Slabbed Proof Set
Aladdin Sane
slabbed by PCGS and assigned grades from PF65 to PF67. This was to be my
birth year proof set.
When the set arrived and I was better able to inspect the coins, I was quite
dismayed to see the surfaces. I could agree with the grades as far as the
completeness of the metal flowing into the dies, but all the coins have what
looks to be surface corrosion. The quarter looks like some surface metal
flaked off, which would have to be prior to slabbing. The dime was mottled
with spots on both sides. The seller is telling me that this is toning, but
I have a hard time believing this. Any thoughts or similar experiences? I
got a great price, but I want my byps to be a show piece.
--
*
/?\
/___\
-O=O-
^
AS & His Magic Hat
A conclusion is simply the place
where you decided to stop thinking.
Mr. Jaggers
> I recently purchased a set of 1950 Proof coins. The coins were
> individually slabbed by PCGS and assigned grades from PF65 to PF67. This
> was to be my birth year proof set.
>
> When the set arrived and I was better able to inspect the coins, I
> was quite dismayed to see the surfaces. I could agree with the
> grades as far as the completeness of the metal flowing into the dies,
> but all the coins have what looks to be surface corrosion. The
> quarter looks like some surface metal flaked off, which would have to
> be prior to slabbing. The dime was mottled with spots on both sides.
> The seller is telling me that this is toning, but I have a hard time
> believing this. Any thoughts or similar experiences? I got a great
> price, but I want my byps to be a show piece.
A 65 coin should have nearly flawless surfaces and luster. The seller is
trying to put you off. Get your money back.
James
David Farmer
Dave
"Aladdin Sane" <jmaz...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:0rudnR7MhpcXS8PU...@giganews.com...
Peter
There are at least 2 more issues to consider.
-Most obviously, in case the seller refuses a request for refund,
there may be a variety of avenues for recovery (including appeal to
the third party grader).
-Even so, base metal coins are more likely to deteriorate, especially
if exposed to corrosive fumes or liquids than are noble metals.
Mr. Jaggers
> On Jan 2, 10:46 pm, "Mr. Jaggers" <lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com> wrote:
>> Aladdin Sane wrote:
>>> I recently purchased a set of 1950 Proof coins. The coins were
>>> individually slabbed by PCGS and assigned grades from PF65 to PF67.
>>> This was to be my birth year proof set.
>>
>>> When the set arrived and I was better able to inspect the coins, I
>>> was quite dismayed to see the surfaces. I could agree with the
>>> grades as far as the completeness of the metal flowing into the
>>> dies, but all the coins have what looks to be surface corrosion. The
>>> quarter looks like some surface metal flaked off, which would have
>>> to be prior to slabbing. The dime was mottled with spots on both
>>> sides. The seller is telling me that this is toning, but I have a
>>> hard time believing this. Any thoughts or similar experiences? I
>>> got a great price, but I want my byps to be a show piece.
>>
>> A 65 coin should have nearly flawless surfaces and luster. The
>> seller is trying to put you off. Get your money back.
>>
>> James
>
> There are at least 2 more issues to consider.
Consider all the issues you will, but the customer should get a complete
refund.
> -Most obviously, in case the seller refuses a request for refund,
> there may be a variety of avenues for recovery (including appeal to
> the third party grader).
The OP clearly stated that a third party grader has already been involved -
PCGS, no less.
> -Even so, base metal coins are more likely to deteriorate, especially
> if exposed to corrosive fumes or liquids than are noble metals.
Dimes, quarters, and half dollars of 1950 were struck only in silver. Do
you consider silver a noble metal?
James
ske...@aol.com
problems you have described. It appears to be a common enough
situation that PCGS and NGC will still assign high grades to these
coins even with their imperfections. Your description of the
condition of the dime (mottled with spots on both sides) is exactly
what I have observed on many early 1950’s half dollars. Hazy fields
and spots seem to be the main problem with the half dollars I have
seen. The dealer may be right that this is toning; it’s just ugly
toning. I hope you can get your money back.
steve
Aladdin Sane
provide pics as I have already repackaged and sent
--
*
/?\
/___\
-O=O-
^
AS & His Magic Hat
A conclusion is simply the place
where you decided to stop thinking.
