IGS grading service?

It depends on what you mean by “damaged”, “altered” and “impaired”. When it comes to these terms I think there are more grey areas than many people realize.

If you are referring to altering of dates or mint marks, or outright repairs of damage or enhancement of features through plugging or tooling, then yes, assigning such coins a straight grade would be a major miss that would never be acceptable IMO. But if you are talking about different degrees of cleaning or PMD, those may be “market acceptable” depending on the coin, and I have no issue with “market grading” per se.

I would expect that occasionally graders would miss an issue that most everyone would agree is a deal breaker. But I suspect more often than not they aren’t missing anything at all but are doing what they think the market prefers.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

In the case of a 6 figure coin, it is a Petition Crown. It's in a PCGS SP53 slab and is the former Norweb (lot 223) coin which was sold in the New York Goldberg/Markov etc sale on 10th Jan 2018, lot 1103. For the record, the estimate was $550K.

J B Bergne noted the scratched initials in the field in his 1854 survey of known examples (Numismatic Chronicle 1854, p.137) and this coin was no.7

The graffiti was subsequently partially polished out, but is still detectable, as is the rubbed down area of field.

In my view it has also been plugged, or an attempted piercing has been filled in the gap between II in the obverse legend. I haven't been able to see the coin in hand, but it clearly isn't right from the pictures compared to the other examples of this type. No. 7 first, the Slaney coin second (not known to Bergne in 1854).




If it had a hole in it, this would go a long way to explaining why the dealer Edmonds picked it up 'for a trifle' from a jeweller on the Strand. Don't get me wrong, it's still a desirable high grade coin, but if you are going to set standards, then you have to keep them.

Second is a gold pattern halfpenny I purchased in 2008 which had a very obvious scuff to the cheek.


2 years later I sold it, only to re-appear 6 months later, repaired, in an NGC proof 64 Ultra-Cameo slab.



On the day it sold to a US dealer for £21K ($30K) including juice, who presumably then made a mark-up when he sold it on. Obviously PF64 ultra-cameo is a better selling feature than UNC details (scratched). It is unique, so desirable even with the scuff, but given the documentary evidence known for coins such as these two, TBH the TPGs should do better.

I remain a sceptic. Sorry for the long-winded reply, but to make an argument, you must show the evidence.

 

I don’t have nearly enough money to play in those leagues, but find these examples egregious. I’ve heard of other examples where high end rarities are given a pass. I suppose someone spending mid six figures wouldn’t want their coin in a holder marked “AU Details, graffiti, plugged” even if they knew it was. Maybe instead of graffiti they could label it as a “courtesy autograph” like the currency graders do?

I’ve heard of puttying slipping by, not sure if that was the scenario with the second coin or if it was deliberately overlooked?

 

Wow. Now this is the big leagues! Sorry for your troubles. That is heart breaking. i think people have your back here though. They are worried about me taking a flyer over a couple hundred bucks. 90% of the posters here do have your best interest at heart, at least that is my impression of being a newbie here.

 

I believe pretty much all of the posters here have your best interest at heart. Just because some of them are Grumpy Old Men like myself, don't take it too seriously if someone seems a bit harsh. Most everyone here means well.

 

It's similar to the old comment " My xxxxxxxx is bigger than your XXXXXX". IMO. PCGS and NGC does that with expansive advertising which is much larger than other grading companies. so people think they must be more knowledgeable and correct.
I suspect ICG spends similar amounts of time if not more on individual coins .

 

Don't think I'm not just like them. I am. I'm as salty as they come. That's why I'm here. I welcome it. But I will not poo on the young guys collecting pennies and nickels. I used to be them. We need new blood and enthusiasm. I've been out of the collecting game a while but I'm back! I just need expertise and honest opinions. I've got thick skin, believe me. I appreciate your reply.

 

I hear you and I see where they give us a discount here. For some stuff, it is really just having someone authenticate it's not fake. I'm going to look into their services for stuff I want to sell but not keep for myself. I know what I like, but sometimes grading makes for better resales.

 

If the crown was/is your coin, my apologies if my comments made light of the issue in any way. I have read about famous coins such as even 1804 dollars that have been overgraded and/or had problems overlooked, and have just assumed that everyone knew what those issues are. If you bought a coin at that level and found out the issues only later, then the TPG business practices are indeed worse than I ever thought. The whole point of a TPG should be to keep people from getting burned regardless of how little or much they are spending

 

It has been my experience, and I've posted examples here of all 4 firms same date/grade/type coins, to show that at a specific time ICG graded coins may be equivalent or better? than the others.

My opinion, relative to a published A.N.A. standard in hand at that time, better.

The grading may vary dependent upon the 3 factors here-to-fore posted!

I'd suggest personally comparing against other published coins at time of purchase, or interest, to determine your choice.

JMHO

 

I don't have enough money for a Petition Crown either, but used it as an example of what I consider to be double standards, and the lottery of having a number assigned. Everyone knows instances of coins coming back details cleaned when you can't see anything wrong for example.

It isn't the first instance of marks being filled that I have seen.

The Petition Crown wasn't mine, only the second one. I happily paid £11.5K at the Plymouth sale in 2008 as it was one of 31 gold patterns that had been off the market for over a century - 20 of which fitted my collecting criteria at the time. It was examined in hand, but being unique was acceptable, scuffed or not. The occasion was one where you bought what you could, because they weren't going to be that cheap again. If I had a 1/4 million to spare on the day, I would have bought the lot. I sold it because I refocussed the collection, but wasn't best pleased to see a coin that I had sold as is in good faith reappearing in a quite desirable slab grade.

It is the numerous inconsistencies that make me question the unswerving allegiance to the system by many.

 

Thanks for all the replies and concern shown by all. I think people have missed the point. It isn't my troubles at all, or at least not financially, as I am in this hobby with eyes wide open. I don't rip people off and don't like to see others suffer the same, irrespective of price paid. My concern is the legitimacy acquired with a grade which is rarely questioned. It is very easy to say that's an MS** coin and worth so much, because most coins are in the right ballpark.

In the case of common coins, people rarely worry about the contents, concentrating more on the label. But in the case of genuine rarities with only a few known, then the number is actually irrelevant because the contents are everything.

As I said initially, if you set yourself up as a guardian of standards to ensure the coin is genuine and hasn't been tampered with, then stick to your own ***** rules. Both the above examples are well documented rarities, so an assessment by an 'expert' should have taken account of existing knowledge. The Petition Crown is an iconic coin.