Popular Post Lem E Posted November 13, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted November 13, 2022 I posted this on my 5 cent thread but I thought maybe I would get some more looks if I posted it as a stand alone question. I received this coin yesterday and upon inspection I believe the step attribution is incorrect. Let me say this right from the start. I am in no way trying to bag on the TPGs. It just happens to be the 2nd time I have ran into this problem. This is the 3rd 39 rev of 38 coin I have purchased. The first coin was clearly a rev of 40 and mislabeled. The second coin had the correct steps but was only graded as a 66. This 3rd example looks to be a very messy set of 40 steps. My concern is not with the FS attribution as this is clearly not a full step coin. These Philly examples are much harder to find with the 38 steps as opposed to the 40 step coins. To me these steps look like the reverse of 40 design. Like I said, they are a little messy but looking at the top step being thicker and the straightness of the top line and the more pronounced side lines makes me think 40. I would like to see what the rest of the community thinks. Hopefully these pics will be sufficient for examination. Thanks. Lem Hoghead515, ShinyObjects and GoldFinger1969 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post RWB Posted November 13, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted November 13, 2022 The 1938 steps clearly go upward, and 1940 steps obviously go downward. (In 1939 they had an escalator, but it kept breaking.) JT2, EagleRJO, Lem E and 2 others 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandon Posted November 13, 2022 Share Posted November 13, 2022 I agree that this is a "Reverse of '40" with weak steps. On the Reverse of '38 the steps are lighter and slightly "wavy", while on the Reverse of '40 the steps are straighter and deeper. More significantly as I see it, the whole area of the steps on the Reverse of '38 has a relatively "flat" appearance, while on the Reverse of '40 that area has a more "rounded" appearance. (On the Reverse of '38 the triangular edges of the area supported by the pillars are a little sharper than on the Reverse of '40, but I consider this a minor difference that may be difficult to discern.) If the grading services recognize these varieties, they should make sure that their graders are properly trained to recognize them! Given the cost of third-party certification, I find the frequency of errors like this troubling. Hoghead515 and Lem E 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleRJO Posted November 13, 2022 Share Posted November 13, 2022 (edited) On 11/13/2022 at 4:33 PM, Sandon said: If the grading services recognize these varieties, they should make sure that their graders are properly trained to recognize them! Given the cost of third-party certification, I find the frequency of errors like this troubling. I think the TPG's spend less than 5 seconds for each coin (other than maybe pre-screening and a finalizer), so the errors don't sound surprising to me. Someone may have submitted it as a R38 and they said "yea ... sure". Edited November 13, 2022 by EagleRJO JT2 and Lem E 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lem E Posted November 13, 2022 Author Share Posted November 13, 2022 (edited) On 11/13/2022 at 3:33 PM, Sandon said: I agree that this is a "Reverse of '40" with weak steps. On the Reverse of '38 the steps are lighter and slightly "wavy", while on the Reverse of '40 the steps are straighter and deeper. More significantly as I see it, the whole area of the steps on the Reverse of '38 has a relatively "flat" appearance, while on the Reverse of '40 that area has a more "rounded" appearance. (On the Reverse of '38 the triangular edges of the area supported by the pillars are a little sharper than on the Reverse of '40, but I consider this a minor difference that may be difficult to discern.) If the grading services recognize these varieties, they should make sure that their graders are properly trained to recognize them! Given the cost of third-party certification, I find the frequency of errors like this troubling. That is the way I saw it too. Usually the top line on the rev of 38 ramps up toward the 1st pillar. I started to question myself after looking at it too much. I’m curious to know how much time is actually spent on the steps in the grading room. Thanks for looking. I appreciate it. Edited November 13, 2022 by Lem E Add thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post FlyingAl Posted November 13, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted November 13, 2022 Definitely a Reverse of 1940. Note the sharp definition at the right side of the steps that is the giveaway. Crawtomatic, The Neophyte Numismatist, JT2 and 1 other 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
