Why I Hate PCG$ AKA Submission Results

[gmarguli]

LINE # CERT # COIN DATE DENOMINATION VARIETY GRADE

1 90080715 1872 1C Enviromental Damage

2 90080716 1960 1C Small Date MS66CA

3 90080717 1962 1C PR67CA

4 90080718 1941-D 5C MS66FS

5 90080719 1955-D 5C MS65

6 90080720 1956-D 5C MS65

7 90080721 1958-D 5C MS66FS

8 90080722 1957-D 50C MS66

9 90080723 1958 50C MS66

10 90080724 1958-D 50C MS66

 

These coins were submitted at the last Long Beach show. A little over two months. That's not the only thing that pisses me off about PCG$.

 

Coin #1 (which I submitted for a friend) was shown to ANACS and they said AU50. It was also shown to NGC who said AU50. He wanted it in a slab, but didn't care which one. He gave it to me to submit. I showed the coin to David Hall at his little free grading offering. He said AU50. I specifically asked "It won't get bodybagged" and he replied "NO. No. Well, at least I don't see any reason why it would. It looks fine." Well, two months later and it gets bodybagged. I guess he forgot to go into the grading room and give the graders a wink. They also spelled 'Environmental' incorrectly.

 

I guess I could complain to him and get a refund of a regrade or something. Too much of a PITA. I'll just eat the submission fee for the friend. Maybe I'll ask for another free grade opinion this next show.

 

 

Coin #2. Notice anything odd about it? Yes, it appears to have graded MS and CAMEO. Except the 1965-7 SMS coins, this is impossible, but it appears to have happened. When entering the cert number into their database, it shows up as MS66CA. This coin was a proof coin.

 

 

Coin #3. I'm not positive, but I thought it was an MS coin when I submitted it. However, it's been so long that I honestly can't remember. I just have no recall of having a proof 1962 1¢ and I know that I had an MS one I was going to submit. I'll have to wait and see when it arrives back.

 

I don't remember the Jeffersons, but I know they were nice clean coins.

 

I sent the nicer Franklins to NGC. They graded MS65 at NGC. These worse Franklins graded MS66.

 

I'll count the fingerprints when they arrive back - which should be tomorrow.

 

And all my problems are made up according to David Hall.....

[MarkFeld]

"I showed the coin to David Hall at his little free grading offering. He said AU50. I specifically asked "It won't get bodybagged" and he replied "NO. No. Well, at least I don't see any reason why it would. It looks fine." Well, two months later and it gets bodybagged. I guess he forgot to go into the grading room and give the graders a wink. They also spelled 'Environmental' incorrectly."

 

Greg, obviously the coin deteriorated environmentally during the 2 months it was at PCGS. I don't quite understand your complaint.

[DonHeath]

Greg, I thought those MS Cams were a variety!

 

[TomB]

You think you could get extra Registry set points for them? You might make a killing on ebay if that were the case.

 

I once had a 1950-S dime come back labeled as an 1811 Capped Bust half, imagine if I still had the insert for my MS66 coin?

[cointagious]

so, greg, how long have you been into masochism?

[gmarguli]

so, greg, how long have you been into masochism?

 

Believe me, my submissions to PCG$ have been a FRACTION of what they would have been had they gotten their act together. Since the "incident" they have been nil.

 

I'm used to bad service there, but calling a coin MS and CAMEO is too much. That's something that shouldn't be possible with their computer system. The computer should be programmed to not print stupid inserts like this. However, in fairness to them, I don't know that the insert does say MS. I'll have to wait to get it back.

 

[DonHeath]

I just looked up the cert. Mine is in the database as a MS Cam. It surely is a pop 1.

[braddick]

Don and Greg- I own a PCGS MS65DCAM 1982-D Washington Commemorative. Sure enough: MS and DCAM on the same insert (let alone it's a "D" mint and not an "S" mint). I even dedicated a Registry Set with it as it is a Pop One coin and shows up in the pops as a valid insert (and not just a mechanical error).

 

 

Of course now someone at PCGS is reading this and will probably kill the Registry and take the insert out of their database. JoyKillers.

 

Greg- didn't you once own a PCGS "MS"66 1963 Franklin that had the most beautiful mirrors you've ever seen?

[gmarguli]

Greg- didn't you once own a PCGS "MS"66 1963 Franklin that had the most beautiful mirrors you've ever seen?

 

I don't recall the date and I believe it was an MS68 (might have been MS67, but either way it was BY FAR the finest known at the time). At the time I had been saving up insert errors because I didn't really know what to do with them. When I got that coin back the submitting dealer was stunned and contacted PCG$ about it and what to do. I sent them a whole box of error inserts and they took care of them.

