Lazy TPG Attributions and Suggested Improvements

Discussion in 'Error Coins' started by JCro57, Aug 14, 2022.

  1. JCro57

    JCro57 Making Errors Great Again

    I really find it lazy when grading companies tag an unknown planchet as a "foreign" blank or planchet.

    For example, attached is a 1987-D Jefferson Nickel Struck on a "Foreign" Blank

    How do we know this isn't a Jefferson nickel planchet, but just significantly underweight?

    And If grading companies want to use "foreign blank" (when they don't know what it is), why can't they include the composition on the label? This could be a big help, right?

    Even better, how about the term "Undetermined Planchet?" Then if the composition is the same for a Jefferson nickel, it at least can help a buyer know it "possibly" is just a regular Jefferson planchet, just underweight.

    1197530-1.jpg
    Screenshot_20220814-203832~3.png Screenshot_20220814-203754~2.png
     
    paddyman98 likes this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Pickin and Grinin

    Pickin and Grinin Well-Known Member

    Interesting, I wonder what foreign blanks weigh 3.7.
    I agree, could easily be struck on rolled thin stock.
     
    Cheech9712 likes this.
  4. Paddy54

    Paddy54 Hey brother can you spare a half dime?

    There has to be a record of countries that the us mint mints for. TPG don't like researching...even when its done for them. But there's a record somewhere... start digging ...
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2022
  5. Insider

    Insider Talent on loan from...

    Foreign Coins Struck at the U.S. Mint only covers vintage coins but I should think that the Annual Report of the Mint for that year should contain what you need.

    Additionally, the poster calls the TPGS lazy. While he does make a valid argument on the surface, perhaps NGC already did the research as their reputation is on the line. I think a call to NGC asking for Dave Camire to explain that slab label would have been more useful than posting personal conjecture on a coin forum not associated with NGC.

    IMO, this member's comments would be better posted on the NGC Forum where he would get a direct answer from folks who actually know something. The "word" would come to the attention of Mr. Camire who is a well known, Internationally renown, coin error expert and noted author of the highest regard. :D
     
    Dynoking, Evan Saltis and medoraman like this.
  6. JCro57

    JCro57 Making Errors Great Again

    1. If I am paying NGC to attribute the error, they should be the ones doing the work seeing what foreign coins the Mint made during that time, not me.

    2. If you are going to put "foreign planchet" on the label, put your credibiliy on the line and say which one. If not, then obviously they don't know. So, dont put it on there.

    3. A person's reputation means nothing to me if they don't get it right. I don't care who it is, what their role at a grading company is, how many books they wrote, or how long they've been in the business.

    I'm 99.9% sure this is a rolled thin Jefferson nickel planchet if the composition and diameter are that of a Jefferson nickel.

    Sorry, but I stand by "laziness"here...
     
    Cheech9712 and Oldhoopster like this.
  7. ldhair

    ldhair Clean Supporter

    I can't guess what testing NGC did. They may have done more than we know.
     
    Insider likes this.
  8. medoraman

    medoraman Supporter! Supporter

    I am not sure about "laziness" sir. Did you pay some sort of premium for "numismatic research" or did you ask for a graded slab? Sorry, but a standard grading fee I do not think would cover hours of research and speculation amongst most likely a few employees at NGC. If not, why should they spend that money when the fee they charged you was for a standard service, which might take 3 employees 5 minutes each, and then printing of insert, slabbing, and processing for mailing it back to you.

    Its simply economics IMHO rather than "laziness". They pay their people by the hour, (effectively, whether on salary or not), and have X expected input per submission. They simply cannot afford hours and hours of uncompensated research. They authenticated, graded, and slabbed it for you, which is what you paid for. Anything further I think you should have done the research for them so they could either verify or disagree with, or you should have called and requested and paid for extra services. Just my opinion as a businessman.
     
