1921 Standing Liberty - 2nd Opinion Cleaned

[nemo656]

I just received this coin back and was a little disappointed that it came back as cleaned. I am trying to understand what about this coin looks cleaned. I took the coin (in the slab) to my local coin shop and asked him if he could explain what about the coin looks cleaned and it was his opinion that it did not look cleaned to him.

 

Is it possible to send it back to NGC to re-evaluate the coin? What do they charge for a re-evaluation and has anyone ever had any luck with asking for a 2nd opinion? Also would they explain WHY NGC says it's cleaned. I (and a few others) have looked at the coin with a 10x and 20x Loupe and I can not detect any indication that it was cleaned. I do not see any hairlines. I do own other coins that say cleaned and they LOOK cleaned. Usually it is obvious if you tilt a coin to the light you can see marks and lines from a cleaning.

 

I will attach two pics that a friend of mine took.... Opinions - Suggestions?

 

Thanks!

Have a great day

Jim

[Treashunt]

Looks fine to my eye.

 

But, hey, I wear glasses

[MarkFeld]

I don't see the cleaning, but that doesn't mean it's not present.

 

I'd you ever attend coin shows, showing the coin to a few dealers at one would probably be better than sending it back to NGC. It's usually better and more informative to be able to have someone review a coin with you in person.

 

Also, I have seen many posters talk about the lack of hairlines on a coin as evidence that perhaps it hasn't been cleaned. I have seen many cleaned coins which don't exhibit obvious hairlines. Look for shiny areas or patches with an unnatural looking sheen or luster. If present, they might not be accompanied by obvious hairlines.

[Nutmeg Coin]

The other side of this "cleaning" judgment is what is missing, i.e. luster? None of these grading judgments are written on stone unless the problem is harsh. You could try PCGS if you believe the judgment is unduly harsh, plus sometimes grading services will net down minor problems. Compare the picture of this coin and date with a bunch of comparable coins that sold at auction.

 

http://coins.ha.com/itm/standing-liberty-quarters/quarters-and-twenty-cents/1921-25c-au50-pcgs-pcgs-population-45-621-ngc-census-11-433-mintage-1-916-000-numismedia-wsl-price-for-problem-f/a/1208-7611.s

[RWB]

Further, the authentication company gets to see the coin without a piece of plastic over it. That makes a lot of difference in my feeble opinion.

[Raisethis2]

Just about every submission I make to NGC includes at least 1 coin that gets the cleaning designation. I have learned that if any hairlines appear, just don't ship it. Therefore, in the absence of hairlines there are 2 explanations in my opinion.

 

1. As was stated above, third party grading companies have gotten into the habit of "net grading", meaning they didn't like something else about the coin and all things considered, arrived at this conclusion. That seems pretty unlikely to me however, as net grading to my logic would just affect the numerical grade. Making the leap to then call the coin cleaned is the coin equivalent to capital punishment.

 

2. More likely, there was something lacking in the coin's cartwheel luster or color that led them to this conclusion.

 

I'd suggest that first you really look the coin over, with appropriate lighting, focusing on abnormalities or inconsistencies that might be man made in the luster and cartwheel. The coin (if it's AU) should have some break in the luster on the knee, shield and eagles highest points. But if it's otherwise complete, it's hammer time.

 

I'd break that coin out of the slab and resubmit it once, and maybe even try ATS. The coin being labeled "improperly cleaned" and not being isolated to just one surface (obverse or reverse) suggests it was over-dipped or the color overall isn't what they like to see because both surfaces are affected.

 

One thing is certain, in that holder it's value is reduced.

 

Another thing that really sucks is that they don't even include a comment about what they see that you don't. That's part of the game they play. You can bet they don't take a stand to protect them, not you.

 

 

 

 

 

[Nutmeg Coin]

I had a SL quarter that was "unc. details improperly cleaned; the coin had great eye appeal inspite of the light hairlines; I blew it out on ebay and actually it did OK even in the purple holder. If you ran that coin on ebay you would probably get at least 50% of AU50 money in a non-problem holder. Generally the problem holder is the kiss of death with some exceptions.

[TonerGuy]

 

2. More likely, there was something lacking in the coin's cartwheel luster or color that led them to this conclusion.

 

I agree with this and it has happened to me as well. I sent in a half roll of 1934-D VAM 4 Peace $ years ago. All of the coins except for 1 graded from 62-64. One came back cleaned. It had no hairlines or other tell-tale signs of a cleaning but its luster didnt match the others. I showed it to a couple of dealers no one said it was cleaned. It just looked different than the others.

 

Try again, Im going to eventually.

