Question for Conder101 Is it impossible for a pcgs #2 slab .......

[realone]

to be used all the way through 1996? Or is it absolutely positively without a doubt impossible and it was only in use in 1989 as it is stated on your slab site? Just want to make sure there are no exceptions to this law.

[MikeInFL]

If I know Conder, his post is 100% correct. I can count on one hand the times that I've seen him post inaccurate information, and none of them were around this issue...Mike

[realone]

Mike,

are you saying that no one is allowed to (or should ever for that matter) ask a question regarding his post?

[MikeInFL]

Not at all. All I'm saying is that I predict the answers will be a resounding "yes" and "yes".

 

From what I've read over the years, Conder is a stickler for detail, and you can virtually take anything he says as gospel, even moreso on this topic...Mike

[realone]

Cool, the only problem is that I haven't gotten an answer back, maybe he is double checking the file.

[MikeInFL]

Although I'd like to hear his answer, might I suggest a PM?..Mike

 

p.s. hope your day is going well!

[realone]

Mike, I pmed him last night with the identical question while he was on the boards, and while it is absolutely understandable that I did not get an immediate reply, my post here today was my last resort to try to get his attention. I realize he is very busy and thought he may not have seen the flashing letter on the top of his computer screen last night or that maybe he doesn't answer pm's as a general rule and thusly I figured that maybe a thread devoted to the same subject matter might be a better way to approach it.

[MikeInFL]

Understood. Patience, my friend.

[TomB]

It does not seem to me at all unreasonable or unlikely that even though you may have sent a PM to someone who was listed as being on the boards that they might not actually have read the PM. Additionally, they still might not have gotten to the PM the next day. NGC has a feature within the PM system where you can tell if someone has read their PM since it will be listed on the bottom of the message.

 

My opinion would be that a slab holder style used in 1989 was likely not used later in 1996. Of course, that does not mean I am correct.

[realone]

Tom,

That feature that you speak of says he did not read it. Although he I have to believe that other feature of flashing mail for pm in box is working. So I posted on the boards so there can be no missing it thats all. I have no doubt he will answer, eventually. As to your opinion, well I am of the same opinion but I am not an expert with slab usage and therefore didn't want to assume anything. TPG's are known to make mistakes, and maybe he might know if at some point during that 8 year span something might have happened at pcgs where maybe some of those slabs were used, who knows. This is why I asked THE MAN.

[cpm9ball]

Relax! It hasn't even been 24 hours, yet. Sometimes, I won't get a response to a PM for 2-3 days. Some people do have lives outside of numismatics, you know.

 

Chris

[realone]

Chris,

totally relaxed, I pmed him yesterday and posted today just to make sure I get his attention, I know and understand that he has a life. I figured that I saw him posting last night and thought I would give him a quick pm with a quick simple question. Today since I didn't hear back I figured I would post here just to make sure he sees my quick and simple question. But I was questioned if I pmed him and I answered that previously. I don't believe that this question is improper posted here or through pm's. I am currently laying out in a Hatteras Hammock sipping a tall tomatoe juice, no problems here.

[ldhair]

I'm thinking Conder has posted that he works nights.

If that is still true he is probably on a very different schedule from most here.

I'm sure he will pop in when possible.

 

[realone]

Thanks Larry for the info, didn't know that although I did see him post late last night and that is why I pmed him. Good to know, thanks!

[realone]

How does one do a whistling theme here. Lets just say that I am still patiently waiting for a reply from the slabbed one.

[Conder101]

Boy all kinds of speculation about why I didn't respond right away.

 

I was out of town from Friday morning until 8 PM last night. Coin Show, and then the Central States Numismatic Seminar in Cincinnati. Then I had to go to work. (I work thirds on the weekends at the local hospital.) So I had three days worth of mail and threads to work my way through, and I don't normally respond to PMs until I get through the threads. I saw this thead last night but didn't get the chance to get to it. (Busy night at the hospital.)

 

And I think Mike has an inflated opinion of my infallibility, I do make errors, plenty of them.

 

But to the question, any chance of second generation PCGS slab being used until 1996. I'd have to say a resounding no. The changes that took place that ended the first generation were because of the counterfeit first generation slabs that appeared in 1989. The "slab within a slab" varieties were short lived interm types until the new shell could be created. If they had been used until 1996 that would be a seven year production run which would result in it being one of the most common varieties instead of one of the scarcest. And there would be no reason for PCGS to reach back and put a coin in a slab discontinued several varieties back.

[realone]

Thanks Conder, I just had to ask to make doubly certain that a coin that I was studying and possibly buying did not slip through the cracks. As you stated 7 years would have been a long stretch but @hit happens as we all know. Thank you very much for the response and I might add in the nick of time.

[Just Bob]

So... at the risk of being nosey, do we get to find out what this was about?

[PerryHall]

So... at the risk of being nosey, do we get to find out what this was about?

 

Yup. And we need to see pics too.

 

 

 

 

[realone]

I was researching a pedigree of a certain cbhd, matching the catalog's b&w's (Eliasberg) with a photo of a coin that a dealer sent to me, it is easier to match photo to photo as opposed to photo to actual coin in hand. I thought I might possibly have a match. Then I noticed the slab was from 1989 and the auction was in 1996 where all the coins that were sold by Bowers were raw so therefore it couldn't be an Elaisberg. CBHD's are tough to match with catalog b&w's because the coin is so small and the b&w's are also pretty small and pretty simple with regards to detail. It was a no brainer once Conder told me what I had assumed, I just didn't want to take a chance and assume. I don't know how to post photos yet sorry.

[rons]

Hey Conder101, How about a report from the Central States Numismatic Seminar in Cincinnati?