My 2009 PCGS adventures [long]
Mr. Jaggers
package, besides the password and secret handshake, I got four free
submissions, including return shipping, all for $99. Fair enough, since one
coin graded at the "regular" rate will set me back $30, plus $8 "per order"
fee, plus postage both ways. I saved on the outshipping postage by
submitting my four coins at a show where PCGS was set up.
Of course, I had seven coins that needed to be graded. Two of the
additional ones were indeed a "regular" grading ($30 each + $8 + $20.35
return postage) and the other was a world gold coin ($30 + $8 + $26.75
return postage). The coins had to be on two separate orders, since they
represented two kinds of service. Postage is charged at a flat fee for
registration, depending on which range the value, as determined by the
shipper, falls. So for the three additional coins I was set back $153.10,
and I dropped them off at the same time as the first four.
More recently I decided to get three coins crossed over from old ANACS
holders to PCGS holders. Again, two different orders were necessary, as two
were "regular" crossovers and the third was a "variety" crossover. If the
variety is not on a certain list, you pay an extra $24 for the "variety"
crossover. This coin happened to be an 1869/69 Indian, not a variety that
is listed on the official formulary.
So along with the three coins, shipped together, but on separate orders, I
sent a check for ($30 + $30 + $8 + $20.35) + ($30 + $8 + $24 + $20.35), or
$170.70 in all for the three coins.
PCGS graded and returned all the coins within the time frame associated with
the fees paid, and USPS got all packages to me within one week after they
were finished. I was kept informed via email as to the status of the
orders.
Here are the results:
1858/7 flying eagle cent, ANACS VF30 = PCGS VF30
1869/69 Indian cent, ANACS VF30 = PCGS VF25 1869/69 Snow 3
1867 3c silver, bought raw as MS60 "perhaps" lightly cleaned = PCGS Genuine
(this was actually the second time this coin was sent in; the first time it
came back bodybagged)
1870 3c silver, ANACS AU50 = PCGS XF45
1830/29 10c, bought raw as VF25 = PCGS VF35
1806/5 25c, bought raw as F12, = PCGS F12
1818/5 25c, bought raw as "Fine or nearly so" = PCGS F15
1828 25c over 50c, bought raw as VG10 = PCGS F12
1930 Danzig 25 Gulden gold, ICG MS65 = PCGS MS64
When I bought this gold coin, I had my choice among 20 examples, all in ICG
MS65 holders, but ranging from gorgeous to butt ugly. I picked the nicest
of the bunch. They were part of a hoard located and released earlier this
century.
and now, the pi�ce de r�sistance:
1864 3c silver, bought raw as MS60 = PCGS PR61.
This last grade flabbergasted both myself and the dealer who had sold it to
me, as the coin shows no signs of ever having been struck as a proof.
Several weeks ago I reported this outcome in these pages, so I won't go into
all that again, but for those who don't know or understand 3c silvers, the
PR grade, as opposed to an MS grade, cuts the value of the coin to about 1/3
of what I paid.
My outlay for the ten coins came to $422.80, or an average of $42.28 per
coin, not counting the $600 bath I took on the 1864 3c silver.
This report is anecdotal, not intended to represent what anyone else might
experience. Nor should any of this be construed by anyone as complaining on
my part. I decided earlier this year to have all my U.S. and world oddments
in matching PCGS holders, the only ones I am willing to consider. As far as
the grades are concerned, I got what I got, and I went into the various
transactions with upfront knowledge of the fee structure. Many here on rcc
may not, however. So, my advice is, make sure you know what you are doing
before sending coins to be graded, and be prepared for just about anything.
Fortunately, I bought all but one of the U.S. coins from a dealer who
"almost" always knows what PCGS will have to say about them.
James the Gradified (a neologism, not a misspelling)
Bruce Remick
"Mr. Jaggers" <lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com> wrote in message
news:h6uq...@enews2.newsguy.com...
Your experience reinforces my notion that it seems to be more cost-effective
to buy PCGS-slabbed coins than to submit coins for PCGS grading. This
doesn't mean I have stopped biting my lower lip over whether to take out one
of those PCGS memberships to get a discount on four specific raw coins I'd
LOVE to have graded and slabbed. I can always complain later.
Mr. Jaggers
At this point I have a very short wantlist of U.S. coins, and when I send it
out to selected dealers such as Ira, it specifies PCGS only.
