Form MS 67 to MS 66 +

[Mark T]

Here is the 1917 S before the down grade to MS 66 Plus :

 

http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1130&Lot_No=581#Photo

 

Here it is in the new holder :

 

http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1144&Lot_No=4019&Lot_Id_No=1603

 

 

 

I was bidding on this coin but the price has surpassed my maximum bid. I think it is a great looking coin with an outstanding strike.

[physics-fan3.14]

Looks like a really nice coin. Its hard to tell what the correct grade should be from the pics, but its obviously a borderline coin.

[Hoot]

A lovely coin that hs not changed one bit, so the grade must be the same. On Oct. 29, 2009, it graded $5,635.00 and on September 23, 2010 it graded $4,026.15. Iyt's perfectly silly what happened to the holder it resided in over the course of that year, but the question for me is simply this: Shouldn't NGC be liable for the difference given the fact that they guarantee their grade and the market value associated with it? I would argue that they should, especially given the fact that the coin market has (surprisingly) not weakened measurably in the course of the past year. Perhaps NGC would not even consider arguing to the contrary of their liability, and perhaps we'll all find out.

 

The reflection of registry-driven mentality in the auction of this coin is sad to me. If the difference had been 10% or so, I might not believe that the Sheldon scale grade had anything to do with the auction outcome, but with the difference being 28.5% of the original auction price, I simply have to believe that the grade was the critical factor. To me, this is a shining example of how little collectors think for themselves.

 

What thinks you?

 

Hoot

[Lazarus Long]

How did it go from one prong holder to another and get a downgrade (i.e. what was the purpose of reholder?)

[Conder101]

Shouldn't NGC be liable for the difference given the fact that they guarantee their grade and the market value associated with it?

The problem is we don't know the submission history of the coin. All we know are the starting and ending holders. Once the PCGS Plus was announced they may have tried a crosover and gotten a lower grade so they then crossed it back to NGC. Or it may have been cracked an resubmitted. In neither case would NGC be liable. And it is also possible that NGC has already paid the former owner compensation when it downgraded.

[BillJones]

Why would anyone send in an MS-67, ful head for an upgrade? The chances of getting an MS-68 in anything from this vintage are slim to none.

[RWB]

All within the margin of error. You took a chance and failed.

[Mark T]

I don’t think this coin was cracked and re submitted, that would be nuts.

I like the downgrade and NGC guarantee explanation from Conder.

Giving it some thought I believe the coin was submitted to NGC for a review, downgraded to MS 66 + and compensation was then made to the submitter. I am sure whoever did this knew exactly what they were doing .

 

[MarkFeld]

I don’t think this coin was cracked and re submitted, that would be nuts.

I like the downgrade and NGC guarantee explanation from Conder.

Giving it some thought I believe the coin was submitted to NGC for a review, downgraded to MS 66 + and compensation was then made to the submitter. I am sure whoever did this knew exactly what they were doing .

I think that is by far, the most likely scenario.

[gmarguli]

I don’t think this coin was cracked and re submitted, that would be nuts.

I like the downgrade and NGC guarantee explanation from Conder.

Giving it some thought I believe the coin was submitted to NGC for a review, downgraded to MS 66 + and compensation was then made to the submitter. I am sure whoever did this knew exactly what they were doing .

I think that is by far, the most likely scenario.

 

Given the fact the TPGs do not like to buy back coins unless they have clearly made a mistake that they do not want out in the marketplace or the coin turned in the holder, I have serious doubts that NGC would downgrade a liner coin like this from MS67FH to MS66+FH. That's a super splitting of hairs and doesn't seem like something they would want to pay for. Liner coins are almost never downgraded and compensated for by the TPGs. I an old post ATS, it was even outright stated that liner coins will NOT be downgraded and the owner compensated. The guarantee is for big mistakes, not liner coins.

 

Given the fact that the coin is likely MS66.7 or higher and could likely slip thru into an MS67 slab with a few resubmissions, I do not believe that NGC would be downgrading a coin like this and paying the owner. I think a far more likely scenario is that this coin was cracked out to get into a PCGS MS67FH slab, failed to obtain that grade, and was resubmitted to NGC (probably more than once) where it only regraded MS66+FH. The owner throws a CAC sticker on it hoping to get every cent he can out of his loser.

[MarkFeld]

I don’t think this coin was cracked and re submitted, that would be nuts.

I like the downgrade and NGC guarantee explanation from Conder.

Giving it some thought I believe the coin was submitted to NGC for a review, downgraded to MS 66 + and compensation was then made to the submitter. I am sure whoever did this knew exactly what they were doing .

I think that is by far, the most likely scenario.

 

Given the fact the TPGs do not like to buy back coins unless they have clearly made a mistake that they do not want out in the marketplace or the coin turned in the holder, I have serious doubts that NGC would downgrade a liner coin like this from MS67FH to MS66+FH. That's a super splitting of hairs and doesn't seem like something they would want to pay for. Liner coins are almost never downgraded and compensated for by the TPGs. I an old post ATS, it was even outright stated that liner coins will NOT be downgraded and the owner compensated. The guarantee is for big mistakes, not liner coins.

 

Given the fact that the coin is likely MS66.7 or higher and could likely slip thru into an MS67 slab with a few resubmissions, I do not believe that NGC would be downgrading a coin like this and paying the owner. I think a far more likely scenario is that this coin was cracked out to get into a PCGS MS67FH slab, failed to obtain that grade, and was resubmitted to NGC (probably more than once) where it only regraded MS66+FH. The owner throws a CAC sticker on it hoping to get every cent he can out of his loser.

Having seen the coin in hand, my guess is that it was not cracked out in an attempt to get it into a PCGS 67FH holder - at least not by someone who is familiar with PCGS standards.

[Conder101]

Why would anyone send in an MS-67, ful head for an upgrade? The chances of getting an MS-68 in anything from this vintage are slim to none.

Ahh but there are now ten more grade points between 67 and 68 and you don't have to go all the way up to 68 to get an upgrade and "more value" now. You just have to get to the upper group of those ten grade points and get that +.