Net Grade This Details Coin #1

Just in case my actual opinion was hidden by the wall of text I just posted, let me make it clear:

This is possibly the most egregious case I've seen of PCGS slamming an unmentionable part of their anatomy in the door with a grade opinion, and I've seen some pretty....curious....opinions from them in the last two or three years.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Not necessarily. Reverse down in the surf where the tide is actually moving over the face could have certainly worn that down over the years while just corroding the reverse.

 

I quite concede the possibility. It's a plausible and believable theory, well-supported by the visual evidence. That kind of process probably wouldn't have messed much with the actual diameter of the coin, while wearing it greatly on the faces. Wouldn't be surprised - of course, we'll never know - if you're absolutely right about how it came to be.

Doesn't explain how PCGS managed to call it Uncirculated after all that, though.

 

I think PCGS made a labeling mistake, and through a possible comedy of errors, it got through. I think we've all seen ludicrous mistakes made in our workplaces that leave everyone saying "How did that happen?"

 

I'm praying this be the case, but even if so it points to a very serious flaw in their process.

 

You can be amazed what a dissatisfied employee can do on their last day on the job.

 

Very true we will never know for certain without a time machine but we do know it needed to be some combination of mother nature abusing the obverse while the reverse was relatively protected.

Considering we are looking most likely at a 150 years of mother natures abuse and could be upwards of 200 years I do think that coin was uncirculated or at the very least a very high AU when she got her hands on it. The lettering on the obverse is still quite strong and even with the obverse there is still a good amount of detail left considering how long it was likely exposed.

From a purely technical standpoint UNC or AU details is likely technically correct, that said in the age of market grading FR/PO Details would be more of the proper net grade

 

Keep in mind, the level of detail we see, obverse vs. reverse, is not really out of proportion for the issue. Check out how much reverse detail remains on these at VF and below. I honestly don't think corrosion ate all that much off the coin.

 

I think this coin was at xf at best when it went in the water cuts a horror show now I wouldn't buy it at any price

 

Let's just hope this guy doesn't get his hands on the op coin ...

 

Is Bob Johnson a grader at PCGS now?

 

OK, I ROFLed.

 

Who's Bob Johnson and what's the joke?

 

He's Centsles and NNC.

 

SD beat me to the post. Well played.

 

Now that is hilarious

 

Tragicomic, actually. It seems he was once a finalist in one of the PCGS World Series of Grading - plainly a world-class grader - and chose the Dark Side instead.

 

Bob Johnson... hilarious! About the coin... um, ugly.

'dude