Where does GSC get their coins from?

Everything written here by poster about GSC I have heard over and over again.
Now just from posters here,but first hand dealing with this company. Being burned years ago off e bay!
The dealers I know in the Tri state area have told me the same.
So buyer beware..... you may get lucky but from years in this hobby and from first hand experience , odds are against you!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I believe if one participates/generates an independent study of TPG "standards", they will find worse than that which was determined/found by the Coin World, and other "independent" efforts. Namely, that there aren't "universal" standards amongst even the "premier" TPG. I have believed gross examples of same, where a 1908-D MOTTO $20 certified, without alterations, differing TPG graded from an original MS65 grade, to a current "UNC DETAILS" OBV IMPROPERLY CLEANED, a potential value change from ~$7000 to ~>$1250. A 1906 $20 certified, without alterations or detectable "hairlines" having continuous mirrored surfaces on fields/devices, differing TPG graded from MS63 PL to a current "UNC DETAILS" HARSHLY CLEANED, a potential value change from ~$3600 to ~>$1250.

It isn't any longer even a requirement for an eBay seller to abide by posted rules of selling a coin once an auction has been completed, or posting an image of the auctioned coin. I've had an auction cancelled after final bid on multiple occasions, and sellers are posting certified under-graded coins with a specific date/#, in an auction listing "random date", ** sold.

I'm sorry, but some of the posts in this thread remind me of ACG threads/posts in the past. In recent studies, ACG coins were removed from their holders, and submitted to the top "premier" TPG, receiving a grade above that on the ACG holder, significantly increasing theoretical value, just by changing a slab. Who is "wrong"?

I know several associates, and prominent firms who take "artistic/creative license" in their sales efforts, well documented, with ignored "reports".

JMHO

 

I'm not quite sure I get the gist of this statement, nor see how any of the points relate to the observations in this thread of GSC's business model. It appears their business model revolves around scraping the very bottom of the coin market, taking photos which disguise the problems/making coins appear better than they actually are, and selling problem coins to unsuspecting customers. That's a huge difference from buying coins in 3rd party slabs or under graded TPG to upgrade. ...not to mention lots of red flags suggest outright blatant schill bidding.

 

Without legal "actions" I don't know who determines "right" or "wrong". Is it a casual observer, an "expert", or the buyer. I just cited experiences with the "experts" who are touted to be the epitome of credibility. As in past studies, current independent believed objective studies seem to substantiate diverse TPG grading "standards", now almost entire gamut of analytical grading spectrum. After viewing reported testimony in the PCI trial, I'd suggest, the "experts" aren't the most reliable source of grade/value assurance.

I thought buyers have been assured by eBay that "shill bidding" is improbable.

JMHO

I don't know who is most competent at establishing correct actions in the Numismatic "industry". I'll defer to your expertise!

 

I believe that changes in imaging technology, and the common use of such imaging products, could alleviate much of the current distrust of images in regards to collectibles being sold online, especially coins. I know video is not a favorite of many here ("video just isn't like the in-hand experience!"), but wouldn't video be harder (albeit not impossible) to manipulate?

A product needs to be developed that consists of a tilt-stage, lighting, and a video imaging device (a.k.a. 'camera,' not your dumb "smartphone camera"!) that has fixed focal lengths and settings for the lighting -all together in one unit, or "box"- so that the same imaging setup is applied to each image and each coin, with the same results each time. I'm envisioning a video version of True View images, one that would become the numismatic industry standard for coin imaging.

 

This company and a few others are on my E-Bay "do not" list for all the obvious reasons aforementioned here. Problem coins are not a good deal for most collectors.

 

Anyone can walk into any large coin show and buy all the rare coins they wish.

 

Too many make money from cracking problem coins and putting them back out there but it will never change. It's good that the forums know who uses this practice.

 

I've been seeing a lot of problem free certified coins in GSC auctions as well. I stay just as far away from those as their raw stuff because I always assume their coins will look worse in hand than in the photos. Because of their juiced photos and wide clientele of "bidiots", the realized prices are likely to be more than the coins are actually worth. However, compared with other scammers on eBay who sell outright counterfeits, they are at least operating legally. But legal doesn't always equate to ethical.

 

I see what you are saying. I agree and disagree a little bit as I give them a bit of a middle ground personally. We are absolutely on the same page though that it is up to people when they decide not to return it

 

Everytime I've found a GSC coin I wanted to bid on they've gone for like 20% more than my max bid. Doubt I'll ever own one to see how juiced their pictures actually are.

 

Whatever they are doing they are getting a premium for their "raw" auction coins. I've been lookin at the final prices for so called red gem Lincoln cents and can't believe what they have been going for. Some are obviously recolored and lack sharp details when compared to photos of like coins sold by places like Heritage and Great Collections. I haven't bought any coins from them so I don't know how well a coin in hand compares to the pictures.

 

I have been tempted to bid on the company's graded/slabbed coins, but because of its reputation with raw coins, I simply don't trust them. Slabbed coins can also be displayed in doctored photos.

 

Yes, I myself have noticed highly toned high grade liberty nickels with scratches. The scratches were likely from a details coin for being scratched, I think they just buy bulk of details coins and sell em' raw. Somewhat deceptive if you ask me.

-SC

 

Oh, and I've also noticed "changed" or edited photos, the colors just aren't right. I've even seen coins with tiny tiny tiny pitting, likely from dipping.

-SC

 

That was something wasn't it!
-SC

 

I've never had any problems with their auctions, or coins I buy from them. In my opinion, they buy ALL coins, and re-sell them. Some are great, some are not. Their pictures are not modified, just good. I can tell easily which coins are the problem coins and which are not. A few of my nice gold toners have come from them, including this sweet 1908 that I had graded at PCGS:

 

This is just a thought... if GSC tends to get their coins from problem-slabbed or perhaps problem-free under-graded or under-valued business strike acquisitions, then with the handful or so coins that came back from the TPGs as proofs (examples below from 2016 and 2017) means that NGC, PCGS, ANACS, etc. misidentified those coins the first time around! Not to mention, GSC! Right? Or, the TPGs screwed up on some of the coins the second time around. It also means that at least two graders each time misidentified a given coin.

So, given that, if you suspect even a little that a coin is a proof, then you should submit the coin as a proof! That way, the graders will actually check the coin with the mindset that it's a proof coin, especially if they're overwhelmed with submissions and are only giving a short glance at the coin.