“” Posted November 13, 2022 Share Posted November 13, 2022 No doubt reverse of 40. The Neophyte Numismatist and Lem E 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lem E Posted November 13, 2022 Author Share Posted November 13, 2022 On 11/13/2022 at 4:48 PM, FlyingAl said: Definitely a Reverse of 1940. Note the sharp definition at the right side of the steps that is the giveaway. On 11/13/2022 at 5:01 PM, Simple Collector said: No doubt reverse of 40. Thanks guys. I agree. I haven’t had very good luck filling this slot. The first coin I purchased turned out to be a fairly costly mistake. It was one of 2 graded at MS-67 5FS with one finer. I had to battle a few bidders for it. I never really questioned the label at first. Just thought I had found a nice scarce piece. Turns out the steps were rev of 40. I had to pull it to keep the integrity of the set. Certainly made me learn the difference though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleRJO Posted November 13, 2022 Share Posted November 13, 2022 Don't the TPGs guarantee the labels in the event of a mistake like that? Lem E 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingAl Posted November 13, 2022 Share Posted November 13, 2022 On 11/13/2022 at 4:46 PM, EagleRJO said: Don't the TPGs guarantee the labels in the event of a mistake like that? PCGS yes, NGC no. Lem E 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandon Posted November 13, 2022 Share Posted November 13, 2022 You may wish to determine whether the seller would be willing to take the coin back for a refund. NGC might correct the designation without charge, but you would probably have to pay the shipping and would still have a coin you don't want and have to dispose of. (You may want to contact NGC about this.) This is why it's important to ignore that little paper tag and carefully inspect any coin that you wish to purchase. If you can't inspect the coin in-person or at least a clear high-resolution photo, you might not want to buy it. Lem E 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleRJO Posted November 14, 2022 Share Posted November 14, 2022 On 11/13/2022 at 6:58 PM, FlyingAl said: PCGS yes, NGC no. I thought they were on a level playing field. Maybe why I notice a preference for higher valued coins. For me with virtually all raw coins if there is a mistake the guy in the mirror I'm pointing a finger at says "tough". 😜 Lem E and Ray Tatum 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lem E Posted November 14, 2022 Author Share Posted November 14, 2022 I will be sending this coin back. Sending it off to be corrected would get me nowhere. The seller pics were just slab shots so the step detail was hard to see. I took a shot and I always presumed from the start there is a 50/50 shot of it being wrong. The hunt continues. Thanks for everyones help. EagleRJO 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J P M Posted November 14, 2022 Share Posted November 14, 2022 To bad, It looks like a 40 reverse to me also Lem E 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleRJO Posted November 14, 2022 Share Posted November 14, 2022 (edited) On 11/13/2022 at 7:20 PM, Lem E said: I took a shot and I always presumed from the start there is a 50/50 shot of it being wrong. Wow, sounds like me with buying raw coins from ebay where it's kinda like a box of chocolates, where you never know what you are going to get. Good thing I get most of my raw coins from a larger dealer that is good at weeding thru questionable stuff and routinely under grades coins a little. 😉 Edited November 14, 2022 by EagleRJO Lem E 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lem E Posted November 14, 2022 Author Share Posted November 14, 2022 I’m starting to run into a similar attribution problem as I start to get into the SMS/satin finish coins from 2005-2010. I picked up a 2006 coin that was supposed to be a high grade MS coin and ended up being a SMS coin. It’s all a learning experience. EagleRJO 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Tatum Posted November 14, 2022 Share Posted November 14, 2022 This is what your forum is about, this thread levitates me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J P M Posted November 14, 2022 Share Posted November 14, 2022 On 11/13/2022 at 9:57 PM, Lem E said: I’m starting to run into a similar attribution problem as I start to get into the SMS/satin finish coins from 2005-2010. I picked up a 2006 coin that was supposed to be a high grade MS coin and ended up being a SMS coin. It’s