PCGS and Franklin Half Dollars W/FBL Designations As of late, high grade (MS-65 and above) Franklin half dollars are being christened with the FBL designation that to my old eyes no where near matches those of yesteryear. Now, I maybe talking through my hat, but PCGS only looks at the bottom three lines of the bell and if they look like they are there, it gets a FBL which increases the collectiblity, which in creases the demand, which in turn increases the value. Looks like the series is being washed out with many candidates that did not or should never receive this anointing are being generously handed out creating a stir within the hardened FBL collectors. There have also been some bannings over on their chat boards as well, over this same issue. Those members cannot speak their opinion on this matter without being squelched...tis a sad day for Numismatics. NGC on the other hand is very strict with this designation and takes into consideration the two distinct lower set of bell lines when making their decision. To this collector, graded NGC Franklins with a FBL designation, out weighs the same date and year PCGS coin, 10:1 The softening of a designation means the coins that I purchased yesterday will be worth less today because the standards have laxed for what ever reason. Coin collecting within specific series and grades can attribute to losses over time, all because a company starts to look at something with a skewed perspective. Sour grapes...
Larry, I didn't comment on PCGS grading of Franklin Half Dollars, or for that matter, anything about PCGS grading. But in the thread you referenced, David Hall stated that PCGS had spent "$7,000,00+" over 25 years, honoring their grading guarantee. And I then asked something to the effect of: David, even if you believe PCGS grading to be excellent, isn't $7,000,000+ over 25 years, a very small amount, compared to the total value of coins graded by PCGS during that time? He was apparently insulted by that, to the extent that he banned me.
Over that, a most knowledgeable, and insightful member was banned? Good thing I don't post over there. Oh well, THEIR loss is OUR, and other forums', gain
I believe it was Bushmaster, an avid Franklin collector who was terminated from the chat boards...one thing for sure, he knew his Franklins and could tell you whether or not a Franklin had full bell lines or not. For years, a collector depends on a company to keep consistent standards in order to maximize what you have invested in your collection, for instance you have a MS-65FBL 1952-S where a two year old could point out the bell lines, you paid XXX number of dollars for that coin 5 years ago expecting it to appreciate and it did...but then you see this "mushly" looking one, same date & mint mark, same grade and designation going for the same money because some grader sitting behind a felt pad said it looked like a FBL, when you know in your heart it's not! I understand the concept, buy the coin and not the holder...but in this case, who ever bids on this coin will get an inferior coin but valued the same as my strong bell lines that took searching and diligence to find. Sorry to here you were cut from the roster Mr. Feld, it's not right.
I agree with all that you state. IMHO, if both sets of lines are not completely full from one side of the bell to the other, and no scratches or bagmarks across them, it's an FBL.
I happened to catch that thread before it went poof. Both Mark and Bushmaster8 didn't really say anything way out of line, IMHO. If the owners of PCGS can't handle civil (and sometimes blunt) discussion of their product, how in the h_ll can they improve and respond to the market? I also saw David Hall's response to bushmaster8, and it sent a deep chill down thru me. I think the bannings have added a chill in the air at the CU forum too. I've bought Franklins from bushmaster8; he knew that series very well. If he said it wasn't FBL, chance were great that it wasn't. That 52-S in the thread was not a FBL on a bad day with a drunk grader.
