Mechanical Errors--Another risk of buying sight unseen

+1


Makes you think about the QC/QA on the graders if they can't get the label right.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I don't know this for a fact, but I'm pretty sure the graders are not printing the labels. This is a downstream error at the encapsulation phase.

 

The problem is the person doing data entry in the computer. They typed MS67 instead of PF67. My point is they probably need someone to screen every coin after encapsulation, they would catch almost all of these errors.

 

Agreed. I was just making sure Tater understood the process. The graders are well paid, well educated, white collar professionals. The guys running the labeling and encapsulation process are not. Just saying...

 

I understand this, but looking at them as an organization. If they can't get simple QC done with the existing processes that the company has in place on simple things like the label, even if this is done by someone in a clerical position, I start to loss some faith that the process that they have in place to QC the grades assigned to coins is rock solid and doesn't have problems like that on the labels. In the end it isn;t good for business to have these kinds of errors with the frequency that they are happening. With that said I have seen errors on PCGS slabs also.

 

Great, that is the first time I've heard of them paying the shipping. Frankly I think they should because they are fixing their mistake. If they had done it right you wouldn't be having to return it.

 

I just saw this on Teletrade and I thought it might be related. http://www.teletrade.com/coins/lot.asp?auction=3285&lot=1375

 

looks proof to me

 

Lehigh Lehigh Lehigh.. Buy the book.. Buy the Book.. BUY THE COIN not the holder.. Coin Collecting 101...


Just a little ribbing from another one thats made a few rookie mistakes over the years. Glad it worked out for ya this time and it was a cheap reminder!

 

I blame registry fever!

 

Just to give an update on this situation, the inevitable has finally happened!

had to give it a go posted by davidk

 

?

 

Wow Paul, I'm surprised that you made that mistake. But you aren't alone, I recently paid way too much for what was supposed to be a 1880 proof Morgan dollar. It was a very nice proof like, but worth a fraction of what I paid for it. The seller argued that NGC could never make that kind of mistake and refused the return.

I can't understand why NGC doesn't own up to their mistakes. It is becoming way to frequent to deny responsibility for the mislabeling. I know NGC has "the Finalizer" who checks grades for accuracy after the graders assign the grade, why not put him after the label is printed and before encapsulation? It seems to me that there needs to be a change to either policy or quality control at NGC.

 

??

 

I have no idea what that thread means other than I recokognise the coin.

 

It basically says the original owner resent the coin in to be looked at again.

 

And it came back PF67, hence the inevitable has happened.

 

Which means they got it right 50% of the time...

 

That depends if you think it is a PF67 or not. In my view, no Jefferson Nickel deserves more than a XF-45

 

99% certain the finalizer inspects the coin post-encapsulation. The grade is checked and the slab itself is checked, and more coins actually get rejected for poor slab appearance (plastic debris within the holder etc) than do for disagreement on grade between the finalizer and the grader. Overall, I think they do a pretty good job, but you have to be diligent. There are some label mistakes that are almost more common than the correct label out there. I can't tell you how many Brazil 19th century gold coins I have seen that had 10,000 Reis on the label when it should have been 20,000 and vice versa."