JTO

Member
  • Content count

    87
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About JTO

  • Boards Title
    Collector

Personal Information

  • Occupation
    Professor and Surgeon
  • Hobbies
    Type Sets
  • Location
    LSU
  1. Is My Coin "Too Good"

    Here is the rub... Crack it out and say goodbye to MS-66. If you decided to recertify it may come back in anything from an MS-67 to a "AU Details Artificial Color." Enjoy the coin, I have cracked out many coins for an album set (I tape the slab insert to the inside cover of the album.) But, recognize that it is a one way street. One trick I use for a coin that I know that I am going to use in an album is to buy a "details" coin that I think might pass for original. Here are my 2 most memorable crack out/recert coins. These were coins that on close inspection I thought were good original coins; that the "Details" grade was inappropriate. 1) 1909-S Indian 1c was in an ICG AU-58 corroded holder. I cleaned the coin carefully with some old Coin Care (the stuff with the now banned TFTCE (trifluoro-trichloro-ethane.) After removing a small amount of verdigris I sent the coin to PCGS and got it back in a PCGS AU-58 holder. The second 2) and my favorite is a 1923-S FH Standing Liberty Quarter that I bought in an NGC AU details improperly cleaned holder. It really did not look cleaned to me. I CAREFULLY dipped it, let it dry for 24 hours and PCGS put it in an AU-58 FH holder. It is now in an NGG MS-61 FH slab and is now in my NGC registry set with picture so you can judge for yourself. I love the albums and I loved the spending time on the NGC registry as a way of enjoying virtual albums. The business decision to no longer allow PCGS has really slowed me down. For most all of my registry sets I have an album as well and for many I only have the album (Lincoln cents, Washington quarters where it make no sense to me to slab a 1964 quarter for the registry.) Buy the coin not the holder... And enjoy the hobby.
  2. Updates and Improvements

    The "journals" are worse not better. The registry is also worse and I have cut my time there by 80% (maybe a good thing?) NGC has taken the "high road" out of town and left us, the collectors, behind. Why do I have to go to page 4 to find my U.S. coins? The time is ripe for a Third, Third party to open a user friendly Registry for us "the collector" that serve as the fuel for the hobby. Maybe the ANA, hint , hint... A good registry is like a virtual Dansco or Whitman album, with holes to fill and eventually the joy of completing a set. This is where NGC had a huge advantage toward participation. Most serious collector have a mix of PCGS and NGC. In auctions of US coins, currently, the ratio of PCGS coins to NGC is about 3 to 4 to 1 . For world coin auctions it is reversed with NGC dominating by up to 10:1. That maybe why NGC is putting the world coins in front of U.S. on their Registry. Is NGC giving up on the U.S. market? NGC IF YOU IGNORE U.S. COLLECTORS WE WILL GO AWAY!!! Here is what I see as a solution, after having several PCGS coins returned that would not cross ( AFTER NGC GOT THE GRADING FEE) I had an idea. If NGC is so much purer and dedicated to truth and honesty then here is an idea: Submit PCGS coins to NGC to cross (full fee) or just to grade (like the GSA coins.) These coins have no guarantee from NGC if they are left in the PCGS holder, they just get a grade. Because they are still in the PCGS holder they: 1) Don't get included in the NGC population report 2) The NGC grade is affixed to the PCGS holder so the coin can be used in the NGC registry 3) NGC has no liability as they do not provide a guarantee (as stated in the small print by NGC on both GSA and Ancient coins) 4) If the coin is sent in for only an NGC grade but not gross over (the GSA treatment by request) the fee could be reduced (again NGC is not providing a guarantee) (About the guarantee, most of you already know all of this but for those that don't, here it is.)The guarantee is what you pay for. Yes they are guaranteeing the grade in an NGC holder but the big money is in the guarantee the the coin is not a counterfeit. PCGS has certified at least 2 counterfeit coins that they placed into their holders within the last two years. If a person buys that coin, in the original PCGS holder without evidence of tampering, they can go to PCGS and expect to be reimbursed for their loss (the fair market value of the coin.) The grade guarantee is much more difficult to "prove" unless it is a "Red" copper that has turned brown, which is why they don't guarantee color on copper anymore. This would bring me back to NGC and I would be willing to pay to get my PCGS coins on the NGC registry (which I liked better before). But it is hard to look at a Liberty V in a PCGS MS-66 holder that NGC would not cross and then resubmit to cross at MS-65 or 64, Would you do it? John
  3. Confused

