How is this market acceptable?

I'm going to keep it. The coin is nice and I understand things happen. This surely isn't the coins fault.

I also want to hold on to it as it illustrates my gripe quite well with the TPGs. I just don't believe this one should have been allowed to slide through. Something should have been said about this mark.

I also don't want to take advantage of the guarantee as that's exactly what PCGS wants. In my eyes its similar to shady eBay sellers who give you a refund plus some to keep from getting negative feedback. They are basically paying actual money to keep their image from being tainted from less than proper work on their part. I know mistakes happen guys, and maybe I'm being too hard on this coin, and just in general, but sheesh I don't like getting surprises like this when I expect a certain amount of assurance that the grading fees are supposed to pay for when that grade is posted on the front of that label.

I just don't see how out of all the possibilities and the principle of Occams Razor applied that those marks are anything other than either staple scratches or intentional graffiti. The stars aligned incredibly well for this coin to be just jingling around in someone's pocket and then picked up not one, but TWO perfect scratches that are almost identical in size and cross perfectly. Not buying it.

I have a weird dilemma as I am full of complaints for the TPGs, but even I seldom buy anything raw. I stick to those companies too. I guess the moral of the story is to always use your own eyeballs and always, always, ALWAYS, buy the coin and not the slab.

This is another lesson well learned and I am consoled in the fact that this still isn't a bad coin, just not something I'm looking to add more of to my collection.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

A fantastic explanation and I wholeheartedly agree.

 

The seller doctored the pic(s).

 

I won't throw that around. I just wish there was more thorough info on the slabs.

Seriously. Use the whole backside, forget the hologram and just write up a two sentence auction catalog listing description highlighting the best and most noticeably worst feature. Whether it be a scratch, soft rub, rim ding, etc.

For details grades give a brief description of the problem.

Such as 'mechanical cleaning leaving excessive hairlines on obverse field'

May be time for a new TPG that incorporates that type info. It could also double as a way to highlight full details coins too.

 

It's MA because the TPG said so, the Grading Gods are infallible don't cha know.

And it looks to me more like scuffs than scratches.

 

I don't know how to write this nicely, so I will just state that I think you are going on a bit over the top on this entire issue. Your statements put the TPGs in a damned if you do, damned if you don't position. If they offer a buyback for the times they make an error you consider this to be akin to a shady ebay seller who is attempting to avoid negative feedback. However, I would imagine you and other folks would be up in arms if the TPGs offered no such buyback for their errors and would write that were less than reputable or ethical for a lack of standing behind their product. They are solid, reputable companies that are offering to stand behind their product with their wallets open and they make no attempt to hide the fact that they will buy coins back.

 

Scuffs dont shimmer where new metal has been exposed deeply enough to have a gash of this nature. It is most certainly a crossed set of scratches deep enough to gouge through the luster and push raised edges up on either side of the line. In fact when I get back home I will tell you which scratch happened first.

 

Yeah, when I see an X on a coin, I figure it was intensionally made, post mint. It's damage clear and simple to me. You can excuse it as highly unlikely bag marks, but I'm not buying it without a deep discount, if at all - there are plenty of problem free coins out there at full price.

 

I have acknowledged my conundrum with the TPGs, I have even acknowledged where I may have a much stricter set of standards that I am viewing from.

My point above was essentially addressing the double standard that seems to be largely left alone. That double standard is that it is OK for these grading companies to take our money, make a mistake, and when that happens they essentially remove the bad product from the shelf by buying it back so noone can call them out again on the same coin. They are in the business to make money too and I know its a fine line between doing the right thing and blurring the lines for profit sometimes. Again my point is that it is ok for them to be reputable and buy back a mistake that they really shouldnt have made to begin with, especially being paid for a high dollar opinion that effects what we pay on these coins. If an ebay seller does something similar, well they are automatically shady and trying to protect their feedback. I see no difference between that scenario and what the TPGs do. They are using money to influence the public perception of their respective companies, especially when they make a mistake (which is noble, but they can easily cut the mistakes by providing more detailed information).