  9. Evan Saltis

    Evan Saltis Student/Collector Supporter

    Interesting. I think it is a regular nickel planchet but rolled thin as you mentioned. The Denver mint struck only 2 issues for foreign use in nickel per Numista. Seeing as the OP coin is definitely not nickel-brass, I can eliminate those compositions.

    We are left with Liberia 5c (1972, 4g), and Costa Rica 25 centimos (1970, 3.4g, slightly larger in diameter at 23mm).

    So I'd say its clearly not struck on a foreign planchet... Instead just lightweight. Not likely a 25 and 27 year old planchet is laying around hidden in the bottom of bags of planchets.
     
  10. masterswimmer

    masterswimmer Well-Known Member

    I think you asked a bona fide question. Then you proceeded with a response based on one answer. It would have been apropos to wait for an answer before putting together a one sided postulation. You could very well be correct, but that still remains to be seen.
     
  11. JCro57

    JCro57 Making Errors Great Again

    Well, if they charge an extra fee simply because it is an error, that means I am paying for their mint error experts to properly attribute the error; I'm not just sending it in for a grade. Why should I pay for a service when they're not willing to do the work on their end? In that case, don't offer error attributions at all.

    In fact, most hardcore error collectors that I know, myself included, don't really care much about grade and care more about the eye appeal as well as the type of error that it is.
    Not attributing it properly can both cause someone to lose a lot of money and also overpay a lot of money.

    The seller is asking for over $400 for this coin, but if it is a rolled thin planchet (which I am confident it is) many won't even pay $100 for it. This should not have been a difficult thing to look into or figure out for experts at NGC.

    Thus, again, I stick to my charge of laziness.
     
  12. Insider

    Insider Talent on loan from...

    ldhair, posted: "I can't guess what testing NGC did. They may have done more than we know."

    EXACTLY! That's why IMO, posting a VALID Question about a VALID Possibility by a fellow error authority :bookworm::cigar: belongs with the NGC representatives or the NGC Forum!!! Error authentication should never appear to be a "My stream goes higher up the wall thing!" o_O

    JCro57, posted: "If I am paying NGC to attribute the error, they should be the ones doing the work [and you were in the grading room to know what they did or did not do?] seeing what foreign coins the Mint made during that time, not me.

    I agree.

    2. If you are going to put "foreign planchet" on the label, put your credibiliy on the line and say which one. If not, then obviously they don't know. So, dont put it on there.

    If it is indeed on a foreign planchet, perhaps their were several possibilities.

    3. A person's reputation means nothing to me if they don't get it right. I don't care who it is, what their role at a grading company is, how many books they wrote, or how long they've been in the business.

    Ditto. When a TPGS gives an opinion they have millions of watchdogs checking their work. :happy: This is a good thing. However, I for one don't like :( how you are going about making sure any possible mistake is corrected.

    I'm 99.9% sure this is a rolled thin Jefferson nickel planchet if the composition and diameter are that of a Jefferson nickel.

    My first impression is that you may be correct. Have you bothered to contact NGC with your concerns yet?

    Sorry, but I stand by "laziness" here.

    :rolleyes: Lazy makes no sense. If you are correct it is a mistake (label error o_O:D).


    JCro57, continued: "Well, if they charge an extra fee simply because it is an error, that means I am paying for their mint error experts to properly attribute the error [agree]; I'm not just sending it in for a grade. Why should I pay for a service when they're not willing to do the work [?? :rolleyes: You don't know what they did or did not do. You were not there! Please contact NGC and see what they did OR is this some coin on the Internet you found and don't own? Please keep us informed.] on their end? In that case, don't offer error attributions at all.

    In fact, most hardcore error collectors that I know, myself included, don't really care much about grade and care more about the eye appeal as well as the type of error that it is.
    Not attributing it properly can both cause someone to lose a lot of money and also overpay a lot of money. [Agree]

    The seller is asking for over $400 for this coin, but if it is a rolled thin planchet (which I am confident it is) many won't even pay $100 for it. This should not have been a difficult thing to look into or figure out for experts at NGC.

