"Temporary" ANACS Slab Design???

This past weekend I saw a type of slab that I had seen once before, but this time I took the time to look it over closer. The label printing is obviously ANACS, but the slab itself bore a very strong resemblance to a PCGS slab. Upon picking it up, however, the plastic was easily much softer, less durable. It had an almost "waxy" feel.

Anybody know anything about this slab type's history and/or demise? The coin in it was a 2009 cent, if that helps.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Do not have much experience with slabs, but could it have been counterfeit? If not was it a Sample slab? Who was selling it ANACS or a dealer?

Sent from my A463BG using Tapatalk

 

Is it possible that ANACS is experimenting with a new design? I've heard in the past that the newer ANACS slabs are fairly easy to crack open. Maybe they want something that is a bit sturdier.

Chris

 

It was in a dealer's showcase at our club's coin show. I had seen, but not touched, the same slab type at the Dallas ANA show last March.

Oh, the coin in it was fully graded, and the word "SAMPLE" was nowhere to be found. If it had been, I would have snagged it immediately. I have a friend who collects samples.

 

Paging @Conder101

 

Interesting, I have a order that will ship very soon, and I'll post photos when it arrives.

 

Kinda like this one, Kurt?

 

Except for the nature of the coin itself, yup, that's it.

 

I don't know anything about it other than I own it. But now... pictures!

 

But didn't they get the obverse and reverse backwards? And that coin looks like it rotated pretty badly in the holder, too.

 

I think it's from the blue days before the sale and move to Colorado. ANACS today - yellow labels - is owned by Driving Force LLC

 

IF I were PCGS, and IF I were the litigious sort, I might have been tempted to have counsel write a "trade dress" complaint letter to ANACS' then-owners. Anyone know if that's what happened?

 

Those were first used around I believe 2009 when the bicentennial Lincolns came out. They were used for businesses like HSN for promotional items they would be selling. They have been used for a few other things but I believe always for large submissions by "promotors". They were never used for just regular submissions.

 

Thanks @Conder101, that all makes perfect sense and fits with all examples I've seen so far. Now I'm going to be looking for others, just to see if they fit that promotional idea.

I do like the shape better than the current ANACS slab, but the lack of hardness of the plastic bothers me.

 

I believe that ANACS tends to use that slab for non-problem promotional items that are not being assigned a numerical grade. The "softer" plastic is somewhat like SEGS slabs which are actually very durable and quite difficult to extract a coin from.

Personally, I like the regular ANACS slab design with the beveled top.

 

The cent in the one I saw on Saturday was graded, MS68. It sure was nice, but I'm not so sure NGC or PCGS would have agreed. 67? Perhaps. I have some 67's. BTW, you're spot on regarding the look and feel of the plastic, very SEGSy. Not the shape, just the material.

 

We've been arguing about your financial acumen, but I STRONGLY suggest you not venture into intellectual property law... there is no similarity. If PCGS really cared, they could get a design patent, but those are close to worthless. The only one I know of is SEGS' (now expired) - https://patents.google.com/patent/USD423757S/en

 

Have you been following the news on IP law? There have been some real "head scratcher" decisions coming down out there. Besides, "trade dress" is a much lower standard than other IP. Eastman Kodak once was held to "own" a color - "Kodak box yellow". [See, inter alia, EASTMAN KODAK CO., Plaintiff, v. FOTOMAT CORPORATION, Defendant, 317 F.Supp. 304 (1970).]

Under that standard, maybe @dcarr needs to look out for the Miami Dolphins, eh? I follow a weekly podcast called "This Week in Law" which deals almost exclusively in IP cases. Train commutes allow for lots of stuff.

As of this writing, only the 9th Circuit seems to be walking back the standard on "DMCA takedown notices", the most pro-complainant statute out there. While you can indict a ham sandwich, it seems that you can get into court on an IP issue just by suing the mustard on it.

In other words, do you think that there are such obvious differences in the look of all four of the top TPGS' slabs is merely a coincidence? Maybe, but I have doubts.

 

I'm actually working on a presentation for a future coin club tracing the patent history of slabs. At least with utility patents you have the claims to follow. For example, ICG's unique feature is the stress relief contour that's supposed to show if the slab has been opened.

Design patents are just a picture (and if you are lucky a few words - usually to explain that something on the picture is NOT part of the claim).

I agree that betting on what a court will / won't uphold is a fool's bet.

 

I'd love to see that presentation. Where? And if it's too far, how about an ANA or FUN talk?