The problem with NGC prong holders (NGC reply posted)

[Keigwin]

I bought this coin at the recent Long Beach auction. I had been looking for this scarce variety for a long while.

 

I noticed a slight nick at a prong but figured it wouldn't be that bad, given NGC's recent AU58 grade.

 

Boy, was I mistaken. What a disappointment.

 

Lance.

 

[123cents]

That's sickening!

[bsshog40]

It almost looks like the coin was positioned a little crooked to hide most the nic in the first place.

[kryptonitecomics]

I can see it just fine even in the slabbed image but that's only because of your planets yellow sun

[KeyMan64]

If you are a frequent/repeat customer of Heritage...I think you are...you should call them as well. They have more leverage! Maybe something like this would initiate a phone call from Heritage to NGC forcing NGC to make it right? All Heritage would have to say is something like...maybe we should NOT ALLOW any more NGC Prong Holders in our Auctions if you as a company are hiding things like this from our customers(bidders). That would get their attention REALLY REALLY REALLY QUICK! Could you imagine the value of NGC Prong Holder Coins just plumeting because they are NOT ALLOWED at big respected auction houses any more?....or if the Auction Houses started to add a disclaimer to all prong holder auctions that went like: "Due to the holder this coin is in, we cannot guarantee that a PROBLEM is not hidden under the prongs. Please bid with caution, no returns accepted."

 

Call Heritage!

[KeyMan64]

For those that say the HIT is shown in the photo, I say BAH! Only HALF of the hit is shown in the photo, there is no indication that this gouge went to the full edge of the coin. That is hiding a PROBLEM if I have ever seen one.

[Buffalo Head]

Maaaaaan,

That's tough! Sorry to see this! I've always like the "prong" holders till now. I enjoy seeing the rim, but now with this problem I've changed my views. Thanks for sharing this, Lance. I for one appreciate this very much as I was going to submit a few coins for reholdering, but now? This coin is damaged and should never have made it into a slab with out mention of this problem, as far as I'm concerned.

[Keigwin]

Hi Buffalo Head,

Here's the link again. It's in the original post.

 

http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=1156&lotNo=7212#Photo

 

I have a call in to NGC. Voicemail to Scott as well as a customer service message with links to the photos.

 

I will also call Heritage but I'd like to see if NGC will make things right first.

Lance.

[Buffalo Head]

Hi Buffalo Head,

Here's the link again. It's in the original post.

 

http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=1156&lotNo=7212#Photo

 

I have a call in to NGC. Voicemail to Scott as well as a customer service message with links to the photos.

 

I will also call Heritage but I'd like to see if NGC will make things right first.

Lance.

 

Good for you, Bud. Take care of it and I'm sure sorry this has happened. It seems like it's always the nice guys this happens to....I'm sure it will be taken care of....

[James_OldeTowne]

From a commercial grading standpoint, that is a trivial rim nick, and not at all out of character for an AU-58. Indeed, I could see a similar bagmark existing on an UNC coin as a bagmark (again, by commercial standards).

 

That part of the rim is still covered by the NGC prongs is STILL a substantial improvement over the days when the ENTIRE rim was covered by the NGC or PCGS insert.

[cpm9ball]

Why would NGC want to intentionally hide the rim hit? They don't own the coin.

 

Chris

[PerryHall]

From a commercial grading standpoint, that is a trivial rim nick, and not at all out of character for an AU-58. Indeed, I could see a similar bagmark existing on an UNC coin as a bagmark (again, by commercial standards).

 

That part of the rim is still covered by the NGC prongs is STILL a substantial improvement over the days when the ENTIRE rim was covered by the NGC or PCGS insert.

 

Agree. Not that big of a deal. Think of it as a bag mark on a non-prime focal area of the coin. I've seen rim nicks that were just as bad on PCGS graded coins.

[Hard Times]

Technically you are correct in that this is not a bad hit from an AU58 standpoint. But Lance is correct in that 1, you can't see the whole hit under the prong, and 2, it is a detracting hit and Lance would have probably never bought it if he could have seen the hit. I would not consider this to be a 'problem free' AU58 given that detracting mark. But that is JMHO, and we all have these..... I can see why Lance is disappointed.

[KeyMan64]

Agree. Not that big of a deal. Think of it as a bag mark on a non-prime focal area of the coin. I've seen rim nicks that were just as bad on PCGS graded coins.

That's not the point...the size of the damage being acceptable in a PCGS or NGC Holder.

 

The entire point of this is that HALF the damage was hidden by the NGC Holder and Lance might not have purchased the coin...or at least paid a lot less if the full extent of the damage had been shown. The bidding would not have gone that high if the entire damaged area had been shown....THAT is the point.

[pakasmommy-migration]

If it's not too contradictory: I really like the coin. Nice, rich, even color. Good detail.

 

And, I can understand you being disappointed. Probably in large part from the "surprise" factor.

 

I have faith in NGC's customer service department and hope it's resolved to your satisfaction...

[Chris1976]

Seems like a few coins lately with damage have been coming through heritage lately, in fact, one of them was even endorsed by CAC (2 other coins with issues such as this can be located in the Journals section). Kinda makes you wonder if the coins are even examined that closely prior to being offered for sale.

 

Sorry that you recieved a coin such as this and truly hope things turn out in the end for you on it.