[e1cnr]

I suspect the problem is on the reverse

 

behind the eagles feathers are parallel lines going down

ahead of the eagles feathers are parallel lines going ahead

and looks like a pin small hole behind feathers

 

the lines I see could be die polish

- rotate the coin while looking with loupe

[Keigwin]

If other authorities can't see a reason for the cleaning designation then crack it out and resubmit it. You may have to do this more than once. My personal record is 7 trips before the coin received the problem-free grade I felt it deserved.

 

Each submission must be paid for.

 

If you resubmit it in its current holder NGC is unlikely to change its mind. Instead they will look for a reason it was originally BB'd and reassert their finding. This is just my opinion and based on nothing more than experience.

 

It is unfortunate to have to play this game. You are not alone. This happens to many collectors and dealers.

 

That's a lovely AU quarter. I wouldn't give up on it.

Lance.

[RWB]

....or maybe if it's sent in enough times, someone on the other end will make a mistake and pass it as OK....Sounds like attempts to force mistakes rather than learn and deal with reality.

 

Just an opinion not based on $$$

[Keigwin]

....or maybe if it's sent in enough times, someone on the other end will make a mistake and pass it as OK....Sounds like attempts to force mistakes rather than learn and deal with reality.

 

Just an opinion not based on $$$

Could very well be.

 

If, however, experienced dealers and collectors all agree there is no good reason for calling it improperly cleaned then maybe NGC's decision should be questioned.

Lance.

[mikew148]

To the right of the contact mark and below the wing feathers. Looks like a possible old cleaning that has re-toned. This is as large as I could get the area without blurring the image -

 

 

 

[newprepper]

Just a couple of observations from an inexperienced newbie, but if I was to go along with the cleaning side, and I'm not, just throwing this out there,

1. the toning does not match from obverse to reverse, I know it doesn't always

2. on the reverse, there is dark toning that might appear to be the result of not being able to clean as well as around the rest of the rim

3.from 2-7 oclock has a weird shine on the rim, could just be reflection

4. weird coloration in the "of America" also.

it could all be a result of the photo. But I could see uneven cleaning based on the photo also

[MarkFeld]

One area you might re-examine is the upper part of Liberty's right arm (to viewer's left) and the drapery beneath it. I can't tell if I am seeing light scratches, discoloration, lines from cleaning or something else.

[Raisethis2]

I completely agree that in sending the coin back it should be a crackout. To send it slabbed is just begging a third party grader to reinforce their previous determination, just to maintain consistency.

 

I highly doubt any grading company would fault a collector from disagreeing with them and resubmitting a coin. They probably are confident in their determinations and if they should grade the coin differently upon a second attempt, they can just point to the subjective nature of grading, shrug their shoulders and say "congratulations".

 

What I would be in favor of is re-submitting a coin in a purple holder for review where one of two things happens, either the coin gets a straight grade or if they still refuse to grade it a detailed explanation is sent with the coin. This way you get something for your money and once enlightened, the collector has something to absorb that should also put the issue to bed.

 

Taking a $500 (approx) haircut and just accepting that it's been cleaned is not an option without some evidence, is just not my style.

 

One additional option would be to bring the coin with to a major show where Mark Salsberg offers grading opinions and ask him (nicely) why he thinks the coin received this designation. I've always found him accurate and always willing to answer any question.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[nemo656]

Thanks all for the opinions, it is all very appreciated. I did notice the obverse and reverse do not look the same as one commenter noticed. Just as an FYI, the coin came from my father. After he passed I was going though all his coins deciding which to sell and which to keep. This coin was in a Whitman type 25¢ folder and had been since the early 60's. He kept his coins in a big safe for the most part they only came out for coin club displays and when ever I would be there because we used to show off our collections to each other. I have a decent number of standing liberty's and since this one came from father I have no intention of ever selling it. So this little adventure is not about the value of the coin. It's more about understanding the why and how they came to this determination. My dad taught me to never ever clean coins other than a quick dip in Acetone to remove organic material such as dirt, glue, the green plastic residue found on coins stored in those crappy plastic flips I think it's called PVC residue. So I highly doubt that my father cleaned this coin and I certainly did not clean the coin.

 

Could the coin have been cleaned long ago? Sure, but THIS is what I want to understand. I have a nice 27-S that looks very similar to this one that also came from the same coin folder and I also have about 30 - 40 Morgans and a box filled with an eclectic mix of stuff worthy of submissions but before I send any more in I want to learn why this coin is or is not cleaned.

 

I sure wish that NGC would give comments when they issue this type of determination and not leave the submitter just wondering.

 

When I get time I will go back and take a closer look at the space below the wings and look for rubs or hairlines. Also I think just to satisfy my own curiosity this will be a crack out and resubmit.

 

OH! and by the way to the one commenter who said "There always seems to be ONE coin in a batch that comes back with an issue" I have had the same experience, to me it seems like they pick one coin and FIND something to make you say WTF? Just so we all think they actually spend real time looking at our submissions.

