Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Earle42, post: 2631417, member: 78261&quot;]Too late on this one - otherwise why would the saying, &quot;Buy the coin, not the holder&quot; be something that can be seen so prominently on forums?</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>LOL!&nbsp; Missed it - Have to remember to open another business and charge for the &quot;NEW!&nbsp; IMPROVED! Tamper Proof!&nbsp; EPQ Sticker Only 10.00 (<font size="1">Plus any Priceless heirloom</font>) Per Submitted Slab.&nbsp; Flat rate mailing cost of 9.99 (<font size="1">per coin</font>)&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Nope, I was the schoolboy-aged helper for the owner.</p><p>My costs were the same as any customers.&nbsp; He kept the dealer prices to himself (although I did sometimes know what he was paying people when they brought something in for sale).</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Although I have looked, I have never found an explanation as to why it did not work.&nbsp; Again, I worked with a machine that could have performed the job - it did this very thing to a higher degree.&nbsp; It scanned and evaluated molded parts according to easily programmed parameters down to thousandths of an inch.&nbsp; You walked the machine through the first part&nbsp; - visually as the part was magnified and you could see it on a screen.&nbsp; You located a position on the part with a mouse click, and through menus, told the machine what to check/measurements to take.&nbsp; After the initial setup, you could save the configuration the machine could access that program to re-use for those identical parts.&nbsp; After this, you would tell the computer which program to use, put the part onto the stage, the machine oriented its scanning according to how it &quot;found&quot; the part positioned.&nbsp; After measuring everything, a report was generated onscreen (which could be viewed by having the machine review the measuring onscreen) where there were problems (if any).&nbsp; This included tolerances of surface anomalies (if found). </p><p><br /></p><p>In fact, if anything, that scanner was more than capable and would have had to have been scaled back to allow much higher tolerances.&nbsp; The 10X loupes TPGs use for coins come nowhere close to this level of inspection.</p><p><br /></p><p>Since I was only working temp at the time, I was at this QC department for only a month or so.&nbsp; It was at a plastic injection molding plant (one of quite a few).&nbsp; I wish I could remember the name of the machine/company!</p><p><br /></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The TPGS said they spent hundreds of thousands on developing the tech when it was already in use.&nbsp; Which is why, at the time,</p><p>I always wondered why coins were not computer graded anyway.&nbsp; Remember this was in the days of Windows 95![/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in