It's absolutely damaged and should never have been given a clean grade - let alone a 66 ! And its not just the rev, the obv is damaged too.
LOL, I just noticed that it is in a gold shield holder. I wonder what kind of reception it would receive over on CU?
I think the submitter may have sent the coin in original mint packaging. The damage you are seeing is from the mint. https://www.error-ref.com/feeder-ejector-scrapes/
But even if the damage occurred at the mint it shoud lessen the grade or be ungradeable as a clean grade.
Either way Mechanical, and lets face it damage should never get into a clean graded slab. What a pitiful reason to strait grade a coin.
Correct, damage is damage and it doesn't matter how, where, when, or why it occurred. The only thing that does matter is that it is there ! And it is undeniably there !
Here is another one I found today. https://www.pcgs.com/cert/47223588 Something about PCGS and the new slabs with grades of MS66. Obviously, this coin has a completely different problem. Some may even say there is nothing wrong with this one, except maybe it's an ugly duckling. But this looks like more than just ugly toning to me. Like rust mixed with sand blasting, LOL. What do you all think this is and is a problem? Even I were to to give the Obv a pass at 66 (looks at the gash on the back of the head), I just don't understand how we can get the reverse there. BTW, I am not pointing this out to trash on PCGS, I have actually been preferring them lately over NGC. Its that I am both amazed and confused when I see something like this, and I want to understand it.
Grader: hmmm… pretty nice obverse, MS65 on a good day… not sure what’s wrong with the reverse… third side… will be hidden by the prongs anyways… overall? solid MS66… next coin please… ;-)
Pick a number - any number (1) Terrible trash coin. Over-graded and significant problems galore. Drop off your coins at Good Will, you’re too dumb to collect. Don’t email me again. (2) Very Bad coin, several problems, but with single small redeeming feature. 50 lashes and come back in a month. (3) Bad coin, obvious over graded and with a small problem or two. Shame! (4) Okay coin with a few minor problems, but over-graded and plenty of other better examples to choose from. (5) Okay coin with single minor problem, slightly over-graded. Probably look for better example. (6) Nice coin with minor problems, about graded correctly. Nothing special but no punishment if you to buy. (7) Nice coins with single minor issue, about graded correctly and with a slightly above average eye appeal. Approved but without enthusiasm. (8) Great coin, about graded correctly, above average eye appeal. Approved with slight enthusiasm. “nice find” merit badge earned. (9) Great coin, solid for grade, stellar eye appeal. Approved with enthusiasm and encouragement to buy it. “wicked-good coin” merit badge earned. (10) Sell your house, sell your car, sell your wife: buy this coin immediately, worth a premium price. Superb eye appeal, under-graded, no similar examples available for 10+ years. “Once-in-a-lifetime coin” merit badge earned.
I remember that! Hmmm, I would have to go with #1 or #2 on this coin. I would say the coin deserves higher than that, but the Reverse is so bad it just destroys the coin.
I am still wondering how it grades above a low 61 at best. I also wonder how many of these they have graded.
The obverse rim just to the left of the 2 not being struck up seems to indicate tapered planchet. Pity the tapering looks like damage on the reverse, though. If you were to weigh it, it would probably be light. I'm trying to look at the interior ends of the scrape marks to see how they're struck out in comparison to how they'd look if the coin were filed. The tapering isn't pretty, but it looks like it was there before the coin was struck.
One thing to remember is that PCGS had the coin, unecapsulated, in hand. Not a couple of photos. If they had been concerned, there are tests they could have done, such as weight and microscopic examination. If they were still unsure, they would have sent it to one of their experts such as @Fred Weinberg or Jon Sullivan.
But but supposing it happened in the Mint parking lot just before it left the Mint. It isn't inconceivable there could have been a hole in the bag and it dropped out, then they noticed it and picked it up and put it back. I mean it's possible. You can't prove it didn't happen. That'd make it a Mint error because it wasn't supposed to fall out of the bag and it did. It can't be post-Mint because it never left the Mint. That has to be the rationale of these PCGS graders. They're professionals, they probably seen this, too, probably many times, probably hundreds of times, probably thousands or even tens of thousands of times, how do we know? But I know I trust them. I'd think this is just post-Mint damage, but they'd know, they're smart, that's why we pay them, ain't it?