    I too agree, the "journals" are worse not better. The registry is also worse and I have cut my time there by 80% (maybe a good thing?) NGC has taken the "high road" out of town and left us collector behind. The time is ripe for a Third, Third party to open a user friendly Registry for us "the collector" that serve as the fuel for the hobby. Maybe the ANA, hint , hint... NGC IF YOU IGNORE US WE WILL GO AWAY!!! Here is what I see as a solution, after having several PCGS coins returned that would not cross ( AFTER NGC GOT THE GRADING FEE) I had an idea. If NGC is so much purer and dedicated to truth and honesty then here is an idea: Submit PCGS coins to NGC to cross (full fee) or just to grade (like the GSA coins.) These coins have no guarantee from NGC if they are left in the PCGS holder, they just get a grade. Because they are still in the PCGS holder they: 1) Don't get included in the NGC population report 2) The NGC grade is affixed to the PCGS holder so the coin can be used in the NGC registry 3) NGC has no liability as they do not provide a guarantee (as stated in the small print by NGC on both GSA and Ancient coins) 4) If the coin is sent in for only an NGC grade but not gross over (the GSA treatment by request) the fee could be reduced (again NGC is not providing a guarantee) This would bring me back to NGC and I would be willing to pay to get my PCGS coins on the NGC registry (which I like better). But is is hard to look at a Liberty V in a PCGS MS-66 holder that NGC would not cross and then resubmit to cross at MS-65 or 64, Would you do it? John
  4. New PayPal policy

