Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="desertgem, post: 912593, member: 15199"]Well when PCGS used the phrase "Coin Doctoring", they were referring to detectable physical alterations and not, again, not Artificial toning. It would be just as rewarding, probably more so for the average collector if they had some analytical marvel machine which could tell the difference 95% of the time, but they don't. It isn't that PCGS is incompetent, just that they are limited to the detectable. And most of the doctoring detected in the suit,  such as the lasering of surfaces , and enhancement of surface details could not be validated until recently at any TPG. It seems almost like a "sting" operation concluding in this lawsuit. They might have been using their newest techniques long enough before announcing to have a base for action. It hopefully will deter any other who physically alters PCGS labeled coins before resubmitting. Also as far as toning, if any change has occurred after slabbing, if it is an appropriate period of time, and there is no visible violation of the slab, I am sure they will honor it. The marketplace seems to value PCGS grading highly, as shown by their market differential. IMO.[/QUOTE]