| Author |
 Replies: 58 / Views: 31,868 |
|
|
|
Locked
822 Posts |
This wasn't done on purpose?  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
14454 Posts |
I am not saying I agree with PCGS I am just saying that I think that is the reasoning they used as to why they wouldn't authenticate it. I bet if Fred Weinberg submitted the original 1964/1972 silver quarter PCGS would have no problem slabbing and grading the coin as authentic but they will not do it for the normal joe because there is more than one way it could happen with an employee intentionally making it being one of those ways
I think the people in this thread saying they need better pictures was because of the member Frank Muir the "second person" saying they had one of these that has a date of 1972 and is silver, not the one Bobby took pictures of, of the one that was actually being asked about when this thread was started
|
|
Forum Dad
 United States
24147 Posts |
Quote:
I think the people in this thread saying they need better pictures was because of the member Frank Muir the "second person" saying they had one of these that has a date of 1972 and is silver, not the one Bobby took pictures of, of the one that was actually being asked about when this thread was started Not the one I addressed. The poster specifically spoke of the one in the locked topic. Quote:
Pennyman...what happend was..there is no such thing as a 1972 silver quarter! Its just like bigfoot....did you notice...no clear pics...everyone has a camera but there are no pics of bigfoot...also notice the thread was locked. |
|
Locked
822 Posts |
Quote:
I bet if Fred Weinberg submitted the original 1964/1972 silver quarter PCGS would have no problem slabbing and grading the coin as authentic Of course. He's the one that decides if it even goes to the graders. Huge conflict of interest if you ask me. Him being one of the top error dealers in the World and all. Heck, let's get Mike Byers in there making decisions also.  Edited by scubu
05/30/2011 8:29 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
16677 Posts |
Quote:
Of course. He's the one that decides if it even goes to the graders. Huge conflict of interest if you ask me. Him being one of the top error dealers in the World and all. I've often wondered that myself  He is an error consultent for PCGS. swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Valued Member
United States
277 Posts |
Am I missing something? Why do people keep calling it a 1964 quarter? Unless my eyes decieve me I can see a zero after the six not a four.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Your eyes are deceiving you.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12437 Posts |
Quote:
Why do people keep calling it a 1964 quarter? Because it is a 1972 quarter restruck on 1964 quarter host, both dates are clearly visible. |
|
Valued Member
United States
364 Posts |
People are mentioning the coin came back from PCGS as undeterminable -- I think the thread everyone is thinking of is the 77' (or something like it) Kennedy half the owner thought might have been struck on 40% silver. |
|
Forum Dad
United States
24147 Posts |
Quote:People are mentioning the coin came back from PCGS as undeterminable -- I think the thread everyone is thinking of is the 77' (or something like it) Kennedy half the owner thought might have been struck on 40% silver. No, it's this one. Eel brought it to Susan and I and we are the ones that sent it in. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1547 Posts |
Quote:
I bet if Fred Weinberg submitted the original 1964/1972 silver quarter PCGS would have no problem slabbing and grading the coin as authentic but they will not do it for the normal joe because there is more than one way it could happen with an employee intentionally making it being one of those ways How is it that possibility is ruled out simply because a palsy-walsy dealer submits it? That said, I wouldn't doubt that's in fact how they operate over there. While justice may be blind applying that standard to PCGS grading may indeed be a little on the hopeful side. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12437 Posts |
Fred Weinberg is not just some "palsy walsy" dealer, he is the go-to error expert for PCGS. He is not a grader for them, more of a consultant, be he more than likely had the final word on certification(non-certification in this case) of the 1964/1972 quarter.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1547 Posts |
Sure enough but the implication was that they wouldn't take so much as a second look at it had just anybody submitted it. In other words I'd feel better were I able to be assured that in the normal course their "go-to error expert" would at least be given a shot at opining on it rather than their simply categorically dismissing it based on possibilities for the identity of the submitter. I don't think I'd like the latter a lot, I'm saying.
|
| |
Replies: 58 / Views: 31,868 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 05/30/2011 7:52 pm
