Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;cwtokenman, post: 43175, member: 2100&quot;]GDJMSP, I understand what you are saying, but even those &quot;low level employees&quot; are a part of the complete service that the tpgs are providing for a fee. If those type of obvious errors (frequently) get out the door, who is to say they did not also make an error with the grade displayed on the label, which may not be so obvious? That could have serious consequences with how these companies are perceived.</p><p><br /></p><p>Also, I had mentioned that some posters with whom I have debated the pros/cons of tpgs, who were staunch slab supporters, admitted they were apalled by some of the high grades assigned to rather pathetic and worn looking cwts. Some tokens, where no one disputed readily apparent signs of wear, had MS64 &amp; MS-65 grades. Was that really the grade assigned by the graders or merely an error in making the label? If one is going to blame the label maker for such as this, when does one know if the label is correct or not? If that example, as others you claim are merely label errors, and are obvious, how about ones that may not be so obvious? Maybe that MS-67 Morgan was really only a 66, or maybe a 68. How is one to know? A chain is only as strong as its weakest link, so what good is it for a professional grader to do a good and accurate evaluation if the label does not convey the proper information? It is ultimately the fault of the tpg if the slab incorrectly conveys the information &amp; opinions gathered about the coin that was inspected. A customer should expect an accurate evaluation and conveyance of that evaluation encapsulated in the slab.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>I do not normally view regular coinage or their slabs. Are such label errors as common with them? If so, it can be derived that the label makers are consistently making errors across the board. If not (especially in relation to grade assignments), just perhaps, the graders do not have the necessary expertise in this area, and the label makers are doing just as good a job as they normally do. I see no real variables in the grader(s) passing along the assigned grade to the label maker, be it regular coinage or token. It boils down to if the slab does not reflect the proper information, I would not care who&#039;s fault it was (ultimately it is that of the tpg). What is wrong is wrong.</p><p><br /></p><p>As far as the tpg not noting the variety or special attribution unless specially requested, as far as cwts (and most exonumia) are concerned, there are no standard issues. It is not like some basic series of coinage that one can collect by date/mm. They (cwts) are pretty much every one a special variety with a unique attribution (if listed). Precious few would have a parallel anything similar to variations in a VAM listing. If they do not provide the proper attribution, they may as well just put a generic &quot;Civil War token&quot; on the label (I have never seen that done, so either it must be standard or everyone is paying extra), and let everyone figure out which of the 14,000 varieties it may be for themselves.</p><p><br /></p><p>It is getting late, and I realized I have rambled quite a bit. Hopefully this post will make some modicon of sense. I apologize if I have repeated lines of thought. If my intent has confused anyone, I will try to clarify when I am more coherent.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in