I'm guessing that your four coins might be early coppers. PCGS will
designate Redbook varieties of large cents as part of the $30 fee per each
(or use your four free submissions as I did), but if you want
Sheldon/Newcomb numbers, you won't be able to use your vouchers.
James the Finicky
Bruce Remick
"Mr. Jaggers" <lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com> wrote in message
<snipped>
>>
>> Your experience reinforces my notion that it seems to be more
>> cost-effective to buy PCGS-slabbed coins than to submit coins for
>> PCGS grading. This doesn't mean I have stopped biting my lower lip
>> over whether to take out one of those PCGS memberships to get a
>> discount on four specific raw coins I'd LOVE to have graded and
>> slabbed. I can always complain later.
>
> At this point I have a very short wantlist of U.S. coins, and when I send
> it out to selected dealers such as Ira, it specifies PCGS only.
>
> I'm guessing that your four coins might be early coppers. PCGS will
> designate Redbook varieties of large cents as part of the $30 fee per each
> (or use your four free submissions as I did), but if you want
> Sheldon/Newcomb numbers, you won't be able to use your vouchers.
>
> James the Finicky
You're right. I do favor big coppers, but I refuse to maintain any of
them in corporate holders and have broken several out of PCGS slabs to join
their brothers and sisters in my collection. To be completely honest
though, I keep them in Amos Advantage holders with my own printed labels
containing the variety, N & S numbers, and my own grade. This way they look
better than they did in 2x2's and I can easily pry a slab apart to examine
or handle a coin.
Two of the coins I want to have graded are sort of early coppers-- 1900's
Indian Head cents. They are as brilliant red as 2009 Lincolns with natural
lustre and minimal marks. I would hope that at least one of them would rate
an MS65RD, and if so, would earn a spot in my 20th century type collection.
I keep this collection in PCGS slabs.
James Rose
>
> - Show quoted text -
Sent a 1923S Standing liberty quarter through my local coin shop for
$95 to be graded, thought it might make MS64; they warned me it may
come back "genuine" because it may have been cleaned, They were
correct!! Next time I'll take their advice. Most of the cost was
shipping and insurance.
Mr. Jaggers
>>
On the other hand, where 1923-S quarters are concerned, it's comforting
these days just to know that yours is indeed "genuine."
James
oepepper
were mainly struck in proof for the collector market and only a small number
of circulation strikes, making the circulation strike the rarer. Dealers
were warned that some coin doctors tried to fix up the more common date
"circulation" strike by treating proofs to appear to be the rarer
circulation counterparts. How this was done was never specified, but sounded
to be a common scam at the time. Did they point out any diagnostics that
they used to conclude yours was a proof? Just curious.
"Mr. Jaggers" <lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com> wrote in message
news:h6uq...@enews2.newsguy.com...
A lot of snippage.....
Mr. Jaggers
> If I remember correctly, there are several years in this series where
> isuues were mainly struck in proof for the collector market and only
> a small number of circulation strikes, making the circulation strike
> the rarer. Dealers were warned that some coin doctors tried to fix up
> the more common date "circulation" strike by treating proofs to
> appear to be the rarer circulation counterparts. How this was done
> was never specified, but sounded to be a common scam at the time. Did
> they point out any diagnostics that they used to conclude yours was a
> proof? Just curious.
Not for $30, they didn't. If I checked, I would probably find out that the
coin had been struck from dies originally used to make proofs, and that's
what they go by. The pickup points for making this call are discussed in
the two Breen books, but I haven't yet made the effort to assemble books,
coin, light, magnifier, and a block of time for the study.
From 1863 until 1873 the total mintages of 3c silvers were mightily reduced,
but circulation strikes still outnumbered proof strikes significantly. The
relative scarcity of the circ strikes is due to the fact that the proofs
were sold at a premium and left the mint, whereas the circ strikes were made
and then mostly warehoused by the mint, only to be melted en masse in 1873.
Why they were minted at all remains a mystery.
James
look@worldnet.att.net don't look
http://www.pcgs.com/grades.chtml
Mr. Jaggers
> For your Genuine 3C Silver here is PCGS "code" for problem coins.
>
> http://www.pcgs.com/grades.chtml
Mine got a "92" but is by no stretch of the imagination the result of a
"harsh, abrasive cleaning." I've seen harsh, and it ain't pretty. At least
they had the good sense to let me know it is a business strike and not a
proof, which is more what I was after anyway. It's also big of them to now
slab the coin instead of pocketing my $30 and sending the coin back to me
raw, as they did until very recently.
James