Self-Attribution of Coins

[mike169]

I have a question. What is your opinion of sellers who self-attribute (or as messydesk puts it, self-designate) coins already certified? Would you prefer the attribution to be already on the slab, or would you trust the dealer?

 

For example, putting "FBL", "Doubled Die", "Cameo", "Ultra Cameo", Overton Numbers, etc. when the slab does not mention the appropriate characteristic?

 

 

[physics-fan3.14]

I trust myself. I never trust dealers for designations. For that matter, I never trust the TPGs. I only buy the coin, and I only pay a premium for the designation, if I designate the coin as such. In the end, I am much pickier than just about anyone else, and since I am going to have a horse in the race, so to speak, I spend the extra time to fully study the coin before buying it.

 

And that really is the only correct answer, despite what anyone else will tell you.

[bsshog40]

As far as I'm concerned, self attribution is merely a selling ploy. If the coin was, for example FBL, FT, FS, etc... I would think it would have already been on the slab. I'm a watcher of Jeffersons and I've seen alot of sellers with, "this is Full Step" , only they won't show a very good picture of the steps and onl;y the slab with no FS designation. I think if you want to self attribute, show a very good picture to prove it.

[JStull]

I have a question. What is your opinion of sellers who self-attribute coins already certified? Would you prefer the attribution to be already on the slab, or would you trust the dealer?

 

For example, putting "FBL", "Doubled Die", "Cameo", "Ultra Cameo", Overton Numbers, etc. when the slab does not mention the appropriate characteristic?

 

 

I have a dealer like this. He self attributes many of his slabbed coins. He asked me one time, recently, why I don't ever buy the slabbed stuff from him. I told him that I disagree with a lot of his self-attributions he's labeled on the slabs.

[BillJones]

If you are talking about stuff like “cameo” and P-L and that sort of thing, I don’t mind if the dealer expresses an opinion, but of course without that language on the slab, it’s not worth very much. This comes down to a judgment call.

 

When comes to attributed die varieties, there are a number of expert dealers who have it all over the graders at the TPGs. Bob Grellman can attribute Newcomb middle and late date large cent varieites off the cuff. I don't know anyone else in the world who can do that. And tell you the truth, for some series, I’m better than some of the graders at TPGs.

 

I’ve seen some major variety attribution errors on slabs. If you went by what it said on the slab, you could be out thousands or at least ready to start a fight to get you money back from the TPG. Die variety attributions are almost never a matter of opinion; they are matter of documented fact.

 

And I’ll tell you this. Most of the really big attribution errors I’ve seen were on PCGS and some “third world” slab companies. I’ve seen PCGS blow Red Book varieties, and that should not happen. NGC from what I’ve seen does quite well in the varieties attribution business.

 

[messydesk]

PL, FBL, etc. are designations, not attributions.

 

Die varieties are attributions that can almost always be shown to be right or wrong. I add these to Morgan and Peace dollars as a stand-alone service.

[Barndog]

I trust myself. I never trust dealers for designations. For that matter, I never trust the TPGs. I only buy the coin, and I only pay a premium for the designation, if I designate the coin as such. In the end, I am much pickier than just about anyone else, and since I am going to have a horse in the race, so to speak, I spend the extra time to fully study the coin before buying it.

 

And that really is the only correct answer, despite what anyone else will tell you.

 

I agree 100 percent

[Coindude]

I even heard once.... from somewhere.... that PCGS misattributed a pedigree on a slab!! Can you believe that!!

[James_OldeTowne]

I have a question. What is your opinion of sellers who self-attribute coins already certified? Would you prefer the attribution to be already on the slab, or would you trust the dealer?

 

For example, putting "FBL", "Doubled Die", "Cameo", "Ultra Cameo", Overton Numbers, etc. when the slab does not mention the appropriate characteristic?

Your question is erroneous as phrased. FBL, Cameo, and Ultra Cameo are not "attributions". They are grade and/or strike designations.

 

Doubled Die and Overton Numbers do reference attributions.

 

Grading companies make numerous mistakes in either case, and personally, I do not mind at all when a dealer or collector expresses a difference of opinion from a grading company. It definitely pays to double-check attributions, whereas grading designations really don't excite me much.

 

 

 

 

[James_OldeTowne]

Let me draw an analogy this way: If a slab displays the wrong date for the coin, would there be a problem with a dealer placing a sticker on the slab with the correct date?

[bsshog40]

Let me draw an analogy this way: If a slab displays the wrong date for the coin, would there be a problem with a dealer placing a sticker on the slab with the correct date?

I don't think this is a good analogy compared to the question asked. A wrong date is easily distinguishable whereas a self attribution/designation, however you want to describe it, is a description of details for a coin. Unless the attributer has extensive knowledge in what he is claiming, there is no proof unless someone else of equivalent expertise can acknowledge it also.

[michael]

I trust myself. I never trust dealers for designations. For that matter, I never trust the TPGs. I only buy the coin, and I only pay a premium for the designation, if I designate the coin as such. In the end, I am much pickier than just about anyone else, and since I am going to have a horse in the race, so to speak, I spend the extra time to fully study the coin before buying it.

