How does this work if NGC pulls this? Do they pay the dealer the list price and keep the coin to be reslabbed and sold? Do they give him the coin back in the new lower marked slab and a check for the diminution in value?
I don't know if the current owner is a dealer or collector. Typically, one of two things happens: 1) The grading company will keep the coin and pay the owner a price that the grading company deems to represent market value for the coin. Or, 2) Lower the grade, return the coin to the owner and pay the difference in market value between the old grade and the new grade. Sometimes the owner is given a choice between those two options.
However, if they company actually calls the grade on the label a "mechanical error" in that maybe someone typed a "69" instead of a "66" doesn't that get the grading company off the hook in some respects for paying under their grading guarantee? That is my understanding of the guarantees of each company if that the grade is obviously wrong on the holder, they can just call it a mechanical error and avoid a large payout.
True, but I don't know how NGC could show that it was a mechanical error...... unless, for example, it was on an invoice with several others, all of which graded the same grade, but a grade other than MS69. Also, we don't know what the coin looked like at the time it was graded.
I think if somebody paid moon money for that coin because it was in a slab that said MS69 that NGC would be hard pressed to avoid making the payout - regardless of they claimed the label got 69 on it. Now if somebody submitted that coin raw, and it was sent back to them graded that way - then they did not pay moon money for the coin. And if NGC claimed it was a mechanical error there would be no payout to make because the owner would not be out anything. So I think the circumstances will define what happens.
I was thinking the same thing, but the amount of marks it has should have kept it out of a 69 label anyway. I went 67, although I could see it getting a 66 as well.
I think it is even rarer than you all do... It's a NGC error... well actually those are fairly common.