Advice Needed On High End Coins In Problem Slabs

and

I'm not labeling resubmitting as decietful or unethical. Cracking out a details coin hoping for it to come back as a clean slab is not the best practice either. I don't reccommend it. If I was to purchase a coin that I later found out had received a previous details grade I would not be very happy. Would you? I understand that sometimes the TPGs are inconsistent with details grades but one should not try to profit from cracking out details coins.

Celticsoul, as long as the coin looked acceptable in your eye, why would you care if a random grader some time ago had a different opinion? Don't they always say buy the coin, not the slab?

That statement doesn't even remotely support itself internally. Bubbles have more structure. Grading is subjective.

I guarantee you own cleaned coins in righteous slabs. Guess you should destroy them.

Aside that, saturn60 (and welcome to Coin Community), you may assume that any higher-end coin has been resubmitted according to the point you're thinking. That said, given the subjectivity of grading and evaluation, do not believe anyone's quoted statistics on the subject because it's merely anecdotal and doesn't reflect the result you'd get with the exact same coin. So going down that intellectual path will more likely lead to self-deception than anything else.

Put to it, I would call cleaned coins the easiest to get regraded. You can't un-scratch a coin, but as long as you're willing to lose a few points of grade in your pocket, you can make cleaning go away forever.

Another point to consider is that it isn't likely to end too well for an average Joe. The big boys tend to have an in

Here's a thread abo https://goccf.com/t/196711 and another https://goccf.com/t/196992

I recall another thread, but I can't find it now. A gold coin in a details holder with scratches on the reverse. It was cracked out the area filed down and later appeared in a problem free holder.

1) "Should I assume that almost all high end problem coins have already been submitted multiple times to try and get a problem-free grade?"

No, I don't think so, though the less obvious the details problem, the more likely it has been re-submitted, particularly if its in a newer type holder.


2) "What has your success rate been when resubmitting high end problem coins to PCGS and NGC? (Post examples if possible)"

I have no idea what you mean by "high end". That's an incredibly vague and relative term. Do you mean $1,000,000+ or $1,000+ ?
I personally don't resubmit coins that have been graded details, the liklihood of it coming back details again is usually high, and submissions cost money and raise the risk of theft in transit. Also, if the coin is particularly rare and would garner a lot of attention, the graders are going to be much more picky before putting a coin out there in a problem free holder that would expose them to ridicule by the community.

3) "In general, are cleaned coins harder or easier than other types of problem designations to regrade as problem free?"

Depends on the type of metal. Silver coins are ridiculously obvious to spot as cleaned. So are gold coins. Copper coins depends a lot on how it was cleaned and when it was cleaned. If you want to crack out and resubmit silver coins that have been marked as cleaned, it better not have any hairline scratches. If its old silver and not toned black, it's probably been cleaned regardless of what the holder says. As for copper, most old copper has been cleaned, but it will retone, sometimes it can be slabbed problem free, sometimes its all the wrong kind of color and will not.

Other Considerations: If you are an important person who knows people at PCGS/NGC, you will have a higher liklihood of getting problem free coins then if you are Joe A Coin Collector.

see, that is why everyone says, buy the coin, not the holder. Buying slabbed coins is a sucker play.
I have seen the same thing in the stamp hobby.

and remember, no matter what the grade, it's only worth as much as the next guy is willing to pay for it.