More Accurate Labeleling On An Error?

Hello all

DEAR MODERATOR: this is a topic that is dealing with an ERROR medal, not a major discussion about t.p.g.'s, so please leave it here if you can. Thanks for understanding.

Never was much into error coins, altho there was a lot of interest, not to mention the kind of money some of them can bring. I noticed that many error coins seemed to involve small denominations like old pennies, nickels, quarters, etc.

I am not knocking that at all, because I have seen several of those coins go for hundreds, if not thousands of dollars. Getting $3,000 or so for a penny seems like a pretty good thing to me!

My medal, which is usually listed in coin catalogs including Krause is a little different. It is technically a medal however. I think the reason ones like it were usually in coin catalogs is because they had various "bolivares" values depending on the gram weights (5, 20, 60, 90, 160) and was issued by a private bank in Venezuela in 1957, 1958 and 1959, all were made in gold and in 1959 they were all struck as proof. The series was called "Chiefs In The Second War", and featured 18 WW2 leaders... everyone from Churchill to Tito to Hitler, etc.

Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on how one looks at it, the medal is very politically incorrect these days. It is the Hitler medal. I almost feel I have to apologize for it and give the obligatory message that he was a monster and I am only interested it in the sake of history. Hitler was the worst of the worst and I am no fan of his to say the least. But I have found that most coin collectors are like me, interested more in history than being offended. Bad history is still history.

I spent some 3 years researching off and on this medal, because no catalogs mentioned it in regards to it's weight (11.7 grams). I have never seen that before since or after, it is the only one that I know of. It is also the only one that I have ever seen that has a blank area of where the gram weight should be. So I consider it an error medal, if there is such a term, by way of its one-of-a-kind weight and one-of-a-kind missing the gram weight.

First, I attempted to get NGC to certify it, as I was positive it was an authentic medal. I got it back in a slab which said "Ineligible Type". Looking up their definition of this term, this meant that they "do not grade these types of coins" (or words to that effect).

Meaning Hitler and the swastika that was on it. Looking up their database, I verified this and that various graders and auction sites would either consider it or not.

So I tried ANACS. They did grade and slab it, however, they left out any kind of error designation. I can't blame them a bit. Detailed information on these medals are sketchy at best, with several wrong opinions, ommissions and the like which did not make the researching any easier. I found out that it was the most mis-understood coin or medal I have ever seen and the most incomplete information, whether on the net, in auctions, websites and in catalogs as well. For instance, Krause does not even mention the year 1958 in several of their catalogs, altho the 1957 and 1959 versions were but even these were incomplete as far a gram weights and bolivares values, etc. And the ones Krause did show were in COIN catalogs, or at least in the Krause catalogs I have. Believe me, this is just a few of the issues I ran into.

Ok. So I get the medal back. They did not mention the unusual gram weight as an error or missing gram weight that is struck on all other medals in the entire series, regardless of weight, leader, year, etc. I could not blame them because there is so little details (that are 100% correct) around in the catalogs and books, etc. For example, in order to find an image of the 1959 160 bolivares 50 gram medal, I had to order a very scarce catalog published in 1981 which showed an image of it. Nowhere else is it pictured.

Ok, regarding t.p.g., there are the "big 3"... PCGS, NGS, ANACS. I will not go into which is better, which is worse, etc. because it seems everyone has a different opinion. I will not start a food fight in here. But they do all have different rules from each other and I personally think that the grading and such is not an consistent and/exact science. I have included an image of this as an example.

One is that ANACS will grade higher than the others. This is not always the case. I can show you an example of a coin ANACS graded AU55 details, then it was cracked out and was sent to PCGS, who gave it a straight MS64 grade. I will show an example of that, however, I am unconcerned about the grade of my medal because, for all intents and purposes, it, with either of the gram weight and gram weight missing area does not exist in any grade, year, grader, etc., anywhere. I think that there is a possibility that it would be considered a unique, which in coin terms means that there are no known other examples.

I know, I know, everybody has a very valuable and exceptionally rare (Gawd I hate that overused term) coin or one in a million coin, etc. But just please bear with me.

One thing I am pretty sure of tho is that NGC and especially PCGS have a better "perceived" reputation than Anacs, including when it comes to selling time, altho they were very tough on my medal as far as grade i.m.o. I won't get into that because I was concerned about the grade, for one thing. How can one be concerned about the grade if there are no others like it to compare it to, or that it does not appear in any catalogs or such? So what difference does it make... none.

Ok, I would like to sell it. HA would not touch it because of their policy regarding Hitler and swastika things, to include coins and medals. Stacks and other sites will.

I found out that PCGS would grade my medal, plus MAY list it as an error medal, but of course I would have to point it out to them and give plenty of examples, which I have.

But what kind of error? A prototype? Pattern? Die variety? Blundered die? Trial strike?

PCGS said that they would problably label it similar to "struck on a 11.7 planchet" (Stk on an Experimental Pt". ok. But if the medal deserved an error designation, of course I would prefer that. As I had mentioned, I have researched this medal for years. Nothing has escaped me on anything about either the series or medal, no matter what year, gram weight, etc. I am not a vain person, but I would almost bet that there are fewer than a dozen folks on the earth who know more than I know about them. Three years of research and going thru many dozens of images and sources is a long time.

Ok, going the long way around the barn here... sorry. The point is that I eventually found out what the error should be by stumbling onto a PCGS example of another coin... "Struck on Experimental Planchet" or, "Stk on Experimental Pt" as it would problably label as.

Because that is what it is and in two different ways.

Here is the rub however... PCGS (and NGC) generally has a better "perceived" value or whatever term may be used than ANACS, when it comes to selling or buying. But this is not a discussion about t.p.g. (well, just a little bit but only because it involves an error medal).

Here is my question... do you think it would be worth my while to send it to PCGS and see if they would put an error label on it, similar to the example here?

I would appreciate your opinions on this, right or wrong, I listen to everybody. Thanks.

Mike

p.s. I can show you the other side of the medal, which shows, or rather, does not show the gram weight where it should be, but I do not wish to bore you further unless requested. I will say that the omission of the gram weight where it should be is glaringly obvious tho.