Why you buy the coin, and not the plastic.

[jerseycat10]

http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=211011&Lot_No=20568#Photo

 

Look at the closeup photo of the obverse.

 

Don't be fooled by the satiny smooth surfaces from the smaller pictures.

 

Once you zoom in, you realize the following:

 

Her neckline is riddled with dings.

Her jawbone area is absolutely hideous for a 64.

Many distracting nicks and dings in her hair.

 

How this coin got a 64 is beyong me. I have plenty fo 63's that look better than this.

[TomB]

Well, it didn't sell so perhaps others agreed with you.

[BillJones]

And do you think that competition does not have coins out there that don’t make the grade? Over the years I find myself remembering the coin and ending up unable to recall which holder contained it. When I was a dealer I had some customers who exhibited the same behavior. May that’s a reflection of becoming an “old guy.”

 

It all comes down to the coin. If I like the coin I tend to forget who graded it. If I don’t like it, it either sticks in my mind because it was so for off, or I forget it. You can’t trust any grading service implicitly; you must use your own judgment, training and experience

 

[JStull]

And do you think that competition does not have coins out there that don’t make the grade? Over the years I find myself remembering the coin and ending up unable to recall which holder contained it. When I was a dealer I had some customers who exhibited the same behavior. May that’s a reflection of becoming an “old guy.”

 

It all comes down to the coin. If I like the coin I tend to forget who graded it. If I don’t like it, it either sticks in my mind because it was so for off, or I forget it. You can’t trust any grading service implicitly; you must use your own judgment, training and experience

 

I agree.

 

Because of the subjectivity of coin grading, people have to remember that submitting a coin to a TPG, is paying for someone's opinion, which is not 100% guaranteed.

 

No two TPGs have the same grading standards, as we all know, and can have differing opinions on a coin's grade.

 

One man's trash, is another man's treasure.

[Conder101]

No two TPGs have the same grading standards, as we all know, and can have differing opinions on a coin's grade.

And the same TPG can have differing standards and opinions if you crack the coin out and send it in twice. When you pays your money you are just buying an opinion of what they think of it at that moment in time.

[mike169]

I agree. My question is, are those holder scratches or coin scratches?

 

And to continue my point, realistically, that's one of the reasons I don't like images. They give a distorted picture of both the positive and the negatives.

 

A 64 grade is supposed to be decent without magnification. If you put too much magnification, the coin may look awful.

 

 

[James_OldeTowne]

This is a scanned image, and I am pretty confident those slidemarks are being exaggerated. However, it does look a point overgraded overall.

[Keigwin]

Coins get misgraded all the time.

 

I would guess NGC would downgrade that coin if it were sent in for a spot review, and invoke their guarantee.

Lance.

[mike169]

Coins get misgraded all the time.

 

I would guess NGC would downgrade that coin if it were sent in for a spot review, and invoke their guarantee.

Lance.

 

I wonder when the "obvious error" clause comes into play, though?

 

[Keigwin]

Coins get misgraded all the time.

 

I would guess NGC would downgrade that coin if it were sent in for a spot review, and invoke their guarantee.

Lance.

 

I wonder when the "obvious error" clause comes into play, though?

Not here.

 

Obvious errors are labeling the wrong year or m/m. Getting the variety wrong. Calling a nickel a dime. Stuff layman can detect without a numismatic degree.

 

When it comes to an opinion on a grade that is clearly wrong, a reputable TPG will come through.

Lance.

[coinman_23885]

Coins get misgraded all the time.

 

I would guess NGC would downgrade that coin if it were sent in for a spot review, and invoke their guarantee.

Lance.

 

I wonder when the "obvious error" clause comes into play, though?

Not here.

 

Obvious errors are labeling the wrong year or m/m. Getting the variety wrong. Calling a nickel a dime. Stuff layman can detect without a numismatic degree.

 

When it comes to an opinion on a grade that is clearly wrong, a reputable TPG will come through.

Lance.

 

I agree and I think that PCGS and NGC would both invoke their guarantee. I recall seeing a PF68 Lincoln wheat cent in a MS68 holder on eBay selling for an incredible premium (greater than $1,200 I believe) a couple of years back. This would probably fall within the "obvious" error exception. With that said, I alerted NGC, and they aggressively pursued the matter. Within 12 hours of emailing customer service, I received a prompt response from Scott Schroeder, and the seller and eBay had already been contacted.

[mike169]

Coins get misgraded all the time.

 

I would guess NGC would downgrade that coin if it were sent in for a spot review, and invoke their guarantee.

Lance.

 

I wonder when the "obvious error" clause comes into play, though?

Not here.

 

Obvious errors are labeling the wrong year or m/m. Getting the variety wrong. Calling a nickel a dime. Stuff layman can detect without a numismatic degree.

 

When it comes to an opinion on a grade that is clearly wrong, a reputable TPG will come through.

Lance.

 

I'm not so sure about that. On PCGS's website, they explicitly state that they do not guarantee the grade for the reasons quoted below.

 

"A blatantly obvious clerical input mistake with respect to the actual grade of the coin. For example, if you had an 1893-O Morgan dollar and the PCGS holder showed the coin as MS65 (a Gem quality coin), but the coin was so beat up and marked up that it would grade MS60 at best, this coin would not be covered by the PCGS Guarantee as this would be an obvious input error. The rule of thumb here would be a difference of more than two points on the grading scale."