<ske...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:41b7a57a-1eb4-4b38...@40g2000prx.googlegroups.com...
note.boy
If the coins are now individually slabbed can they still be considered a
"set"? Are they not now individual coins? Billy
Aladdin Sane
Regardless of that, any collection would be a set as long as it meets
certain qualifications, in this case, Proof strike and year.
Were you to take coins from several proof sets of the same year, mix them up
and reassemble the sets, they are still proof sets. There are no markings
on the coins that indicate a specific half dollar goes with a specific dime.
--
*
/?\
/___\
-O=O-
^
AS & His Magic Hat
A conclusion is simply the place
where you decided to stop thinking.
"note.boy" <note...@naespamntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:FGR7l.204044$LM6....@newsfe03.ams2...
David Farmer
"Aladdin Sane" <jmaz...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:R-qdnUn9997mcMLU...@giganews.com...
note.boy
longer consider them to be a "set". Billy
"Aladdin Sane" <jmaz...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:R-qdnUn9997mcMLU...@giganews.com...
Mr. Jaggers
> As soon as they are removed from the original mint packaging I would
> no longer consider them to be a "set". Billy
The original packaging of that day consisted of coins placed in cellophane
bags stapled together and stuffed inside a cardboard box sealed with paper
tape. The staples would often rust, depositing contaminants on the coins.
There are still a few unopened "sets" around, but a nasty surprise often
awaits him who decides to "see what he has." That's why the coins that were
transferred to proper holders early on are the best preserved.
Here's an example:
James
RWF
> As soon as they are removed from the original mint packaging I would
> no longer consider them to be a "set". Billy
Your opinion is not accepted by the US proof set collectors in general.
Bruce Remick
"Mr. Jaggers" <lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com> wrote in message
news:gjr42...@enews1.newsguy.com...
I kept the the coins in the first1953 proof set I ordered in their original
stapled baggies and Mint box until about 1960, when I became curious to see
what the coins inside those cloudy bags really looked like. Darned if all
the coins weren't cloudy, too.
Mr. Jaggers
This discussion makes me think about the dubious nature of Maundy "sets."
At various times, one could order a set of four from the mint in a
velvet-lined case, but the coins were not really sealed in anything, just in
recesses in the case. In the years that these sets were not offered, "sets"
of four would have to be assembled, often after they had been in the hands
of the recipients. I understand that these days some recipients even
liquidate them on eBay.
James
note.boy
"Mr. Jaggers" <lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com> wrote in message
news:gjr42...@enews1.newsguy.com...
Not the best packaging of a proof set I've ever seen.
Why was it so cheaply done?
Royal Mint proof sets have always been well packaged, in fact the older the
set the better, very old sets were in custom made leather cases. Billy
note.boy
"Bruce Remick" <rem...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:J_c8l.11622$Dt1....@newsfe05.iad...
A bit of a let down. Billy
note.boy
"RWF" <R...@2009.invalid> wrote in message
news:gjrilq$6u5$1...@news.motzarella.org...
Slabbing is very uncommon in the UK but single proof coins are seldom seen
for sale, any seen are usually very recent issues. Billy
Jon Purkey
wrote:
I've bought several sealed proof sets dating from 1957 to 1964 and
there was really no way of telling whether or not the coins would be
cloudy until after I had cut them out. Luckily for what I paid for
those dates I was never realy disappointed. When transferring a few of
the coins to Air-Titles I found the cellophane was actually stuck to
the coins slightly.The cellophane was definitely not the best
packaging for proof coins.
Mr. Jaggers
"Sealed" proof sets from that span of years are more than likely "Re-Sealed"
in brand-new reproduction brown envelopes, such as were on the market some
years ago, and may still be. Normally the less desirable sets were the ones
to receive this treatment.
James
Jon Purkey
Yeah, I know that is a possibility. Even the original brown envelopes
could probably be steamed opened and then re-sealed. But I like to
believe that most sellers are honest.
And it is a gamble that has generally worked well for me. As a rule I
have been quite happy with the quality of the coins for the price,
usually only a couple dollars more than what unseen opened sets cost
from online dealers. When I have found coins to have some haze I could
not tell it until I had cut them out of the cellophane and that would
be difficult to reseal. Maybe someone would go to the trouble for the
more expensive older sets, but I would not want to take that big of
gamble buying one of those unseen/sealed anyway.