Seriously PCGS

Agreed. They seem to have been trending that way for a while.

Not their finest moments, but those were some REALLY good counterfeits and it isn't the first time something fooled everyone at least with these it didn't take several years or decades to expose them like some in the past. Fortunately the fatal flaw of counter-fitting is no matter how good they are they either have to make several to be worth it financially or get greedy and make a bunch trying to make more money. With all the pictures and sales records on the internet now someone will more than likely pick up that identical coins seem to exist sooner rather than later.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Have a photo of the 1797 cent called C/F?

 

They napalm some of my coins on every submission too. Its really frusterating because most of them are coins that there isn't enough margin in to crack and resubmit again and be worth it even though they are easily a better grade than given. For example, the 1884 dime was an NGC ms63 before but I cracked to put in a set. It is a 63 all day long and could be a 64 on the right day but they gave it a 62. The same for a half dime that was also previously a 63 that I cracked to be in a set. It's a solid 63 and they gave it 62 also. The 2 cent is one of the ones that frusterated me the most. It came from an old collection in FL and was in an old paper envelope from the collection so I know the toning is good. Yet they gave it QC. They also gave the 1879 morgan that was an ms62PL ngc before a details grade. I've been very annoyed by this for the past few weeks but unfortunately for me, there isn't much I can do about it. It just seems to me like their grades are all over the place. The 1861 3 cent is easily MS, the 1942 proof nickel was an NGC pr66 before, the 1916 barber was a pcgs ms63 before, the 1917 standing quarter is easily a 63 or 64, and the 1921 peace is in my opinion an AU. I just feel like my grades were all over the place.

 

This is just an opinion: You have just given us several great examples of why "commercial" or "market grading" as practiced by the TPGS's can be soooooo frustrating.

The 1884 dime above is NOT UNCIRCULATED in the way that term was defined decades ago. The coin has definite friction wear that is easily seen EVEN IN A PHOTO by the change of color on the high points. NOW forget about that and let's talk about TODAY.

That coin is easily an MS-63 due to its eye appeal (mostly the color). If it did not have "Cabinet Friction" I'll bet it would have graded MS-64. IMO (again), if it were "raw" it would be priced in the 64 -65 $$$ range.

This is a case where the passage of time from its first grading and present one has hurt your bottom line. I believe the services have given themselves wiggle room and down-graded the coin due to the fact that it is a pretty AU that is worth Uncirculated money. They have become more sensitive to actual "friction wear." Now we all hear stories that if the "right" person sent it in, it would jump to a 63 or even a 64 again! Believe what you wish.

Your 2c is an attractive coin also - with some corrosion on both sides. A while back, that "blue" color on copper was ALWAYS considered AC. It often results from storage in the old cotton inserts or the application of acetone in combo w/other chemicals. Today the color is prized although in my experience, it will come right off with a certain treatment. Now, I believe this coin was "detailed" due to the corrosion. They went "soft" on it an only claimed AC on the tag.

This coin also has lost its original mint luster on the high spots.

 

They have different standards than NGC has. I am not sure how it can be all over the place though when both services were basically within one point of each other and color is always a crap shoot. One of the reason why the biggest dealers pick and choose what goes to PCGS and what goes to NGC is their slightly different standards on grading and what they will give details grades too so they send the coins to the service they think will like it the best.

 

Agree. I like ngc better for early copper certain toners half dimes 2 cents and coins pcgs didn't like. I prefer pcgs for original gray bust and seated coins anything blast white. Morgan dollars and gold

 

This was in the first pcgs slab when I bought it as environment damage some verdicare helped the reverse too

 

S-128. Not surprised that the die break across the bust on this var. made coin look "fishy." I've never seen this particular die state but I don't collect the early dates. There must be something about this coin that made them call it fake twice before finally slabbing it. As you know, lightly corroded fake Large cents are presently in the market!

 

Was only called fake once. First it was enviro damage. Then ngc called it tooled?? Then fake. Then vf 25 brown. Yeah the s-128 is a cool one cracks all over it. I think this is a middle state and more cracks develop later

 

You spent a lot of money on that one! I can see environmental damage. The TPGS's don't throw the word "tooled" around as that is black and white. It is either tooled or it is not! When body bags were around, ED could be used on many old copper coins to avoid needing to determine their authenticity. It is different now; however, it is hard to believe it was called fake and then genuine UNLESS you sent it back for review with a letter. Perhaps they have some young graders in training. I will say that their office parking lot and the number of cars has tripled over the last five years.

 

I can see the environment damage too. I thought I'd crack it and try for a straight grade if if had gone environment damage again I would have probably called it good. But I really didn't agree with the tooled or the counterfeit So I ended up with about $100 in grading fees in a coin I paid $485 for which in a straight holder goes for around $1250. Plus as the s-128 is r3-4 so I'm ahead on this one any way you look at it. Was just a pain in the butt