Is NGC blind or am I seeing things? VarietyPlus Shenanigans

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by Sunflower_Coins, Oct 8, 2020.

  1. Sunflower_Coins

    Sunflower_Coins Importer and Exporter

    So, I cherrypicked what I thought was an 1884 MPD FS-301 a while back. It seemed like a decent enough coin that I threw it into my NGC submission with the VarietyPlus fee. My submission came in the mail earlier today:


    1884 1C_01.jpg 1884 1C_02.jpg

    However, it didn't come with an attribution, but this little note instead:


    1884 1C_03.jpg



    This is my first time using NGC's VarietyPlus, and I must say I'm disappointed, either in NGC or my own stupidity (if I've done something wrong). The variety is listed on their VarietyPlus catalog, and I wrote it onto my submission form for the coin (as FS-301 under the Variety Column). Is there something I've missed on this MPD, or a process I flubbed up? Or is VarietyPlus really that hit or miss?
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. kanga

    kanga 65 Year Collector

    Apparently VarietyPlus is limited to the ones mentioned -- at least for IHCs.
     
  4. cpm9ball

    cpm9ball CANNOT RE-MEMBER

    I think I see the top of the "8" but I don't see the "4". Why don't you call NGC Customer Service to initiate a review?
     
  5. physics-fan3.14

    physics-fan3.14 You got any more of them.... prooflikes?

    Are there other die markers that could help confirm the variety? I'm not familiar with Indian cent varieties.
     
  6. Sunflower_Coins

    Sunflower_Coins Importer and Exporter

    FS-301 is shown on the VarietyPlus catalog (although they only have one example certified). It's also in PCGS's website-they have 14 examples certified. I'm not sure why there's a disparity.

    I think I see the cross of the 4 exactly two denticles right of the second 8, but I'm not sure. I'm considering calling their customer service but I'll have to wait until tomorrow, and even then I don't really know what they can do for me. Until then I figure it makes good discussion.

    Every example I've looked at so far has Longacre doubling, but it seems most 1884 cents do. There are also examples that have die tooling in the shield on the reverse:

    FS301 Example.png

    This example is from PCGS's FS-401 page. However, not every 1884 MPD I've seen has it.


    Also worth noting is that VarietyPlus attributes the MPD as FS-301 while the Cherrypicker's Guide (along with PCGS and ANACS) attributes it as FS-401. It probably doesn't even matter, but I thought I'd leave it here.
     
  7. Conder101

    Conder101 Numismatist

    Part of the problem may be because NGC is the least reliable of the four top services at getting varieties correct. They also do not guarantee their attributions. If you can get some good pictures of the variety send it back for review with the pictures of both you coin and the known variety with arrows on each pointing out the digits in the denticals.
     
  8. micbraun

    micbraun coindiccted

  9. LA_Geezer

    LA_Geezer Well-Known Member

    Nor am I despite my rather large collection of them. IMVHO I don't see why that coin should be graded any higher than it has been. It is precisely why I would not consider owning any NGC IHCs graded lower than MS64.
     
  10. shoelessjoe

    shoelessjoe Member

    Sorry to hear, the doubling appears very clear, the question is for a variety designation, are the graders guaranteed to wear a loupe or not--call and ask if the coin is graded with a loupe. this lowers confidence in the TPGs.
     
  11. messydesk

    messydesk Well-Known Member

    I would put an FS-301 (or S1) label on that. Clear as day from you pictures.
    Five if you count me.
     
    micbraun likes this.
  12. Conder101

    Conder101 Numismatist

    If we include you we really need to include SEGS as well which put them down to the least reliable of the top six TPG's.
     
  13. micbraun

    micbraun coindiccted

    Maybe you should explicitly mention that this is your personal opinion only... or do you have any source/reference/statistics supporting your claim?
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page