and thanks for the update.

[WoodenJefferson]

No wonder your throwing your arms (legs/paws) in the air as a act of celebration!

 

Good going!