1875-S quarters 0

[samclemen3991]

This is just a general statement/question.  I have been on the lookout for an 1875-S Seated Quarter for about 3 years now.

I put a coin in my auction track list a few days ago but discovered today (And for the third time in 1 year) that NGC has slabbed a Twenty Cent piece and labeled it a Quarter.  Seriously,  my wife has dyslexia and hasn't written down a correct phone number in 45 years!  do we need to check on who is in charge of labels?  Vent over.  James

[Fenntucky Mike]

On 9/8/2023 at 12:35 PM, samclemen3991 said:

This is just a general statement/question.  I have been on the lookout for an 1875-S Seated Quarter for about 3 years now.

I put a coin in my auction track list a few days ago but discovered today (And for the third time in 1 year) that NGC has slabbed a Twenty Cent piece and labeled it a Quarter.  Seriously,  my wife has dyslexia and hasn't written down a correct phone number in 45 years!  do we need to check on who is in charge of labels?  Vent over.  James

Mechanical errors happen unfortunately, but the frequency with which I see them has increased over the last few years. It's a shame as it really goofs things up with the registries and Pop reports. PMG is a worse offender than NGC, big time. In general the label means little to me when I buy a coin as I know what I'm buying, also a mechanical error or omission on the label could play in my favor in terms of $'s and I can always send the coin in to get it relabeled at no charge if I choose to.

Typically NGC and PMG are quick to make the corrections if someone notifies them and sends the coins or notes in, maybe if people weren't screaming and yelling about when their submissions were received, how long it's taking, filled out forms correctly, etc., etc., etc., NGC/PMG might have fewer mechanical errors. Just sayin.  

[zadok]

On 9/8/2023 at 1:38 PM, Fenntucky Mike said:

Mechanical errors happen unfortunately, but the frequency with which I see them has increased over the last few years. It's a shame as it really goofs things up with the registries and Pop reports. PMG is a worse offender than NGC, big time. In general the label means little to me when I buy a coin as I know what I'm buying, also a mechanical error or omission on the label could play in my favor in terms of $'s and I can always send the coin in to get it relabeled at no charge if I choose to.

Typically NGC and PMG are quick to make the corrections if someone notifies them and sends the coins or notes in, maybe if people weren't screaming and yelling about when their submissions were received, how long it's taking, filled out forms correctly, etc., etc., etc., NGC/PMG might have fewer mechanical errors. Just sayin.  

...amen....

[RWB]

Finding employees for specialty businesses such a TPGs can be very difficult. Few applicants likely have more than a passing acquaintance with a coin or any kind.

[ldhair]

Mistakes are made. No one is perfect. 

[Sandon]

   It is particularly interesting that you posted this topic today, as NGC just posted "updated" rules regarding mechanical errors.  NGC’s Mechanical Errors / Returns Policy | NGC (ngccoin.com). See also NGC Guarantee | Coin Certification Guarantee | NGC (ngccoin.com) at section 12 under "WARNING THIS GUARANTEE IS LIMITED." This appears to be a reversion to NGC's traditional policy regarding such labeling errors, which had been recently changed to require that such errors be submitted for correction within some ridiculously short period of time after receipt from NGC, 14 or 15 days as I recall. They can once again be submitted for correction at any time without charge, although you still have the hassle and expense of shipping them to NGC.  There is still a 14-day limit for returning coins due to "holder defects".

   I assume that NGC's reversal of its policy resulted from a substantial number of complaints about the time limit, as it would prevent subsequent owners of these coins from having erroneous labels corrected without substantial cost.

   I've seen such errors in ANACS, NGC, and PCGS holders.  Unfortunately, new or casual collectors often rely on what is printed on the label and sometimes don't realize that the coin has been misdescribed.  The NGC Guarantee--and as I recall PCGS's as well--don't provide for compensation in these circumstances but only provide for free reholdering.

   While the mechanical error was significant in the case you describe, 1875-S quarters being much scarcer than 1875-S twenty cent pieces, you should consider renaming this topic "Mechanical Errors", as it would likely attract more long-lasting attention.

[samclemen3991]

In truth 20 cent pieces are listed for more money than quarters but I already have a 20 cent piece I like.  I suppose someone out there has the chance to buy the coin and perhaps make a profit.  I am not sure what a "mechanical error is", i would think it would be human error to apply the wrong label.   just my opinion.

[Sandon]

On 9/8/2023 at 5:33 PM, samclemen3991 said:

I am not sure what a "mechanical error is", i would think it would be human error to apply the wrong label.

   I agree that "Labeling Errors" would be a better name, or perhaps "Grading Service Goofs". I just used the terminology that NGC uses. 

[Henri Charriere]

Note: written an hour ago; published now.

Am I to understand none of what the OP and foregoing members have described constitutes "human error"?

A few years back I ordered a 1907 MS-67 coin, and received a 1911 MS-67, instead.  No big deal, right? Perhaps not, but for the fact the former is the most common in that series while the latter is one of its rarest.

I did what any responsible collector would do and shot off a message to the vendor immediately offering to return it, exchange it, or pay the difference in price between the two.  At the very least, I wanted their inventory to reflect an accurate accounting of what they had on hand.

For reasons I never understood -- perhaps reluctance to admit such a grievous, costly error, or the embarrassment and/or inconvenience and expense entailed in making an adjustment requiring a conversion of euros back to dollars -- they demurred and told me to keep the rarer, more costly coin, with their compliments. A quick check of their website had the correct date listed, 1907, accompanied by the wrong photograph of a 1911 I hadn't noticed before.  It was perhaps one of the few times when the advisory, "You will get the exact coin pictured," was incorrect, but not objectionable. 

To me a "mechanical error" accurately illustrates neither the OP's circumstance, nor mine. But if this is the current terminology being used, I withdraw my objection, and [to echo the famous line uttered by former Mississippi Governor Ross Barnett] "do so politely."  🤣

Edited September 9, 2023 by Henri Charriere
Die polishing.