    I was burned over 10 years ago by a Dealer selling Silver Dollars by the roll. He was selling on the come, sell then take the money and go buy the roll. He got caught upside down by the metals run up and would not refund, he strung me along for the 30 day protection period and then nothing. He was well known in his community, and I reported him to the Fed's. The bottom line was that it was Visa that ultimately saved the day. I never pay for anything on e-bay with cash or bank transfer unless it is under $10. John
  5. My opinion, for what it is worth, is that the "Royal" Canadian Mint is out of control and abusing the collecting public. Rarity does not always confer value. There may only be 20 or 50 of some of the subject coins, but again my opinion, they are going to be a prolonged flash in the pan. That said, do what you like. But with modern coins be careful about expecting to get a return on your investment in the long run. Just one opinion, John
  6. I would like to add my worth. I agree with a number of the discussants that it is unreasonable to expect NGC to bare the cost of manually and training PCGS coins into their registry. One option, which I suspect PCGS would agree to, is to have PCGS allow NGC to access their database. At that point whatever number you enter, assuming it's a valid PCGS Number would Auto populate the slot with everything from the correct grade and modifier ("+", details grade, etc...." to even the picture if that is available in the PCG S database. It should work as smoothly as when you use the "check certification" on the PCGS (or NGC website for that matter). I think this is a common sense no cost solution. And after experiencing the recent Election that means it clearly will not work. The likelihood of getting PCGS and NGC to cooperate is about is likely as Donald Trump appointing Hilary Clinton to his Cabinet. The reason I even bring this possibility up is because it would actually be in PCGS's best interest. I fear that NGC's decision to stop accepting PCGS will not work out well for NGC (to whom I have greater loyalty). Also the consequences of the current move may further destabilize the coin market, which, I perceive to be somewhat precarious at this time. My worth, John
  7. To Mark: I started a new thread because it had been a week since the original post and I want those, if any, who were looking for the grade to see it. Second based on your definition obviously all coins are in fact net graded. My point was when does an atribute constitute damage versus "negative eye appeal". Grading is subjective by nature but several sources (Such as the ANA grating standards, PCGS Coin Grading and Counterfeit Detection, Photograde, PCGS Photo Grading App, Coin World, Making the Grade...) give objective standard that attempt to instill an element of objectivity to the process. I felt that the coin was a VG, not a Fine, based on the above resources. Is the difference trivial, sure, but the HOBBY is filled with trivia and trivial issues. Those are what appeal to the odd brains of we coin collectors.
  8. But rim damage is not an element in establishing a grade. That is my point if there is enough of a rim "bump" to be damage then it should be "VG details...Rim Damage". John
  9. Has NGC begun net grading coins? First, I apologize for the delay in posting the results, I am a working guy and got busy with my "day job". Thank you all for your thoughtful and insightful comments. Many of you identified correctly that there are rim bumps at the 11 o'clock position and 2 o'clock position. To give you a perspective on the significance of these they do not extend to the reverse of the coin (e.g. they do not involve the full thickness of the coin.) My dilemma is this: Based on all of the grating standards that I've been able to find this coin should grade VG and could possibly even grade Fine. My understanding is that the grade is based primarily on the amount the coin's wear. In different series the sharpness of strike also plays a role usually to add a positive attribute if the coin is well struck (i.e. full head designation for Liberty Standing Quarters, full split bands for dimes, full bell lines for Franklin half dollars...) The conundrum for me is that both PCG S and NGC state that they do not "net grade" coins. If the coin is a problem coin then it is listed as "unable to grade" and then assigned a "Details Grade" using the adjective (i.e. VG details) without a numerical score. This allows "problem coins" to be used in the NGC registry. There "problem coins" are given a value of one half of the lowest number for the category (for example a corroded coin that has uncirculated details gets one half of the score a "no problem" MS--60 coin would get. For people new to the hobby the ANACS historically would take into account problems and assign a "net grade" based on the underlying grade of the coin and the severity of the problem. Although the difference between G and VG is minor, as I looked at the coin I saw a Very Good or maybe even Fine-12 coin that was under graded. Now I am curious as to whether in fact NGC assigned a "net grade" based on a Very Good to Fine coin with rim damage. If so based on their grating policy they should have called the coin out as a problem coin and assigned to details grade. I welcome your input as to whether I should return the coin to NGC to be re-graded. In my opinion it is clearly better than a "Good--6" unless they're calling it a problem coin in which case that should have been stated on the holder. Again I thank you for your thoughtful comments and I await your insights. John See more journals by JTO
  10. I bought this coin and I wanted your opinion: what numerical grade would you give (1-70 Sheldon Scale). This coin is certified by NGC (not a Problem, Details, or No Grade coin). The grade assigned puzzles me and I would be interested in the collective wisdom of the group. I will post the grade, photo of the coin in holder, once I give you all a chance to vote on the grade you would assign as a grader for NGC or PCGS. If you think that the grade would be different between the two major services I would be interested in your opinion on that as well. Thank you for looking and please vote if you have an opinion. John See more journals by JTO