I do not know with any certainty that graders arent trained to let 'sliders' like the one i posted through the gaps. (Sliders in this case being coins slightly on the verge of coming back details graded) How many may actually be returned through the guarantee program 1 in 5? 1 in 10? 1-100? Oh and lest we forget that the TPGs STILL have the final say over that guarantee too. So they may not agree thats its still damaged after I sent it back in and paid to do so.

Yeah, I have a problem. Even like I mentioned earlier, I still use their services, but it surely isnt the end all be all for my collecting decisions.

I also think their services can be improved upon.

No ONE has even said anything about them putting the additional information on the slabs. Again on the back. How is that terribly much more expensive than the hologram? It sure would make the slabbing companies even more solid in this community and could surely net them more reslabs in the future, everyone sending back in to get that info on their coins to make them more desirable at resale. Its not hard to describe the single best and worst attribute of a coin from a technical perspective. We've apparently used that method for decades in all of the major auction catalogs. At least it would validate the prices they charge and make collecting alot easier for the beginner.

 

So you want them to say "there's a scratch on the obv but it's too small to be a problem"...? I think we really need a slab section now ;-)

 

Please stop the madness! You can barely see it. If you want to see a gouge, I can show you graded coins with gouges. You are making a mountain out of a mole hill. If the very minor blemish that you have found bothers you that much then return it or sell it, but stop acting like your new coin is an example of a travesty of coin grading.

 

I don't know that your standards are any more strict than the TPGs, but where you draw the line (no pun intended) for various characteristics is no doubt different than where each TPG draws its line. This is consistent with anyone else who has studied grading and surfaces extensively and should be expected.

Your ebay seller analogy, however, is off base. A deceptive ebay seller only makes money if there is a sale, which means that they will engage in practices to hide problems and encourage sales. The TPGs, though, make money regardless of whether or not the coin goes into a details slab or a problem free slab. In fact, it could easily be argued that the TPGs lose money on the grading guarantee portion of their service, but this is the cost of correcting a mistake in performance or quality control and they do what they can to make their products better. These are night and day and I am quite surprised that you do not see the difference in strategy and goal.

The graders at the TPGs grade according to the proprietary grading standards of the respective TPG and what the view as too much of an issue for a problem free holder may be very different than what we view. They, of course, can also make errors and let coins through that in no way should have been certified as problem free.

If you would like a detailed analysis of each coin then you may want to suggest that to the TPGs, but since you, me and many others do not rely entirely on the TPGs then this service is likely redundant.

 

I think they are unintentional marks, I felt that way before reading everyone's comments. It's a nice AU-58 with contact marks and two of them cross. Nice coin.

 

I am trying to learn Lehigh, like I said, my standard may be too strict. I am simply presenting my opinion and learning the opinions of the many respected members of this site. Thats not madness good sir, this is simply my education.

Admittedly I dont know all the finesse of what constitutes a 58 between a 55 or borderline details or not.

My problem isnt really just the gouge itself, I just assumed staple scratched were automatically declared 'Details'. I just let an SLQ go that was problem free from the small white ANACS that also had a scratch. Albeit a single one, but it made an MS-63 grade. Many wouldve called that bad grading, but PCGS gets an apparent pass for TWO gouges in the same location. I am just trying to understand.

I just cant understand why we as collectors throw our money at these guys and regard their words as gospel with mistakes abound and still in need of using our own two eyeballs to double check what the experts say.

To your point Tom about the information being redundant, I agree, for me its almost useless, except buying coins from a distance I would still be able to read the graders opinion of what the best and worst features of a coin are. It would have prevented my little problem to say the least. So there is definitely a market for it if advertised correctly. I dont want to buy coins on a 'mail order basis', im sure sellers would appreciate the same thing, I can imagine many less returns, or even more protection through ebay by saying "Hey they had the opportunity to read the additional data before purchasing". I want to buy coins and feel a little more comfortable doing so without having to always see the coin in hand first. Again, this was the way it is and has been done for years. Take a Stacks catalog for example. All that information about the coin is a picture (sometimes) and a brief description. This method has been used for ages, all I am saying is incorporating that into the new era of slabs would be a very positive thing, IMHO.

