1927 China Dollar Just Back From NGC

Nice! Congrats!

Your ability to spot potential has been rewarded.

Two interesting points are raised by this thread.

What is an NGC grade worth?
Is this behavior "ethical"?

The original holder must have indicated a form of damage had occurred. Has the damage gone away? Why was it AU before and MS this time?

It is the same coin only now it is known to be cleaned on top of previous damage - yet it went from AU Details to MS 62.

The only thing that changed is a small piece of paper and a plastic holder.

So I think the answer to the first question - What is an NGC grade worth? - is NOTHING. NOTHING AT ALL.

The next question is to the current owner. With what disclosures would you re-sell the coin? If you fail to disclose that the coin is regraded from a net AU to MS 62 do you see that as a problem? Would you accept it being done to you?

I don't mean to be a buzz Kill here and I know this happens all the time - but to profit from an alteration of any sort (coin doctoring) is unethical behavior in most professional societies. It is considered to be fraud in some circles and if it is habitual legal action can be taken. PCGS recently made headlines when it sued dealers who had done the same thing - they cleaned problem coins got them graded fresh - sold them at a higher sticker price and then after the coin aged in the holder - the cleaning started to show. When the last in a string of purchasers went to PCGS to take advantage of the warranty of accuracy - PCGS paid and sued the original submitter for the full cost.

A recently cleaned coin that has been encapsulated is very likely to change color over time and the fraud becomes very obvious.

I believe that many members of the Forum here know that I am a member of the ebay Safety and Trust Coin Community Watch Group. We are the "experts" to which the reports are submitted regarding positing violations. We read and vote on terminations and sanctions for sellers who violate rules. I have wondered for years about this group and wondered if they even existed but now I know. I am the World Coins expert on the panel. I get all world referrals TPRs on coins posted on ebay.

Posting a crack out coin (if it is recognized) is a violation of ebay rules if the previous damage is not disclosed. These are routinely terminated but they are also very difficult to prove.

Recently we handled a a few cases that are very similar.

There were three coins posted on ebay that had previously been in TPG holders - they were purchased at bargain prices because of defects indicated on the labels and all three were cracked out - photographed under "advantageous conditions" and posted on ebay with no warning that the coin had been previously graded as damaged.

In all three cases bids had far surpassed the original sale price. One had already risen to a profit of over $1000 when we stepped in. In all three cases, the auctions were terminated the seller was sanctioned (a temporary suspension) - one permanently and in that latter case prosecution under fraud statutes was recommended (the pictures had actually been photo shopped to hide a scratch). It is not outside the scope of the committee to make a report to a proper jurisdiction for criminal prosecution.

The hobby we are all involved in is supposed to be fun AND SAFE - not just a method to make a quick buck off someone else with less insider knowledge.

I certainly hope you pattiewhack retain and NEVER sell that particular coin in the new slab. I would actually resubmit it for re-holdering under the original number and advise NGC that they need to review their procedures - they missed one. The benefit to you would be the knowledge that you did spot a good coin and that no one at a later date will be defrauded by the sale of a cleaned coin as an MS 62.

One thing that did surprise me about the members of the ebay committee is that we have a couple that check for crackouts and report at least 2 or 3 a week. We do not know each other by name and work through a contact at ebay so that we can not take any collusive action. All crack out auctions reported since I have been on the committee have been terminated and the sellers sanctioned. I only wish we could do more in this line to make ebay safer.

I believe that resubmittals when spotted are reported to the TPG's but so far I have not heard of any action or sanctions the TPG's are taking. Perhaps they just file the information waiting for a claim so they know who to sue.

I am sure we only are hitting the tip of the iceberg. It is a huge problem but in each case - what I focus on is that we have protected an unsuspecting buyer from being defrauded of his/her money by someone else who conseales information.

This is a good instance where we should all apply the golden rule to all our dealings.

Isn't that exactly what the designation MS (Mint State) originally meant? That is theoretically exactly why there is a premium price on MS coins. There are VERY few such coins still in existence.

What the grading companies like NGC have done is to flood garbage into the market by not checking surfaces as they should. They did it to supply dealers who look the other way because now they have dragged in speculative investors who sink millions of dollars into the bogus MS boom.

They were not satisfied with brand new issues because investors want MS everything.

You are also exactly right when you say:


I agree and I believe each and every one of these "touched up" coins has become AU or less in the process. They are no longer MS.

Then you say:




If I had paid the premium associated with any grade above AU cleaned, I definitely would feel cheated and so would many other folks who believe in full disclosure.

