| Author |
Replies: 18 / Views: 3,607 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4897 Posts |
lotta hairlines in the field behind the right wing though...
The denticles at 11:55 look kinda funky?
Edited by amida17 03/22/2012 10:43 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
3640 Posts |
Last two numbers in the serial are code #'s ? News to me. See some die polish lines and a chip and crack around F of "OF" If that coin was drilled then plugged then one heck of a fine job on it. Pretty good eyes on this grader then. Those pics with the zoom come in far better than what a 4X graders loupe would of seen. Unless because it's a 56 flyer they used a 1000X laser induced electron stereoscope with mach 7 afterburners.  If damaged, that woulda shoulda been marked on the slab. If it was mine i'd crack it out and send it to another TPG without any prior info.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4897 Posts |
From the PCGS site: Quote: A list of no grade codes is provided below:
No Grade Description Printed Description Holdered 82 Filed Rims Yes Yes 83 Peeling Lamination No No 84 Holed and Plugged Yes Yes 90 Not Genuine No No 91 Questionable Color No Yes 92 Cleaning No Yes 93 Planchet Flaw No Yes 94 Altered Surfaces No Yes 95 Scratch / Rim Dent No Yes 97 Environmental Damage No Yes 98 Damage No Yes 99 PVC Residue No No
http://www.pcgs.com/faq/
Edited by amida17 03/22/2012 11:20 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
3640 Posts |
Thanks for that info. Still pretty confusing though.
1."The format of the numbers printed on the obverse will remain the same. From the left - the coin number followed by a period, the "no grade code" assigned (such as 92 for cleaned), a slash and a certification number."
2.Then: "The reverse of the insert will be modified on Genuine coins to read "GENUINE NOT GRADABLE."
3."The no grade code to the right of the coin number is what should be used to determine the problem that PCGS has identified"
Which sentence/paragraph is correct of #1 and #3 ?
Anyway, good plug and play job on this one. Wonder how many other key coins slipped through this.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4897 Posts |
I dont claim to understand PCGS... I tolerate them perhaps...personally, I do not own a slabbed coin...
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
3640 Posts |
I do not (anymore) like or use PCGS. They used to be good yrs. back. NGC was kind of crappy a while ago but recently are much better then PCGS. I use them or ANACS depending on the coin.
Still would like some input on this plug job. Are they now using X-rays etc. on grading ? Where was the hole to begin with ? Usually it is around 12:00 Honestly, if you saw this coin in hand raw would a plug job even occur to you ? If that price was a tad lower (looks to be in the mid. AU price range) Coin is a close 58 easy 55, I would consider buying it and cracking it out.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
462 Posts |
I think I see something under the "E" in "STATES". A weird blotch. Cannot detect any corresponding alteration on the reverse, though.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7840 Posts |
Indian1 makes some good points. This is screaming FAKE Slab, IMO. PCGS does not use the code GN, I have only seen numerical codes (not saying that I know them all), and the back side of the Insert should have; The reverse of the insert will be modified on Genuine coins to print "GENUINE NOT GRADABLE". The Certification Number is good, but I have a feeling that is about all that is worth a hoot on this "coin". http://www.pcgs.com/grades.html
Edited by oih82w8 03/23/2012 11:49 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1934 Posts |
I'm not convinced the coin is genuine.
Edited by j_h_s 03/23/2012 07:33 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3453 Posts |
I am not sure about the coin but I am not convinced the SLAB is real. 
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10045 Posts |
Doesn't it say something if the slab cannot furnish proof in a critical situation like this?  But, if the slab is fake, calling it "genuine" might be a way to deflect concerns about the coin. If the coin is a fake, it's better than this one discussed recently--a least the legends and date look pretty close to my eyes. But, if I were to split hairs on this one, I would wonder why the tailfeathers end so close to the denticles--was this obverse die (one of 5 total) sunk deeper than the others?  An obvious fake   Why are the tail feathers closer to the denticles--hubbing difference? 
Edited by DVCollector 03/23/2012 2:51 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5854 Posts |
I think the coin is genuine and the slab it too. If you look at the 5 in the date, you can see that there is a chip in the ball of the 5 and the back of the 5 bisects the ball. If you look at the "o" in of, the inside is sort of rectangular in shape and not a oval like on other dates. Also, if I remember correctly PCGS did use The GN code on their earlier genuine slabs. I don't know if it has been plugged but I do think it is accurately labeled as a problem coin. The surfaces look off and there is a patch of hairlines in the field above the eagle's tail.
|
|
CCF Sponsor
United States
702 Posts |
It may be genuine but personally I'd stay away from this one, especially at this price. At BEST it's been improperly cleaned, at worst it's a Chinese fake in good fake holder. There are other nice coins without questions at this price that are a safer bet. It's a proof strike and while it does look nice, I'd rather have a worn version (preferably circulation strike) without problems or asterisks in my mind for the same money.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
I'm inclined to believe the coin genuine. This seller, although not adding up bunches of Feedback, has been selling coins on ebay since 1999. This one's the most expensive he's offering currently, but not by much and most of it is stuff that's way out of my range. My guess is the GN code is an administrative error - this one's been cleaned.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
16680 Posts |
I've seen the GN designation on other holders. I believe the coin is genuine as well. Definitely a cleaned coin. The orange/pinkish hue is a dead giveaway. Still a nice looking 1856. Also appears to be an S-9 by the tiny dot on the upper serif of second N.
swcoin.ecrater.com
Edited by vermontensium 03/23/2012 8:23 pm
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 18 / Views: 3,607 |
Page 2 of 2
|