Shipwreck effect? Pffft!

I know that. You know that. Most of the people on this Forum know that. But it's an implied grade, not an explicit statement of condition. The TPGs use the terms "Details" and "Genuine" to explicitly denote damaged coins that they will not straight grade. Using "Shipwreck Effect" as a synonym is a dodge as I view it. But you may think differently and that's OK with me since I'm not out to change anybody's mind.

And if PCGS wants to SG a coin with seawater corrosion damage, that's their business but I don't have to buy into the deception. This could be viewed as one more situation where the TPGs damage their credibility.

Note that I am not anti-TPG - almost all of my collections are slabbed and I value the service but I'm not blind to the faults.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Genuine can mean several different things. It doesnt automatically mean its a details coin. It is also used for coins that dont meet the minimum grade on submissions or just submissions where they just want it as genuine with no grade.

It's a factual statement. There's no dodge at all

You should really look into the S.S. Central America find, there was some VERY elite gold in the find. Theres no deception.

https://www.pcgs.com/shipofgold

 

I agree w/Baseball. "Shipwreck Effect" is the details designation.

 

OK, just to be ultra technical about it, NGC's list of details designations does not include "Shipwreck Effect", a term I could find nowhere on NGC's website. It does include the following:

SEA SALVAGED - Coins recovered from the sea that are unreadable due to unsuitable storage containers, extreme heat and humidity, and/or atmospheric pollutants or saltwater.

Now, I know that many if not most recovered coins that are conserved are readable. I also know that the coin in question here has not received either a numeric or adjectival grade. So, the coin in question is not in a details holder by NGCs definitions. Ipso facto, "Shipwreck Effect" does not mean "details" although I am happy to concede that we all interpret the phrase to mean just that.

I am also happy to admit the possibility that NGC INTENDS for "Shipwreck Effect" to be taken as meaning "details". But where do they say that?

And yes, I am not ignorant of the many beautiful coins from numerous wrecks. I've seen many of them at shows not to mention in internet auctions.

 

BTW, I checked the slab number and it shows up in NGC's database under the details category. So, why didn't they just say "Details" on the slab? My point is only that their label is not descriptive by their own terms and that's why I call it dodgy.

 

https://www.ngccoin.com/specialty-services/shipwreck-coin-certification/

Yes NGC hypes themselves up in that but they clearly mention it on their website that takes a few seconds to search for.

I dont even like NGC with their charging practices of charging people right away and then they wait months for the service, but its very clear what these are

 

I stand corrected in a puddle of own effluvium. Thanks for the education.

 

This may be similar BUT OPPOSITE to what happened in the industry regarding Chop marks. At on time they were body bagged, then "detailed" for damage, then "detailed for "Chops," and now just slabbed as Chopmarked (actually a details grade).

 

Chop marks arent a details grade anymore on things that are known to have gotten chops like trade dollars. CAC will even sticker some of them

 

So we should take all the details coins we have, crack them out and put them in a boat and sink it and wait?

 

I think that's what I indicated: "...now just slabbed [ignored & straight graded] as 'Chopmarked' (actually a details grade [because a chop is damage to the coin's surface].

 

Works for me and it would not be the first time coins were "salted" into a salvage recovery.

 

They are details graded so not sure what the issue is

Not really. One has history and why it happened, the other is just some random person doing whatever to a coin. Theyre labeled as is either way so it really doesnt matter and its very easy for someone to avoid them if they dont like them

 

I guess if you wanna kill people for that. Youd be dead before it was recognized anyways

 

It's still a dodge, the shipwreck itself didn't make it look like that, the extended saltwater exposure did.

 

@baseball21 said "It's a factual statement. There's no dodge at all"
The majority of what you say is true, although what you construe is a different story.
Not

 

And the exposure was the result of the shipwreck. Without the wreck none of that happens

 

Damage is damage. Why are TPGs giving these a nicer name. To make the damage more marketable. Any other explanation is just BS in my opinion. A pig is a pig regardless of what you call it.

 

Oldhoopster, posted: "Damage is damage. [Yes it is, but...] Why are TPGs giving these a nicer name. To make the damage more marketable. Any other explanation is just BS in my opinion. A pig is a pig regardless of what you call it."

Here is the "deal" as I've seen it evolve:

At one time there were only authentication services. ANACS was the first in the US, the INS Authentication Bureau was the second. At that time coins were graded in house and ONLY to help ID them if lost or stolen. Coins were either sent out as genuine, counterfeit, or no decision - NO EXCEPTIONS! Any counterfeit coin became untouchable "junk" in the market. Then in the 1990's the "Micro" O Morgan's were determined to be counterfeit at PCI. Perhaps a year later, NGC started calling them counterfeits and later, everyone agreed. Then a funny thing happened , rather than these coin's heading for the melt pot as fakes, they became even more collectable and many more Morgan's previously considered genuine were found to be fakes and very collectable. Thus, certain counterfeits became totally acceptable because of the market and a way to save the dealers/TPGS money for having them in stock or for slabbing them as genuine!

A similar thing happened with grading. The first TPGS INSAB started to give out their internal grade opinion FOR FREE (used for ID) to anyone who asked. After the ANA Grading Guide was published, the ANACS (first authentication service) became the second third-party grading service. Today, the ANACS can trace its roots back and is the oldest authentication and grading service in business. Grading was very strict in the beginning at INSAB and ANACS. It was completely different than the way coins were graded in the market AND GAVE NO INDICATION of a coin's value or eye appeal (two things very necessary for the coin market). Dealers had enough and started PCGS. While the first grading services graded anything including coins with problems, PCGS and NGC did not. PCI was the first TPGS to slab coins with problems using a red border on the label. Their grading was strict. Dealers loved to buy PCI problem coins because over 60% of them could be broken out and straight graded by the two major TPGS. Eventually, pressure from the public forced the the top two services to also grade coins with problems.

Finally, I get to answer to the subject of this thread. When a grading service puts a coin in a "detailed" holder it is a coin that they must. TPGS's don't want to "kill" a coin so there are a large number of straight graded coins with "MARKET ACCEPTABLE PROBLEMS (in their opinion - not mine) in their slabs. The major TPGS do not wish to "kill" a problem coin either so we can find buffed and polished coins called "cleaned" along with improperly cleaned coins that are not altered as much. That's what is going on with corroded coins. A "wink" is given and corroded coins became "Environmental Damage." Sounds better. Coins corroded by salt water became "Sea Salvage." and since many of these came from known wrecks, they became collectable - just as the fakes in the first paragraph. We all know the coins are ruined but the market sells them without "killing" them in a details holder. The same thing happened recently with "Chopped" coins.

This is not new at all. "Details" grading is exactly how any coin with problems was graded over forty years ago at the INS authentication Bureau! We named it "Technical Grading."