This is one reason why I never buy MS grade coins at ANY PREMIUM over AU. An AU I understand - but MS - I like you DO NOT TRUST anyone who claims they have one.

As long as you never sell this coin GREAT. But what about your estate? As long as the coin sits in an NGC MS 62 slab - how will your heirs know? Who buys it next and what premium will they pay?

I ask because I am likely facing that situation myself sooner rather than later. I remember a good friend now deceased (my age) who told me about 10 years ago that he hoped to never live long enough to see me die - because he feared what liquidation of 30,000 counterfeit coins could do if placed in the wrong hands.

I too am beginning to fear what happens next. I have amassed over 50 years of collecting a staggering collection of counterfeits. Do I donate it now? How do I prevent my heirs from attempting to profit by its sale? Should I even try to do so?

One final comment. You say:




If the coin had been graded stained with UNC details that is one thing and then I might agree but "NGC graded AU-Details" is something else. It is very easy looking at the before picture to (as a grader) concentrate my gaze at the points where the "stain" has clearly been worn away by contact - the cheek bone and forehead. That missing ink proves the very definition of AU. But after being cleaned the areas of rubbing are not as obvious and were likely missed.

Also most black silver tarnish is silver sulfide and it does not dissolve in acetone so I believe another agent (an acid) had to be used or a very blotchy toning pattern would remain. More than ink was removed in the second photo.

Regarding professional conservation - which I dislike because of crack-outs - it may have a valid place in some circumstances but it should always disclosed as a "restored" or "conserved" coin. If it is not disclosed by NGC that would be a fraudulent act on their part. The taint of an NCS slab on the value of the coin would preclude a sale in the future at MS 62 levels.

Finally, you did not remove a random ink stain. It was an INK CHOP. Which in some people's eyes might have added value to the coin as a numismatic item. An ink chop actually proved the coin did circulate at least some time. I would also caution that the micro-erosion of the surfaces caused by most ink chops (which were acidic inks) will sooner or later re-appear inside the slab.

I guess we can agree to disagree.

In terms of the value of an NGC grade I think this example proves that an NGC numerical grade is totally worthless.

Regarding ethics I can only agree that we are operating in systems that have a different view of what is and is not ethical.

jfransch The color of the ink chop interested me. I have a couple Cap and Ray 8 Rs with black ink and I think that was more or less standard. Any idea what the color range for ink chops was?

Likewise this interesting story raises considerable concern for me. Not on the ethical side but on the grading side. Obviously,in this case, NGC, has allowed its self to be influenced by a bright shiny coin. I am always extremely suspicious of a silver coin that is bright and shiny and over 30 years old. IMHO an old coin with an as new "patina" is immediate evidence of cleaning. A few years ago I purchased a 1781-1788 early re-strike Maria Theresa Thaler from Stacks( I hope someone from Stacks reads this). It was in a floor auction the photos didn't cause concern I bid....when the coin turned up I was really disappointed the coin looked as if it had been struck yesterday. Stacks had not noted that the coin had been cleaned but any idiot would realize that a coin that is over 200 years old is not going to look bright and shiny even if held in collectors hands for the whole of its existence. I am of the strong opinion that graders should be assessing the concurrence/non-concurrence between patina and the age of the coin. IMHO TPG's are often too often influenced by current market fashion rather than integrity.

Bob, pre-script: I've seen non-black ink-chops before... Blue, orange-red... Ggle ink chops, ink chopmarks or similar - there's a webpage or two devoted to these.

With this coin, without even looking at the before pic (had a remnant ink chop, acetone dipped it off... "eh". I don't call that doctoring. If the coin has a piece of dirt stuck to it and you pick it off with your nail, did you doctor it?)... very simply, there's slight rub on the face and the shoulder. It's an AU58, albeit one where most semi-knowledgeable collectors would say "that looks overdipped".

Bob noted the easy proof:
"It is very easy looking at the before picture to (as a grader) concentrate my gaze at the points where the "stain" has clearly been worn away by contact - the cheek bone and forehead. That missing ink proves the very definition of AU."

The follow-up:
"But after being cleaned the areas of rubbing are not as obvious and were likely missed."

This is plausible, though I wish that "professionals" wouldn't necessarily be the ones who miss such things. Does kind of speak to the idea that pictures can reveal traits/details that the naked eye won't pick up on as readily.

Just one other point - I would say that, yes, the ones who knowingly hide problems/amplify a coin's appearance with creative photography (or pull a Mr. Johnson from Florida) are indeed semi-dirtbags... BUT, if you're endeavoring to spend several grand on a coin and you don't know how to see beyond bright lighting... there's a name for that, too.