| Author |
 Replies: 21 / Views: 3,690 |
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
  8-3 ton9-22 and their "expert" couldnt authenticate it. I don't believe ANACS got the grade right either considering the strike but at least they were able to get the off struck part right. I'll send it to NGC in a month but very disappointing how PCGS grading has gown down hill. They have the best holders by far, but we have different definitions of experts. Edited by basebal21
11/11/2015 03:08 am
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5828 Posts |
So... PCGS didn't authenticate it? If its fake and ANACS authenticated it, you could get the $$$ you thought your coin was worth from ANACS, I think...
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
I'm not sure what the OP is trying to say. Did PCGS refuse to slab it? Did they slab it but not identify it as a mint error? Did PCGS send it back as questionable authenticity? What did they do?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5828 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 13014 Posts |
Pcgs sent it back as a code 98 "we don't know" which in all honesty it's not a hard error at all. Whatever expert they have their their error room right now isn't worth the fee they're charging. I sent it to ANACS after that to make sure I wasn't the one who was wrong about it since I don't have a submission currently big enough to send into NGC.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5828 Posts |
Ah, okay... Looks like a nice looking error coin to me  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
I thought so as well. This was more a thread of frustration and just warning to not waste money sending those to PCGS with who they currently have working in that department. I struggle to understand how a simple off strike is so complicated
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6390 Posts |
Might be worth calling PCGS and asking questions. Someone there might be willing to have a constructive discussion with you. Maybe they would accept a crossover from the ANACS slab, at no charge.
Looks like a beautiful error to me. It's especially nice when a major off-center includes date and attribute features, like the L on ribbon for this semi-key date. A great coin for any error collection!
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Interesting discssion, great error!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
757 Posts |
The only thing I can see on why pcgs wouldn't slab it is, why are there denticles on the obverse and not the reverse? That little detail would have kept me from buying it raw.
While PCGS may be wrong, I (and many others) trust them way more than ANACS. Obviously one is right and one is wrong, but who's who?
|
|
Moderator
 United States
15459 Posts |
The OP original post made no sense to me ... was there a question or statement of intent in there along with the photographs?
That appears to have been settled ... concur that either PCGS or ANACS is wrong here.
My experience is that ANACS is a bit more ... uhhhhm . more generous slabbing error coins than PCGS.
Also a bit confused by the OP report that PCGS called this *98* ... which means 'damaged'. I see no damage?
Are you sure basebal21 it was not *86* which means 'No Decision'?
David
Take a look at my other hobby ... http://www.jk-dk.artEdited by nickelsearcher
11/12/2015 7:30 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
Might be worth calling PCGS and asking questions. Someone there might be willing to have a constructive discussion with you. Maybe they would accept a crossover Tried that several times over, their customer service manager couldn't care less. Quote:
PCGS may be wrong, I (and many others) trust them way more than ANACS. Obviously one is right and one is wrong, but who's who? By no means am I a fan of most of ANACS grading and I did use to be one the biggest defenders of PCGS and their quality work, however at the same time it's fairly well known ANACS is better with varieties and errors even if the actual grade itself is more questionable. It would be one thing if it was a difficult error but, a simple off strike should be very easily identifiable. They've actually graded a handful of these in the past as well. Seems to be a waste of money for that part of their service if they can't handle that. Quote:
Also a bit confused by the OP report that PCGS called this *98* ... which means 'damaged'. I see no damage? Yes it was the no decision one just mixed up the code numbers in my head when posting it. In terms of authenticity I firmly believe ANACS got that part right. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
757 Posts |
Looking at some off struck errors on heritage there seems to be something off with the one you posted and the ones they sold. http://coins.ha.com/itm/errors/1863...bnail-071515http://coins.ha.com/itm/errors/1863...ption-071515 On the obverse of the heritage pictures the denticles seem to fan out toward the edge of the strike and on your picture it looks like the stay uniform around the edge. There are also denticles on the outside of the strike on the reverse and I don't see the same on the one you posted. There are a lot of fakes out their so I'm still at a loss. You have a potential $2000+ error on your hands that's a lot of motivation to make a fake. Did you ever weigh the coin before it was sent off to grading? |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
2668 Posts |
Could be PCGS weighed it.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
I've never heard the argument before that error coins should have a consistent strike but that's a new angle for sure.
My pictures on this one weren't good. NGC will be its final resting place in time before it's sold.
What do the 1863 Indians you posted have to do with an 1864 L?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5828 Posts |
Quote:
why are there denticles on the obverse and not the reverse Ah, that could be it! |
| |
Replies: 21 / Views: 3,690 |
Posted 11/11/2015 12:23 pm
