Pedigree favoritism from TPG's?

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

So, suppose I hand you a coin and ask for a grade. You grade it MS-63, and then I tell you that I got in change from a bank teller.

Does that change your opinion of the coin's grade?

 

OH please!

Talk about parsing words. That coin doesn't warrant a mint state grade because it clearly shows evidence of handling. The fact that it was found in a bank tellers till only reinforces the fact. Furthermore, that coin was determined to be less than mint state by several other prominent Numismatists. Try reading ALL my comments, not just one response.

You don't need to "suggest" what you think might possibly be my meaning of anything. Just simply ask and you will get an answer even though it probably won't be what you want to hear. I won't dignify your comments about bag marks and hairlines with a response. I know as well as you what is accepted by the Numismatic community.

There is a big difference between "All I said was that they were a business and that I expect them to act like a business and try to make a profit" and, "And who says the TPG's should have a moral compass ? They are a business, they are in business to make money. That is the business of a business. To expect anything else of them would be foolish". When someone says "who says" most people that I associate with consider that a point of disagreement. Now I suppose it could just be that someone is trying to be argumentive.

If you haven't figured out what I think is unsavory about the TPG's from my posts, I'm not about to go through that very long list.

And I have consistantly made reference to where my information comes from. And yes you do respond to most with your opinion, so how is it you're asking what I think is unsavory when you have already responded to it? Is this a case of "If you're position can't stand up to scrutiny, just muddle the waters or change the subject"?

That comment about "frame of reference" was made by Rick Montgomery when he was talking about the other 1804 that was upgraded to 66, not the AU "Mickley Dollar. And BTW, P&N routinely grade coins that might benefit from "conservation" but have not been conserved. If we believe Mr Rick, their grades should all be suspect, No?

Why would I expect TPG's to act differently than those companies you mention? Let me count the ways. Most are regulated, most have ligitimate competition, most are providing a product of value, not an opinion, and if they make a mistake they can be held accountable in a court of law if necessary, for starters.

 

This is big time TPG Kool-Aide as they all do it especially when they know it will be up for a major auction.

 

My contention with regard to evidence of handling in this case is in relation to THAT coin.

To answer your question, I believe that the phrase "evidence of handling", when spoken by Rick Montgomery in reference to that coin, means that the coin is no longer "mint state". Apparently Q. David Bowers, Walter Breen, an auction house, and those other two early Dollar specialists who examined that coin were all able to detect just that, conserved or not.

What did you expect NGC to say when all the criticism came out about that grade? Evidence of handling with regard to that coin is TPG speak to CYA IMO, just like "revenue enhancement" is political speak for tax increases. Also IMO, they bumped that grade up because it's a rare coin, plus the pedigree, and they went with 62 because they knew it wouldn't change the pecking order for 1804 Dollars. If that's not wear on that coin, it's one sick coin that was struck as a presentation piece.

If you want to believe Montgomery that's fine with me. I'll go with the majority on this one and I'll take Bowers' opinion over Montgomery's any day and every day.

 

Lots of little scratches and dings, a large one over the "4" in 1945. Lots of wear evident and dings on almost all of the lettering. The person that graded this must have drank a fifth of Jack Daniels the night before or perhaps while at work.

 

lol

 

Unless this seller and bidder were clueless, I think this says you're right...