Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Jaelus, post: 2515484, member: 46237&quot;]So then if the definition of the method of manufacture of a proof isn&#039;t actually helpful as a diagnostic tool for determining if a coin is or is not a proof, it&#039;s not really relevant to this discussion.</p><p><br /></p><p>The question, I believe, is that when a TPG looks at a proof-like coin, <i>how do they determine</i> if it should be PF, SP, MSPL, or just plain MS?</p><p><br /></p><p>My belief is that you&#039;ll get the proof (or SP, depending) designation if you&#039;ve submitted documentation (such as the coin being submitted in a proof set, or other provenance) indicating it&#039;s a proof, or if the coin was only ever struck as a proof based on information on the type in the relevant major numismatic text. If that&#039;s not the case, then they may go by mint records for the date (from whatever source) to see if proofs were recorded as being struck <i>and make an educated guess</i>, or you might get lucky and there may be die markers that indicate it is from proof dies (if only proofs were struck from those dies). If there is no conclusive evidence, you may get proof-like, or you may get nothing.</p><p><br /></p><p>Here&#039;s an example:</p><p>1912 Austrian Corona KM-2820 (1912-1916)</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]535606[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>This is the first year struck for this type. The coin is extremely well struck with frosted devices and mirrored surfaces. I&#039;ve never come across another proof-like example of this type, let alone this date. Proof-like examples are more readily available for the equivalent Hungarian types, and those examples do not have frosted devices. To me, this is a proof. As far as I know, no mention of proofs exist in the mint records.</p><p><br /></p><p>I submitted this coin to NGC and here were the results:</p><p>[ATTACH=full]535611[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>I took the coin to several world dealers and my LCS to get some opinions, and every single person I spoke to said they thought the coin was a proof.</p><p><br /></p><p>I resubmitted it to NGC for designation review and here&#039;s what I got back:</p><p>[ATTACH=full]535613[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;ve had similar experiences with <i>8 other coins</i>, a couple of which I consider to be proofs, and the rest of which I consider to be proof-like. Some got the PL designation, others did not. I can&#039;t help but think they might just be guessing, but they are very reluctant to give out a PF based on the appearance of the coin alone without <i>documentation</i> to support that proofs were struck.[/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