 

-Chris#2

[Walkerfan]

From a commercial grading standpoint, that is a trivial rim nick, and not at all out of character for an AU-58. Indeed, I could see a similar bagmark existing on an UNC coin as a bagmark (again, by commercial standards).

 

That part of the rim is still covered by the NGC prongs is STILL a substantial improvement over the days when the ENTIRE rim was covered by the NGC or PCGS insert.

 

Agree. Not that big of a deal. Think of it as a bag mark on a non-prime focal area of the coin. I've seen rim nicks that were just as bad on PCGS graded coins.

 

Sorry guys, but I have to disagree with you on this one. It is BARELY noticeable in the slab but when removed and the OP's new images are shown it is a HUGE rim nick and VERY substantial damage. I would be VERY displeased!! Unacceptable for an AU 58 coin and not even mentioned on the insert!! I don't think it was intentionally covered up but it was in a very 'strategic' or 'coincidental' location.

[James_OldeTowne]

you can't see the whole hit under the prong

If the coin were in a gloopy, gloppy PCGS holder, you probably wouldn't have seen the ding at all!

 

Take it from my personal experience - been there, done that.

[BROADSTRUCK]

Raw it's like an eyeball magnet as once noticed it overpowers the petite head obverse design.

 

Scarce variety or not, slabbed or raw there would have had to have been a very substantial discount!

[FishyOne]

I certainly sympathize with the OP and also understand these images are at least 7X magnified on my monitor.

 

Other non-prong holders would have hidden less of the gouge. Some of it would not have been visible in any holder though and I don't view this as a "problem" coin at all.

 

The real dilemma is we now have a cracked out piece. I will be interesting to see how this progresses.

[rrantique]

From a commercial grading standpoint, that is a trivial rim nick, and not at all out of character for an AU-58. Indeed, I could see a similar bagmark existing on an UNC coin as a bagmark (again, by commercial standards).

 

That part of the rim is still covered by the NGC prongs is STILL a substantial improvement over the days when the ENTIRE rim was covered by the NGC or PCGS insert.

 

It also has a nick on the adjacent star to the rim ding.

[Denver Dave]

 

It dose not look like the typical rim ding, could it be a "Strke Thru"...?

 

Just looking on the Bright Side...

 

 

[leeg]

Was this a sight unseen bid? If so, not really much to complain about. Win some, lose some. The coin is a little out of center in the holder which isn't the norm. I truly don't believe that NGC would do this intentionally. If this is a proven fact that they did no more coins from me to NGC.

[PerryHall]

Was this a sight unseen bid? If so, not really much to complain about. Win some, lose some. The coin is a little out of center in the holder which isn't the norm. I truly don't believe that NGC would do this intentionally. If this is a proven fact that they did no more coins from me to NGC.

 

I wonder if the original owner tapped the corner of the slab to rotate the coin slightly to hide this rim nick before he submitted it auction.

[Conder101]

Could you imagine the value of NGC Prong Holder Coins just plumeting because they are NOT ALLOWED at big respected auction houses any more?....or if the Auction Houses started to add a disclaimer to all prong holder auctions that went like: "Due to the holder this coin is in, we cannot guarantee that a PROBLEM is not hidden under the prongs. Please bid with caution, no returns accepted."

Keyman, have you READ the Heritage terms of sale? There is already a clause in there that says coins certified by the TPG's are not returnable for any reason. (You'll find that clause in the terms of sale from the other major auction houses as well.) Basically they are saying that if there is any problem with a certified coin it is between you and the grading service. In the case of this coin it has been removed from the holder so that makes it non-returnable, and since it has been taken out of the holder NGC will no longer stand behind it either. The guarantee is now void.

 

Heritage also would not be too likely to kick NGC slabs out of their auctions because they have (Or at least did have, it may have changed) a partial ownership stake in NGC.

 

I also notice the OP said he bought it AT the Long Beach auction. If he bid from the floor or examined the lots before the sale then once again by the terms of sale the coin is not returnable. So this coin is potentially non-returnable three different ways.

[coinman_23885]

Was this a sight unseen bid? If so, not really much to complain about. Win some, lose some. The coin is a little out of center in the holder which isn't the norm. I truly don't believe that NGC would do this intentionally. If this is a proven fact that they did no more coins from me to NGC.

 

I wonder if the original owner tapped the corner of the slab to rotate the coin slightly to hide this rim nick before he submitted it auction.

 

I had the same thought.

[coinman_23885]

For those that say the HIT is shown in the photo, I say BAH! Only HALF of the hit is shown in the photo, there is no indication that this gouge went to the full edge of the coin. That is hiding a PROBLEM if I have ever seen one.

 

While I disagree, I would ONLY need to see half of the hit to pass.

[coinman_23885]

If things don't work out, you could always attempt to resubmit it. If they graded it once there is a chance that they will grade it in a problem free holder again. This would renew their guarantee.

[rrantique]

For those that say the HIT is shown in the photo, I say BAH! Only HALF of the hit is shown in the photo, there is no indication that this gouge went to the full edge of the coin. That is hiding a PROBLEM if I have ever seen one.

 

 

I disagree the adjoining star has a hit also,

 

 

 

[e1cnr]

I like it - it has a couple dings around the lips and side of face as well

 

it sure isn't a MS67, but wasn't advertised as such either

big blow-up shows more than I can see with a naked eye

 

 

thanks Heritage for your improving pix over the years with the thousands of coins you help move to new owners