First Page
Posted 03/28/2006 10:43 pm
This is an update and companion thread to my "1891CC Morgan" thread which should also be read for related comments. Today, I received back my 1890CC Morgan which I had resubmitted to PCGS for Presidential Review.
First, to answer Susan's question, it's 20 bucks per for a Presidential Review. From what I got back, that works out to be something like $4 per second for a five-second review; add another 30 seconds to write up his "report". Add paper-shuffling time in and we'll call it $20 per minute. If he can maintain the rhythm, that's $1200 per hour, almost Bill Gates stuff.
Also, in response to previous posts: Susan, it could very well be a strategic move on the part of PCGS to suddenly tighten standards on its Morgan grading. I had not thought in terms of population reports, but it very well may be they thought Morgans were getting top-heavy and driving down the values. As a well-schooled mathematician, I really hope they are not trying to form a bell-shaped curve which has long been discredited as a measure of populations be they humans, wildlife, or coins.
I received back the 1890CC Morgan as "cleaned"... again. The handwritten note from (presumably) David Hall which accompanied the coin stated, "This coin has been abrasively cleaned, stripping the coin of its original luster. We do not grade harshly cleaned coins."
This just adds insult to injury. What started out as an NGC MS-62 worth $475 (per PCGS Price Guide) now has little value over bullion, not counting the $50 I have now spent on it for grading and Prez Review. I have dealt with a lot of cleaned coins and there is always some sort of indication that it has been cleaned. If this Morgan had been "harshly cleaned", its luster, if it had any left after a cleaning would be dull and there would be hairline marks in circular or straight patterns. Similarly, if it were dipped, it's luster would be completely different than a comparably uncirculated Morgan. I cannot detect any difference in luster between this Morgan and two PCGS MS-63 Morgans in my collection. And there certainly are no physical signs of "harsh cleaning". And according to my optometrist, I am NOT going blind.
In summary, David Hall just rubber-stamped his graders' previous assessment. Further, his "comments" state no evidence whatsoever that this Morgan has been cleaned at all; rather, he just made the unsubstantiated statement that it "has been harshly cleaned".
Again, as with the 91CC, as soon as I master my new Canon S2 IS, I'll upload new images. And, once ANACS has its transition to Texas completed, I'll submit it to them and live with their decision.
I have now completely lost faith in PCGS's grading competency. Yet I now have all PCGS Morgan CCs necessary for a Registry Set, sans the 90CC, but suddenly am looking at other options, particularly ANACS Registry when they finally launch it.
Fred
First, to answer Susan's question, it's 20 bucks per for a Presidential Review. From what I got back, that works out to be something like $4 per second for a five-second review; add another 30 seconds to write up his "report". Add paper-shuffling time in and we'll call it $20 per minute. If he can maintain the rhythm, that's $1200 per hour, almost Bill Gates stuff.
Also, in response to previous posts: Susan, it could very well be a strategic move on the part of PCGS to suddenly tighten standards on its Morgan grading. I had not thought in terms of population reports, but it very well may be they thought Morgans were getting top-heavy and driving down the values. As a well-schooled mathematician, I really hope they are not trying to form a bell-shaped curve which has long been discredited as a measure of populations be they humans, wildlife, or coins.
I received back the 1890CC Morgan as "cleaned"... again. The handwritten note from (presumably) David Hall which accompanied the coin stated, "This coin has been abrasively cleaned, stripping the coin of its original luster. We do not grade harshly cleaned coins."
This just adds insult to injury. What started out as an NGC MS-62 worth $475 (per PCGS Price Guide) now has little value over bullion, not counting the $50 I have now spent on it for grading and Prez Review. I have dealt with a lot of cleaned coins and there is always some sort of indication that it has been cleaned. If this Morgan had been "harshly cleaned", its luster, if it had any left after a cleaning would be dull and there would be hairline marks in circular or straight patterns. Similarly, if it were dipped, it's luster would be completely different than a comparably uncirculated Morgan. I cannot detect any difference in luster between this Morgan and two PCGS MS-63 Morgans in my collection. And there certainly are no physical signs of "harsh cleaning". And according to my optometrist, I am NOT going blind.
In summary, David Hall just rubber-stamped his graders' previous assessment. Further, his "comments" state no evidence whatsoever that this Morgan has been cleaned at all; rather, he just made the unsubstantiated statement that it "has been harshly cleaned".
Again, as with the 91CC, as soon as I master my new Canon S2 IS, I'll upload new images. And, once ANACS has its transition to Texas completed, I'll submit it to them and live with their decision.
I have now completely lost faith in PCGS's grading competency. Yet I now have all PCGS Morgan CCs necessary for a Registry Set, sans the 90CC, but suddenly am looking at other options, particularly ANACS Registry when they finally launch it.
Fred