[braddick]

That's right. It WAS an "MS68". Imagine the points that coin would have received in the Registry?

[Hoot]

I know we've talked about this, but I'm forever cracking PCGS graded coins and resubmitting them for the right grade or designation. It sometimes takes me three or four submissions, but they are especially bad with Jefferson nickels - and that's not a recent phenomenon. Just compare a handful of Jefferson FS nickels in PCGS holders and marvel at the inconsistency. This goes way back.

 

Hoot

[Beijim]

Greg,

 

Look on the bright side. You can now sell the nine coins that didn't get bodybagged for anywhere from 50% to 1000% more than if they were sealed inside NGC plastic, for no good reason. Then you can take about 20% of the proceeds, purchase replacements, and submit them to NGC. Of course the downside is that NGC will likely withhold the CAMEO designation from your MS coins and vice versa, but there are tradeoffs to be found in all walks of life.

 

Best regards,

Beijim

 

[gmarguli]

Well, I had enough free time to go pick up the coins today.

 

Here is the David Hall graded AU50 Indian cent that has no problems according to him, yet bodybagged by PCG$.

 

 

 

Here is the super rare cameo MINT STATE Small Date 1960 cent.

 

 

The 1962 cent was actually a proof. I don't even remember owning this coin. Shows how long the coins have been at PCG$. Two of the Franklins are clear FBL coins, yet didn't receive the designation. At least they overgraded them to make up for the lack of designation.

[Leothelion]

Greg

Did they clue you in as to the why the IH was BB. Here's my 1958-D 6 step Jeff. It resides in the ANACS MS65 holder. PCg$ had a look at it earlier this year and wouldn't upgrade it. It has a very stong strike with very nice toning and 6 steps.

It was already in a MS65 holder and fearing fingerprints, I really didn't want them to touch it unless it was upgraded.

 

Leo

[gmarguli]

Did they clue you in as to the why the IH was BB. Here's my 1958-D 6 step Jeff. It resides in the ANACS MS65 holder. PCg$ had a look at it earlier this year and wouldn't upgrade it. It has a very stong strike with very nice toning and 6 steps.

It was already in a MS65 holder and fearing fingerprints, I really didn't want them to touch it unless it was upgraded.

 

Nope. They gave no reason why other than "Enviromental [sic] Damage". I thought they were going to list the exact reason why?

 

Funny thing is if I had sent this coin in under the Regular Tier, I could have paid more to have the Presidential Review by David Hall so he could say it was OK. I guess that would only have cost $50 or so.

 

He said this coin was OK and PCG$ didn't. I guess his Presidential Review isn't worth anything.

 

My 1958-D 5¢ is from a mint set and has light blue nice mint set toning. It also has 6 steps and a great strike. I didn't even look up the value of this coin before submitting it. I never realized they were so cheap.

[TomB]

That's a nice looking IHC, Greg. I don't see any obvious, active verdigris on it, so, is there anything out of the ordinary about the coin? That is a tough date to find nice and is a very good "collector" coin.

[gmarguli]

That's a nice looking IHC, Greg. I don't see any obvious, active verdigris on it, so, is there anything out of the ordinary about the coin? That is a tough date to find nice and is a very good "collector" coin.

 

There is some MINOR crud on the reverse. MINOR. Nothing out of the ordinary for a circulated copper. It was hardened dirt and not verdigris. There was more crud on it that was removed using an olive oil soak. There is some extremely minor pitting and a scuff on the obverse fields. It is not deep at all. These things are me being picky and looking to find so-called problems.

 

I've seen much worse than this in a PCG$ slab. If this were an 1877 1¢ I bet it would not only have been slabbed, but would be sitting in an overgraded AU58 slab.

 

I just talked to the owner of the coin. Let's say he is more than a little upset after waiting two months for the coin to be graded and then for it to be bodybagged after David Hall said the coin was OK and wouldn't get bodybagged. I can safely say that PCG$ has lost yet another customer.

[dragon]

Greg,

 

I am mad at PCGS too now. I recently sent in a killer toned Morgan to them that was like a no question fully PL coin, in fact, a borderline DMPL coin. It has that see-through type monster color that actually brings out the mirrors. It came back the correct grade but no PL designation, and it's so close to a DMPL. PL and DMPL dollars have been my specialty for a long time, I was really PO'd that they messed this one up.

 

Oh, and did I mention that it also came back with a print near the date on the obverse that interrupted the killer color??? Grrrrrrrr.

 

 

dragon