  11. As Gary points out, with the albums the real competition was not with another collector but rather with you, yourself. You competed to fill all the slots. Now with the Registries there is the added component of potentially competing against other collectors. When embarking upon a new Registry set I find the same spark of enthusiasm to fill the slots as when I brought home a new Washington Quarter album, or Franklin Half album. For me adding photography (pictures of each coin) brings it all together. I tried to replicate this with a few custom sets with little satisfaction. The custom sets are, at best, awkward to create. I have put together a complete (except the 1891 “with Motto” Quarter) New Orleans type set (as a custom set) and found that building it was as awkward as the grammar of this sentence. I certainly have seen some of the extraordinary award winning custom sets. They are beautiful!... But they are in fact extra–ordinary and that is fine. The awards that the owners received were certainly hard earned. Like the collection manager, the fields in custom sets are not easy to manipulate. As you build your set you have to carefully think ahead when you assign each coin a slot number to avoid needing to renumber you whole set. The experience is just not the same. Ultimately, for NGC, the proof of the value and quality of “competitive” versus “custom” sets is in the number of members participating in “competitive”, predefined sets, versus the number building custom (non-competitive) free field sets. The vast majority of sets are “competitive” or maybe better described as predefined sets not custom. And as for custom sets are they really non-competitive since they compete for awards as well? For better or worse “competition” in Registry sets is a major driving force the rare and modern coin market today. Otherwise how can you explain the fact that coins such as the 1928-S Peace Dollar in MS-64 has a greysheet value of $900 and the same coin graded MS-65 jumps to $17,000? Is an MS-65 coin really 19 times better looking than one in 64? Of course not. It is competition that drives all of this. Competition breads passion and the million or billion dollar question is: can the competitive passion be passed to the next generation of collectors? If not those who did feel that an MS-65 1928-S peace dollar was 19 times better looking will be left holding a ~$1000 coin that they paid 18.8 times more than it is worth in the market place. John
  12. I think starting competitive sets for so-called dollars would be a win-win for collectors and NGC alike. Coins that are at the top grades for their type, date, and mint mark are becoming quite expensive, whether they are modern issues or 18th Century coins. So-Called Dollars have remained relatively affordable even for top population tokens. NGC is a leader in grading these coins in assigning the appropriate Hibler and Kappen (HK) designation. By opening repetitive sets in So-Called Dollars NGC would open the Registry to more people and allow for serious competition with a lower price tag. The above description is how the collector would benefit. I think that the Numismatic Guarantee Corporation would benefit by #1) as with world coins, make this an NGC only registry, #2) doing this would encourage the submission of So-Called Dollars to NGC that are not currently graded and #3) would step ahead of their major competitor, as they have in world coins, with So-Called Dollars. Just a thought after I purchased the 1901 Pan American Exposition official medical (So-Called Dollar HK--289). I made the purchase simply because I find the token beautiful. John See more journals by JTO
  13. A shattered 1797 Half Cent Here is s coin with a well recognized repunched date (1 over 1). I am curious as to what the markings are to the right of the upper 1. Are they the remnants of the re-punched date? There does not appear to be anything on the reverse to explain them as die clashes. It also has evidence of several major obverse die cracks. The cracks are described in a left-to-right fashion. Die crack #1 that runs from just before 12 O'clock to Miss Liberty's hairline And then appears to angle slightly to the left and disappears in her hair.. A second die crack (#2) from just past 12 O'clock runs in a wandering line that intersects the third crack in a perpendicular fashion just below the "Y" in Liberty. The third crack (#3) is more subtle crack and appears to go from approximately 2 O'clock just to the left of the Y in Liberty and then intersects Miss Liberty at her temporal scalp line. The fourth (#4) crack extends from approximately 4 O'clock upward Ending at the underside of Miss Liberty's nose. Finally there is what I believe is a die clash that extends from perpendicular to crack #3 and extending the intersection of the pole and Liberty's neck. See more journals by JTOThank you for reading my post, I don't presume to be a Numismatic expert, I just enjoy the hobby. I hope some of you have enjoyed this or other of my posts.John
  14. Photo looks great, this is HOBBY. "The enemy of good is better" John
  15. Hi Rick, I do a lot of business with Heritage, mostly buying. Remember that there is a 17.5% buyers premium that heritage tacks on and unless you are well known they will also charge a percentage on the front (seller's premium). You can usually talk you way out of the seller's premium but the buyer's premium is more difficult. If you are selling a Stella in top population or a Hawaiian 5c piece then you can negotiate to get a cut of the 17.5%, i.e. 105% of hammer price. BUT.... if you put in later date coins that don't have something special (top pop, amazing color, ect.) you may expect to get about 20% back of Greysheet (wholesale). It is a pain to sell them yourself but I have found that if there is a dealer that works with the coins you are selling you may be able work out a win, win situation, like ~10% back of Greysheet instead. IF.... your coins are really WOW coins and you think Heritage might find two bidders who are both willing and able to fight for them then you can score some real home runs and cash. My story from the ANA show in Dallas... I had a "problem" Original Gobrecht dollar that had been struck with a "strikethrough error" that someone tried to fix. They committed a felony by "fixing it" but in spite of the crime I thought that the coin was still acceptable. I also had a 1907 St. Gaudens High Relief with a FIN edge (wire rim) graded ANACS AU-55. I bought the coin 15 years ago before I knew that there would be only 2 acceptable holders. I talked with the folks at Heritage who said, and I already believed, that it was not likely to cross (and now they (NGC) break it out to decide.) The Gobrecht was a duplicate and the HR i wanted to use in the Registry,so what to do? The Gobrecht went in the Heritage Auction and the St. Gaudens HR, I traded for a stunning PCGS AU-58 with Jeff Garrett of Mid-America Coins for ~3k. The outcome was disappointing for the Dollar and I was happy with the High Relief deal and with Jeff. I wish I had not let the Gobrecht go that way. Even as bad as that may look to you I think $5k was too low. But that is just me. I wish you good luck and profit, John