| Author |
 Replies: 349 / Views: 38,131 |
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
188560 Posts |
Quote:So during the 8% ebay bucks day I bought 4 NGC 70 sets (saved $110)... Well done.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
Quote:So during the 8% ebay bucks day I bought 4 NGC 70 sets... PCGS continues to be tough on the Block Island grading. Current pop report shows  or 7.45% graded as 70s - down from 8.12% graded as 70s in the 8/22 pop report I posted earlier. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4901 Posts |
Quote:
So NGC graded them as 70's (perfect), but didn't provide them a special designation?
How do the two NGC 70's compare to the one you received from the mint? Do they look the same? They look exactly like the one I got from the Mint...BUT the issues with this set is not the half but the BI quarter..and those four look perfect to me...thus the 70 grade Of all the sets I got from the mint (12 received so far) one had an issue with a quarter (not home so I forgot which) and one had a mark on the case... I still have 4/4/2 sets coming from the Mint after they went "Currently unavailable" so that will be interesting edited to add: sorry I forgot...NGC has not decided how to attribute the variety/error yet. These were graded before it was a well known variant. PCGS has said no way...NGC said we will but still deciding how to attribute...easy to get a new designation for already graded halves ANACS should be all over this since they are the leaders in attributing errors/variants...like the 2009 Linclon Edited by Foxwoods Man
08/27/2018 5:22 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1913 Posts |
I don't see how the PCGS and NGC can ignore it. To give two very different looking coins the same perfect grade without a designation difference defies logic to me.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
I don't see how the PCGS and NGC can ignore it. To give two very different looking coins the same perfect grade without a designation difference defies logic to me. I don't believe they are, I think they just have to be submitted as errors for them. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2023 Posts |
They could have label them as "cameo" or not, like the have done with older proofs. That's an obvious distinction in these cases and wouldn't necessarily qualify as an error. Or does the "cameo" qualifier have to be requested as well? In my case, neither coin is labeled as cameo, they're both just "PR69".
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4901 Posts |
These variety RP's are NOT RP's or PF's so cameo is not a valid distinction. They are definitely more burnished looking than anything else.... ..and re: TPG's attributing this variety...in 2008 the reverse of 2007 took some time to be accepted and labeled as a variety....same issue here. NGC was the first to recognize and label it...PCGS then followed suit... |
|
Valued Member
United States
223 Posts |
 to the burnished look. |
|
Moderator
United States
188560 Posts |
Quote:
They could have label them as "cameo" or not, like the have done with older proofs. That's an obvious distinction in these cases and wouldn't necessarily qualify as an error. That is what I was thinking about earlier. Quote:
These variety RP's are NOT RP's or PF's so cameo is not a valid distinction. They are definitely more burnished looking than anything else.... Good point. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
Quote:
These variety RP's are NOT RP's or PF's... Well....I think the coins are proofs, since that term applies to how the coin was made and not how it looks. It's just that the obverse doesn't look like a brilliant, frosted, matte (closest to this I guess) or reverse proof coin  To me, they are an error coin produced most likely from an incorrectly prepared reverse proof die. As someone else said earlier, it indicates lackluster quality control procedures that the coins ever shipped. Quote:
...so cameo is not a valid distinction as that term generally applies to frosted proofs (and some brilliant proofs), but not reverse or matte proofs Edited by BadDog
08/28/2018 5:29 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
188560 Posts |
Quote:
Well....I think the coins are proofs, since that term applies to how the coin was made and not how it looks. Ah, agreed. Still a proof, certainly not a cameo proof, reversed or otherwise. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
534 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1913 Posts |
They also claim their graders discovered the variety. If you pay them $15 they'll certify what is plain to see.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
Quote:
If you pay them $15 they'll certify what is plain to see Those folks who collect labels need this  The rest of us, not so much  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
They also claim their graders discovered the variety. If you pay them $15 they'll certify what is plain to see. Definitely a stretch claiming they discovered it, but that's what I thought that they'd only label it with the error fee. |
| |
Replies: 349 / Views: 38,131 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 08/27/2018 4:38 pm
