I've recently acquired some classic uniface die trials and die splashes that I'd like to have slabbed. NGC has declined to slab them, saying they are too thin. This is nonsense since they are thicker than denars and they slab those all the time, but apparently that's their final word on the matter. I'm not a member of PCGS but I think they are a poor choice for world coins anyway, so I've been considering ANACS. I know they are open to slabbing oddities that NGC/PCGS would decline. Has anyone here used ANACS for this type of material before? What was your experience?
ICG does lots of oddities. The did some for the coin club recently. Call them. EDIT: The fact that they told you the coins were too thin rather than they were not qualified to authenticate them sounds like a "weasel" move on their part.
ICG slabs all sorts of oddities. Some time ago, I posted a link to an NGC thread where the member was submitting all sorts of crazy things to ICG just to learn how far he could go before ICG refused to slab something. Chris
In case anyone would like to read the NGC thread, here it is....... http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1478368 Chris
That post was in 2002. I'll bet wood and porcelain tokens could be graded now. The only thing I ever heard they would not grade was milk bottle tops! They no longer do ancients or casino chips; but they do bitcoins.
Dang! I knew I should have saved all of those milk bottle lids from the 50's. The thread was from 2006. Greg became a member in 2002. Chris
That remains one of the two or three greatest things I've ever seen on the Internet. From the standpoint of reputation amongst those who know, ICG would not be a bad destination for your items. You're more worried about authentication than strict grade.
I'm not worried about authentication or grade for these. I know they are authentic already, and as for a grade, they are unique pieces so it doesn't affect the value. I just want them to be slabbed for consistency with the rest of the collection. Technically NGC did authenticate them (I think). I've submitted items before that came back as "TOKEN" where they couldn't authenticate. For these, they came back with fully descriptive labels with the "ineligible type" comment, just not in slabs. I take that to mean they authenticated them, but did not want to slab them. NGC's current policy is not to slab anything that isn't in their approved catalog (and it has to be added to the census before they can process it). They are hesitant to do this and will rather just reject a coin than add it, however, in the past I have made a case successfully to have coins added to the census after which they became eligible types. In this case, these die trials are likely unique and do not appear in the approved catalogs. Saying they were "too thin" was just a cop out. I could take an NGC insert from a crackout and put one in there and take a picture to send them I suppose. There is no issue. I think they just don't want to add them to the census when each will have a population of 1.
Understood; the main point of my post was to express support for ICG as a potential slabber in your situation. Although there are those who would quibble about their grading, I personally know nobody reputable who expresses doubts about their accuracy of authentication.
So does anyone have any direct experience with submitting a numismatic trial or other oddity to ICG or ANACS, or do you own one?
No, but I have seen all kinds of foreign stuff like essais, pieforts, and patterns in the ICG holders.
That's a good idea too, if I can get them in the right size and economically for single holders. None of these are perfectly round (especially the die splash) and they are mostly different sizes.
ANACS is pretty good with unusual stuff. If it can be slabbed they'll try and figure out a way. It's not that uncommon for discovery coins to start their life at ANACS before being crossed over later on. It sounds like the problem may have just been that they didn't want to be on the hook for authenticating them and risk being proven wrong later and if that was the case you wouldn't have that problem with ANACS. They will send coins out to specialists if need be to get an answer.
That's along the line of why I was thinking ANACS. I've submitted to them before as well so I'm familiar with their process, but I've never done business with ICG. One of the trials I'm submitting is a discovery piece for a die variety and I was hoping they would attribute it as such.
In that case I think ANACS would be your best bet for a first stop. Any documentation or letters from a recognized expert should help, but PCGS and NGC are always pretty gun shy with those without some significant documentation to go with it and even then they may just say no which is what I think happened to you.
Yea. These trials are probably unique. I have documentation of provenance for them, but they aren't listed in any catalog I know of (even the one that would be considered definitive for this type of material). From my own research, I've discovered that one of the trials was struck from a unique die that doesn't match dies used for any documented pattern, specimen, or business strike. There really hasn't been any work done on documenting die varieties for this type though that I know of, so I have nothing to reference.
That sounds like an interesting piece you came across and hope it works out for you. If it was me I would gather whatever information I could find and print it out and maybe even include a letter with what I know about it and include all that in a submission to give them some guidance. I do think ANACS will be your best bet in this instance, if that strikes out ICG could be worth a try but I wouldn't have high hopes if ANACS wouldn't do it
