Variety and Special Certifications add value to encapsulated coins... 0

[RWB]

...that is evident in any marketplace analysis. But what happens if some of those "certifications" are not, or cannot be supported by facts? Are buyers of certified coins, especially those with unusual designations or questionable validity, entitled to clear, direct, truthful and documented proof of the certification? Is the entire corpus of American Numismatics being deceived by a withholding of this information? Has open discussion by hobbyists, "experts" and "researchers" been destroyed by reliance on opaque for-profit companies as arbitrators of fact or "imaginary fact?"

Edited May 28 by RWB

[Mike Meenderink]

All TPGs have a service called Re Grade if you feel a coin was graded or attributed incorrectly or too high. Fixed your problem. Cheers.

Edited May 28 by Mike Meenderink

[RonnieR131]

 I get what you're saying. On the 'for-profit companies as arbitrators' part, anything can happen. If they say it is, then I guess it is. A few years from now, they'll be a 'first hour of first day of first year' release. Unusual designations?  Not being deceived, just creating want, a desire, where none should exist. You fall for it or you don't, and that's from TPGs. The BIG deception of the future is what we can already see happening. Whether we like it or not, so called 'errors' is gaining momentum, and when it explodes in popularity in youthful coin enthusiasts, so be it. It'll be painful to see the machine doubling coins bought, sold, rebought etc... Scams and cons galore, and not just rediculous Etsy, everywhere, driven by demand, truthful documentation be d__ed. 

Edited May 28 by RonnieR131
everything

[RWB]

On 5/28/2024 at 5:59 PM, Mike Meenderink said:

All TPGs have a service called Re Grade if you feel a coin was graded or attributed incorrectly or too high. Fixed your problem. Cheers.

You misunderstand. I refer to labels claiming a coin is a certain variety or, especially, those called "specimen" or other undefined and unexplained terms that imply something special or are complete name inventions ("Special Proof" etc.)

Before TPGs multiple people contributed to discussion and examination of unusual looking pieces. A consensus was eventually reached and that was considered "reality" unless significant new information became available. It was an open-discussion process. Now TPGs make a declaration with little or no evidence (just lots of promotional hype) and NO explanation or input from outside their little fortresses. They dictate out of ignorance, then collectors pay grossly inflated prices on raw guesses.

Edited May 28 by RWB

[ldhair]

I remember some important people in the hobby speaking up on the topic in the past. Some got in trouble with the host of the forum they were on. I may be wrong but I'm not hearing many speaking up any longer. It's a no win situation with risk of upsetting someone. Special labels are not part of what I collect. 

Long term we will all learn if what we collect was the right thing to do.

 

[Henri Charriere]

There are [only] two members left who are eternal optimists and I am not one of them.

[VKurtB]

On 5/28/2024 at 6:28 PM, RWB said:

You misunderstand. I refer to labels claiming a coin is a certain variety or, especially, those called "specimen" or other undefined and unexplained terms that imply something special or are complete name inventions ("Special Proof" etc.)

Before TPGs multiple people contributed to discussion and examination of unusual looking pieces. A consensus was eventually reached and that was considered "reality" unless significant new information became available. It was an open-discussion process. Now TPGs make a declaration with little or no evidence (just lots of promotional hype) and NO explanation or input from outside their little fortresses. They dictate out of ignorance, then collectors pay grossly inflated prices on raw guesses.

Not even the top two TPGS (NGC and PCGS) agree on the word “Specimen”, or the designation “SP”. Both have their own definitions and they both believe the other is out of their collective minds. Both are flying the “we’re right and those other guys are crazy” banner. I heard this 11 months ago at Summer Seminar, directly from the mouths of NGC personnel. It was the topic of my talk (named a Bull Session) at the Summer Seminar. 

[bstrauss3]

 Humpty Dumpty, in Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass (1871):

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.”

“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master——that’s all.”

[VKurtB]

On 5/29/2024 at 12:39 PM, bstrauss3 said:

 Humpty Dumpty, in Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass (1871):

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.”

“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master——that’s all.”

Substitute “PCGS” for each use of “Humpty Dumpty” and substitute “@RWB” where “ Alice” appears. They’re both bad acid trips.