all a learning experience. I do not think the coin I picked up on Friday is a SMS or Satin Finish 2006 D coin. You can see it on my JP Nickel thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VKurtB Posted November 14, 2022 Share Posted November 14, 2022 On 11/13/2022 at 8:57 PM, Lem E said: I’m starting to run into a similar attribution problem as I start to get into the SMS/satin finish coins from 2005-2010. I picked up a 2006 coin that was supposed to be a high grade MS coin and ended up being a SMS coin. It’s all a learning experience. The future of 2005-2010 coins seems controversial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lem E Posted November 14, 2022 Author Share Posted November 14, 2022 (edited) On 11/14/2022 at 7:34 AM, J P M said: I do not think the coin I picked up on Friday is a SMS or Satin Finish 2006 D coin. You can see it on my JP Nickel thread. I think these coins are going to be a slippery slope. I think it is going to be hard to tell the difference between a nice MS coin and a bad SMS coin. I have a little experimental project going on with these. I don’t have a lot of experience with the SMS coins or really any of the coins from this date span. I bought 4 2006 uncirculated sets and 4 rolls of mint wrapped nickels also dated 2006. I’m not even sure what will be in the rolls. I’m hoping they are just regular coins. A nice SMS coin is pretty obvious but, in just the two uncirculated sets that I have looked at, I have noticed a difference in the quality. The Kennedy half in one of the sets doesn’t even resemble the Kennedy half in the other set. I figured I would try to collect up some examples of both types of coins and do some comparisons. I would like to see if I can find any type of marker or design element that would help differentiate between the two other than just the finish. The rolls are supposed to be here today but I am at work. From the info I have gathered, all of the uncirculated sets from the mint from 2005-2010 are considered the SMS/satin finish coins. There were no regular coins in these sets. Here are the two Kennedy halves. Both from sealed SMS sets and the difference in the finishes is quite a gap. Edited November 14, 2022 by Lem E Fenntucky Mike 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lem E Posted November 14, 2022 Author Share Posted November 14, 2022 I apologize for straying off topic from the original heading of this post but in the grand scheme of things it is relevant. Here is another shot of that same Kennedy half from above pulled out of the packaging and I set it next to a 1995 example that was given to me as change from a gas station. I know there were no SMS coins in 95. If there is some type of “special finish” that was used in 1995 I am unaware of it. The 06 is just a complete turd. The reverse isn’t nearly as bad. Fenntucky Mike 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J P M Posted November 14, 2022 Share Posted November 14, 2022 There may be some oil on the 06 from the mint packaging and it is making the coin look bad....... Or not LOL.... and yes the whole 2006 to 2010 SMS is a pain in the butt if you ask me. Trying to find a regular strike coin for my set is difficult everything comes up SMS Lem E 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lem E Posted November 14, 2022 Author Share Posted November 14, 2022 On 11/14/2022 at 4:36 PM, J P M said: There may be some oil on the 06 from the mint packaging and it is making the coin look bad....... Or not LOL.... and yes the whole 2006 to 2010 SMS is a pain in the butt if you ask me. Trying to find a regular strike coin for my set is difficult everything comes up SMS That 06 is beat to hell. Scratches and marks all over the obverse and it simply looks like a regular strike finish. Below is the coin that got me looking into this particular subject. Graded as a MS-68 6FS coin. Pop of 2/0. When I got it in hand I was pretty certain it wasn’t a regular finish coin but I wanted to see other examples. After getting my SMS sets I was convinced it was not a regular strike. It’s just too clean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J P M Posted November 14, 2022 Share Posted November 14, 2022 (edited) This MS68 FS SMS is nice it is just not as matt looking as your 68 in my opinion. Edited November 14, 2022 by J P M Lem E 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lem E Posted November 15, 2022 Author Share Posted November 15, 2022 On 11/14/2022 at 5:43 PM, J P M said: This MS68 FS SMS is nice it is just not as matt looking as your 68 in my opinion. 5 years of this mess to wade through. Thanks for nothing US Mint. EagleRJO 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