 

I think I may have confused you just a little bit Tom and I am sure it was my fault in rushed typing. Dont think of the ebay seller as having been previously accused of being scummy. Think of it more as an after thought, like say you sold an item on ebay, the buyer was unhappy, you refunded to in part protect your feedback, but also to do the right thing. Now user Toadsil over here on CoinTalk gets all grumpy and starts complaining about how you are a scummy seller and only refunded to protect your image and that you always sell terrible coins because it happened to Toadsil on two separate occasions, although accidental both times. Many times that same complaining Toadsil would be completely fine with how the TPGs operate, even though its the same principle. Using your wallet to fix the problem, especially with an honest mistake.

See what I mean now? we jump on ebay sellers but not the TPGs, and lord knows im not saying every case is like this, but i have seen it enough to realize there is a double standard there and the TPGs always get the pass. They are automatically noble whereas an ebay seller making a simple mistake is automatically scum.

At any rate, I have been learning to use my own judgement over what someone else tells me, especially when it comes to coins, and no matter what that grade says on the outside, sometimes the coin just isnt the right fit for me.

 

Its like this knawing at me type thing. And again, I know its not the coins fault and I am sure I will enjoy it and love it for the length of time it remains in my collection, but i just cant lie to myself and dismiss it as anything other than exactly how it appears to me. And how it appears is as if a staple scratched it or someone took a fine pin and carved it.

Ocaams Razor = the simplest answer with the least amount of assumptions is usually the correct one.

I feel like the stars would have to align like they did for the creation of mankind in order to repeat two near perfect lines approximately the same size and depth intersecting one another. IDK, im going with the more obvious answer.

Everyone please keep in mind that I am fine with the coin. Its the grade assigned to it and the way the TPGs operate that has me miffed at the moment. Bare with me, I am trying to understand a little bit better. Also thank you to everyone who has contributed to this thread. I have once again learned a little more and for that I am always grateful, even when I am wrong.

 

Im just curious, what would you say this coin contacted in order to create those marks?

I will concede that it is entirely possible someone had a needlepoint pin in their pocket or pouch at the same time this coin may have been there, or some other wild scenario involving keys or open bladed knives, but that just seems like a stretch when intentional graffiti or accidental staple scratches seem much more likely.

 

I'm with you on those scratches being intentional also could be someone's crude but subtle test to see if the coin was in fact real silver (and not a Chinese fake)

 

I wont exactly say it was intentional, as a staple could have very easily caused the same thing and that wouldve been improper handling and accidental.

What baffles me the most are the folks trying to twist it into a long shot circulation mark and not the more obvious glaring answer of some sort of a scratch, intentional or not. I just cant come up with many scenarios that would result in what we are seeing and still remain in the realm of plausibility.

Good answer on it being a test for authenticity.

 

And we are trying to teach you, but you seem very uninterested in learning. Even Doug doesn't see anything on this coin that would warrant a details grade for damage and his grading standards are the most conservative I have ever seen with regards to the present topic. The coin is not a problem coin. If you submit it for grade review, you will get the same coin back with a note saying that they think the grade is accurate.

The real problem is the level of magnification that you are using. The TPG graders use 5x magnification (if any at all) when grading a coin. You have decided to use an extreme level of magnification and have convinced yourself that that a minor blemish is the grand canyon. I see at least 3 other marks in your photos that you have not mentioned. The one near the "E" is the same size as the ones that you are complaining about. Yet you only seem concerned with the two marks that criss cross. If these marks were parallel, would that make you feel better?

Furthermore, why are you convinced that the so called "x" is the deliberate result of someone with a staple? Have you ever seen a coin with a staple scratch before?

I have no idea why this tiny blemish on this coin has spurred you to blame the TPGs or why you think that a TPG provided description would solve anything at all. If you want to place blame, blame yourself for using magnification higher than 5x. Or blame yourself for buying a coin sight unseen from an E-Bay seller with substandard photos. Or blame yourself for refusing to return a coin that you are obviously unhappy with. You seem to think that others should bear the responsibility of preventing you from making mistakes. Life doesn't work that way. Admit your own mistakes and solve your problem by returning the coin to the seller within his stated return policy.