 

And that really is the only correct answer, despite what anyone else will tell you.

 

agreed

 

i self-attribute every slabbed coin i see and i am unanimous in my attributions

 

[grade it-migration]

I have a collection of TPG error labels.

 

Along with an extensive collection of grading errors. IMHO

 

 

[physics-fan3.14]

I have a collection of TPG error labels.

 

Along with an extensive collection of grading errors. IMHO

 

 

Me too. I think we all have a large number of coins we think are undergraded

[nunfa0]

Hey Physics, love the new avatar!!

[James_OldeTowne]

Let me draw an analogy this way: If a slab displays the wrong date for the coin, would there be a problem with a dealer placing a sticker on the slab with the correct date?

I don't think this is a good analogy compared to the question asked. A wrong date is easily distinguishable whereas a self attribution/designation, however you want to describe it, is a description of details for a coin. Unless the attributer has extensive knowledge in what he is claiming, there is no proof unless someone else of equivalent expertise can acknowledge it also.

What about an 1812/1 half that is certified only as 1812? Technically, this is an attribution error, but it is also a date error. In either case, it's pretty easy to spot, and I wouldn't mind at all if a dealer put a sticker on the slab that correctly states 1812/1. I just don't think the slab is the final word.

[Conder101]

Die variety attributions are almost never a matter of opinion; they are matter of documented fact.

Yet attributions are NOT covered by the guarantee by NGC. From NGC's guarantee

•Attributions, including variety attributions, reference attributions and pedigree attributions are NOT guaranteed."

 

On the other hand PCGS DOES guarantee the attribution.

 

While they have gotten better NGC used to FREQUENTLY misattribute Conder tokens, and don't trust their shield nickel attributions. Well heck BOTH of the major TPG's tend to suffer from frequent misattributions. PCGS used to be especially bad back in the days before they start doing a lot more attributions. I used to see a LOT of 1794 "Head of 94", or even "Head of 95" large cents in PCGS "Head of 93" slabs.(BIG difference in value)

[James_OldeTowne]

Early on, PCGS misattributed numerous 1922 "plain" cents, by putting a number of die-pair 1 coins in to "no D" holders. That is a difference of several hundred to a thousand dollars or more.

 

I also remember seeing not one, but two high grade 1836 "lettered edge" halves misattributed as "reeded edge" coins. While anyone familiar with these series can tell them apart immediately without seeing the edge, the whole point is to make it possible for non-experts to buy rare coins, and the potential for error there is in the thousands of dollars.

[bsshog40]

Let me draw an analogy this way: If a slab displays the wrong date for the coin, would there be a problem with a dealer placing a sticker on the slab with the correct date?

I don't think this is a good analogy compared to the question asked. A wrong date is easily distinguishable whereas a self attribution/designation, however you want to describe it, is a description of details for a coin. Unless the attributer has extensive knowledge in what he is claiming, there is no proof unless someone else of equivalent expertise can acknowledge it also.

What about an 1812/1 half that is certified only as 1812? Technically, this is an attribution error, but it is also a date error. In either case, it's pretty easy to spot, and I wouldn't mind at all if a dealer put a sticker on the slab that correctly states 1812/1. I just don't think the slab is the final word.

You have a point James, I guess my object of opinion was directed more towards designations than date errors and such.

[Conder101]

What about an 1812/1 half that is certified only as 1812? Technically, this is an attribution error, but it is also a date error. In either case, it's pretty easy to spot, and I wouldn't mind at all if a dealer put a sticker on the slab that correctly states 1812/1. I just don't think the slab is the final word.

Unless the submitter paid for variety attribution I would not consider calling an 1812/1 just an 1812 to be an attribution error or a date error.

 

[bill65-migration]

IS there a difference between an attribution and a designation?

 

another way to phrase it are Full steps, full torch, full bell lines, PL, Dmpl, vam ,*, +, are these attributions or designations?

[James_OldeTowne]

IS there a difference between an attribution and a designation?

 

another way to phrase it are Full steps, full torch, full bell lines, PL, Dmpl, vam ,*, +, are these attributions or designations?

Those are all "grade designations".

 

Some examples of "attribution" would be:

 

S-215 (Sheldon-215)

O-101a (Overton 101a)

bearded goddess

1937-D three-legged buffalo

spitting eagle

VAM-3

1918/7

doubled-die obverse

Breen-2018

 

[mike169]

What about an 1812/1 half that is certified only as 1812? Technically, this is an attribution error, but it is also a date error. In either case, it's pretty easy to spot, and I wouldn't mind at all if a dealer put a sticker on the slab that correctly states 1812/1. I just don't think the slab is the final word.

Unless the submitter paid for variety attribution I would not consider calling an 1812/1 just an 1812 to be an attribution error or a date error.

 

Now that this thread has been resurrected somehow, the 1812/1 is considered to be a "major" variety (i.e. listed in the Red Book), much like the 1955 Doubled Die Cent. I don't believe that one should have to pay for attribution in this case.

 

I am more concerned with non-standard attributions, such as R-1 die varities attributed as R-5, or with designations, such as FBL.