 

Again thank you for all the comments!

 

Have a great day

Jim

[Raisethis2]

Again, if a coin displays a few (3 -4) tiny, short hairlines in a random pattern, the coin should grade. If it has hairlines that run in any obvious pattern, (like rubbing) it most certainly will not.

 

In the absence of hairlines, poor cartwheel, luster or obvious dip residue, then you get into potential issues like color and having the "wrong look". These are intangibles that are spotted by only the most experienced.

 

Learning individually by trial and error leads to frustrating results that go unexplained. But that's the situation coin collectors face when submitting.

 

This subject is an excellent one for grading classes and coin club meetings to hash out. It's not discussed near enough.

[asdfgh]

As to the issue that every submission comes back with one problem coin, I believe it is just random.

I thought that the graders did not know which coin goes with any particular submission. This topic has been brought up before about particular people getting good grades.

As for me, I pretty much see the problem when they say Cleaned. My problem is not seeing it before I send it in. Its the ones like what you have that give me the most trouble. After I get it back I see that it is lacking luster and appears over dipped and such. When I put it side by side with other coins it stands out.

[MarkFeld]

As to the issue that every submission comes back with one problem coin, I believe it is just random.

I thought that the graders did not know which coin goes with any particular submission. This topic has been brought up before about particular people getting good grades.

As for me, I pretty much see the problem when they say Cleaned. My problem is not seeing it before I send it in. Its the ones like what you have that give me the most trouble. After I get it back I see that it is lacking luster and appears over dipped and such. When I put it side by side with other coins it stands out.

 

Each submission is segregated. One person's coins are not combined with those of another.

[mikew148]

I sure wish that NGC would give comments when they issue this type of determination and not leave the submitter just wondering.

 

It would be nice.

 

They often do include things like scratched, graffiti, harshly cleaned etc....

 

On coins like yours, where the cleaning is not so obvious, a quick word or two would be helpful. Although, if they did it for every cleaned coin that comes through the grading room it would slow things down a bit.

 

 

[Raisethis2]

I think that TPG's will state the obvious but on cleaning it's likely they don't know what's wrong or how it got that way, they just know it's not right.

 

Call it a black art, voodoo or whatever, they just know something's up.

 

Additionally, in this day and age especially, if they stated something specific there might be liability issues.

 

 

[nemo656]

So this morning I was able to get to the coin and take a closer look at the suggested areas. Mostly on the reverse around the wings. I do see some issues but still nothing that would jump out at me and say CLEANED. What I do see that to me might suggest an old cleaning is the odd toning around the periphery of both the obverse and the reverse. While I had the coin out of the safe I took some pictures with my own camera and although not totally perfect does show the coin in a different light. I took one picture then rotated the coin 90 degrees. so there are 4 pics of the obverse and four of the reverse. The more I look at this coin the more I agree with NGC it was cleaned but for the life of me I can not say for sure why....

 

Again thanks for all the comments and suggestions.

Have a great day

Jim

 

Attached is the four Obverse

[nemo656]

The reverse shots

[MarkFeld]

Looking at the new images, I think it's possible just about the entire surface area has been cleaned on each side. It might just be the imaging, but the coin looks unnatural.

[BillJones]

You initial photos made the coin look as if it might be okay, but these photos make the surface look grainy which would indicate that it may have been dipped in mild acid for too long of a time. If that is the case, the coin has been "improperly cleaned."

[Raisethis2]

Additionally, a coin of this high grade must have obvious luster remaining especially in protected areas. Again, it might just be pictures, but I'm seeing nothing.

[mikew148]

I like the initial images better. There is luster present there. The new images are not good. The angle of lighting is not right.

 

I'll stick by my original assessment.

[Nutmeg Coin]

Thanks for the updated pictures. It does look like it lost some original skin along the way. As you go back in time through various series and as you go down in grade there is more tolerance in the grading services for surface issues. Where do they draw the line? Only they and their finalizers and top graders know what they will call "market acceptable" or "market unacceptable". We have all seen those yucky obviously cleaned coins where the coin's surface has been disturbed beyond repair. Then you have coins like this with minimal issues, overdipped at some point probably. Mr. Swiatek had a periodic "report" I subscribed to where in one article he showed with a high powered microscope how even the briefest and most mild of dips results in metal loss on silver coins. You can't put the genie back in the bottle. This coin is worth a submission through a major dealer and I'm pretty sure you will be able to get it into a problem free holder. But once I get a coin rejected by service "A" it doesn't go back there.

[No+4Me]

I found the images in the original post to be more helpful, actually. I don't see anything in the newer images that lead me to think the coin has been cleaned. I would re submit it at some point; I think we all know of coins that straight graded after being labelled "cleaned" on the first go-around.