    Thus, again, I stick to my charge of laziness." I guess your stream goes higher up the wall on this forum. :D
     
    JCro57 likes this.
  13. Mountain Man

    Mountain Man Supporter! Supporter

    Buy the coin, not the slab. Now I have a headache.
     
    Insider and JCro57 like this.
  14. Oldhoopster

    Oldhoopster Member of the ANA since 1982

    @JCro57

    Mint Error News published a write up and comprehensive PDF with dates, weights, comps, mints, diameters and other data. The latest date I can find that the mint struck foreign coins was 1980, 7 years prior to 1987.

    Of the 1980 coins, none were struck in Denver, and the only ones that were small enough to fit in a nickel die chamber were 2.5 gms in 75Cu/25Ni, 3.1 gms in 95%Cu, and 2.2 gms in clad.

    Based on this info, I don't see how any foreign planchet of 3.7 gms, could have found it's way to Denver and be struck in 1987. It looks like NGC dropped the ball on this one. I would really like to see their research. The Error Coin News info has been around for a while. I have it bookmarked and I don't even collect errors.

    I agree with your conclusion that somebody did a poor job with their research. I also agree that it's most likely a a nickel planchets punched from thin rolled stock

    Let's see if NGC buys this back due to their mistake.

    You can get to the PDF through the following site. The PDF is a little cumbersome to use on handheld devices.

    https://minterrornews.com/news-5-13-03-foreigners_in_the_mint.html

    BTW: Mint Error News is published by Mike Byers
     
  15. JCro57

    JCro57 Making Errors Great Again

    Fair points all
     
  16. JCro57

    JCro57 Making Errors Great Again

    Fair points all
     
  17. Oldhoopster

    Oldhoopster Member of the ANA since 1982

    If you you don't want to call it laziness, then call it "poor research techniques", or "failure to perform due diligence", or "pencil whipping". Personally, I think laziness is an apt description, but that's just my opinion

    If I was able to access data and information on this topic quickly and easily, why wouldn't an expert employee/consultant of a major TPG not have it? (I'm using your technique of changing font colors. Like it? :smuggrin:) It's not like I'm trying to find info on how to fabricate Hafnium Nitride heat resistant tiles for military space applications. This info is out there for anyone who needs it. Heck, I don't even collect errors, yet had the info bookmarked.
     
    Insider likes this.
  18. medoraman

    medoraman Supporter! Supporter

    Fair enough. The nature of such boards makes it hard to know when to stop and wait for a response, (like texting or a conversation), or to go further with a possible outcome, (like a business email as an example).
     
  19. medoraman

    medoraman Supporter! Supporter

    Ok, I did not know if there were extra fees for the type of coin or not. My answer was from a business standpoint. Everything costs money, and such research must cost more than a normal slab would cost the firm to process.
     
  20. ldhair

    ldhair Clean Supporter

    This would be a good topic to post over on NGC. It's not all that active over there but the NGC folks do watch the forum and jump in with answers.
     
    Insider likes this.
  21. Insider

    Insider Talent on loan from...

    Oldhoopster, posted: "If you you don't want to call it laziness, then call it "poor research techniques", or "failure to perform due diligence", or "pencil whipping". Personally, I think laziness is an apt description, but that's just my opinion

    If I was able to access data and information on this topic quickly and easily, why wouldn't an expert employee/consultant of a major TPG not have it? (I'm using your technique of changing font colors. Like it? :smuggrin:) It's not like I'm trying to find info on how to fabricate Hafnium Nitride heat resistant tiles for military space applications. This info is out there for anyone who needs it. Heck, I don't even collect errors, yet had the info bookmarked."

    I like it! :D Easy to make your point clear. Your research makes it look like Joe found an NGC error and should notify them. I wonder if they determined the composition of the coin's alloy.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page