JTO

Member
  • Content Count

    101
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by JTO

  1. PCGS does it again making their "New" holder Worse than their old ones. Sometimes I wonder if the people at PCGS are just mean spirited, greedy or maybe both. The new PCGS holders which were introduced a few months ago have added security feature on the bottom of the slab. This consists of a series of capital letters. Presumably to accommodate this feature they made their slabs fatter. Okay... Also, NGC lead the collecting community with the edge view slab and I must say that I strongly prefer it to the old style were the edges are covered by plastic. he'll notice that the new PCGS slabs no longer have this feature. Or maybe if you paid a premium you can get it. Either way...come on. What a surprise, the new PCGS slabs no longer fit in the NGC plastic slab boxes. Since this is one of the primary ways that I store my slabs it has presented me with a bit of the dilemma. They do fit into the intercept shield cardboard box lined with copper to reduce environmental deterioration (corrosion/oxidation). I have a large number of these boxes but after about 5 years the protection becomes exhausted as the Copper molecules in the lining are bound to oxygen. Also the NGC boxes are more space efficient and generally nicer to deal with. Granted NGC had a good thing going by selling their boxes as the only high quality all plastic boxes that fit PCGS, NCG, ICG and ANACS. That is now over. This appears to one collector as one more step in the war between NGC and PCGS that will lead to complete separation and force collectors to choose one or the other. So far NGC, in my opinion, has taken the high road. They include PCGS coins in the NGC registry (exclusive of world coins). There boxes accommodated all relevant slabs, including PCGS. Look at the freedoms and liberties we have given up in the name of security since 9-11-2001. No I'm not saying that something is trivial as coin collecting is in anyway on par with the terrorist attacks on New York. But here is PCGS "upgrading" there slab for "security" reasons in leaving me with a slab lab of lesser quality that doesn't fit into my system. On the whole when put in the perspective of the twin towers my concern is trivial. But this just like the twin towers, it pisses me off. See more journals by JTO
  2. PCGS does it again making their "New" holder Worse than their old ones. Sometimes I wonder if the people at PCGS are just mean spirited, greedy or maybe both. The new PCGS holders which were introduced a few months ago have added security feature on the bottom of the slab. This consists of a series of capital letters. Presumably to accommodate this feature they made their slabs fatter. Okay... Also, NGC lead the collecting community with the edge view slab and I must say that I strongly prefer it to the old style were the edges are covered by plastic. You may notice that the new PCGS slabs no longer have this feature. Or maybe if you paid a premium you can get it. Either way...come on. What a surprise, the new PCGS slabs no longer fit in the NGC plastic slab boxes. Since this is one of the primary ways that I store my slabs it has presented me with a bit of the dilemma. They do fit into the intercept shield cardboard box lined with copper to reduce environmental deterioration (corrosion/oxidation). I have a large number of these boxes but after about 5 years the protection becomes exhausted as the Copper molecules in the lining are bound to oxygen. Also the NGC boxes are more space efficient and generally nicer to deal with. Granted NGC had a good thing going by selling their boxes as the only high quality all plastic boxes that fit PCGS, NCG, ICG and ANACS. That is now over. This appears to one collector as one more step in the war between NGC and PCGS that will lead to complete separation and force collectors to choose one or the other. So far NGC, in my opinion, has taken the high road. They include PCGS coins in the NGC registry (exclusive of world coins). There boxes accommodated all relevant slabs, including PCGS. Look at the freedoms and liberties we have given up in the name of security since 9-11-2001. No I'm not saying that something is trivial as coin collecting is in anyway on par with the terrorist attacks on New York. But here is PCGS "upgrading" there slab for "security" reasons in leaving me with a slab lab of lesser quality that doesn't fit into my system. On the whole when put in the perspective of the twin towers my concern is trivial. The just like the twin towers it pisses me off. To see old comments for this Journal entry, click here. New comments can be added below.
  3. That "shelf like" appearance is usually a dead giveaway for strike doubling. I may be wrong and the NGC guys know their stuff but that does not look like a Doubled Die to me. Just one old guys opinion.... I hope I am wrong, John
  4. Grading services, especially PCGS, seem to give a pass to high ticket or marque coins. I tried this once before but it got bogged down on the peripheral issue of the role of the auctions houses in this issue. It drives me crazy when I send in a perfectly good coin and get it back "code 92" or improperly cleaned or maybe that's code brown. Here is another shining example of a coin that is er... Proof-61? Or should it be Proof Unc details? The upper red arrow shows a protected where the abrasive cleaner could not reach and the lower arrow show the "hairlines" or improper cleaning marks on Liberty's leg. These features eliminate the possibility that these are just highly reflective die polishing marks. What if this were a 1983 Kennedy half with the same surface, what do you think the grade would be? John To see old comments for this Journal entry, click here. New comments can be added below.
  5. Grading services, especially PCGS, seem to give a pass to high ticket or marque coins. I tried this once before but it got bogged down on the peripheral issue of the role of the auctions houses in this issue. It drives me crazy when I send in a perfectly good coin and get it back "code 92" or improperly cleaned or maybe that's code brown. Here is another shining example of a coin that is er... Proof-61? Or should it be Proof Unc details? The upper red arrow shows a protected where the abrasive cleaner could not reach and the lower arrow show the "hairlines" or improper cleaning marks on Liberty's leg. These features eliminate the possibility that these are just highly reflective die polishing marks. What if this were a 1983 Kennedy half with the same surface, what do you think the grade would be? John See more journals by JTO
  6. I found the 1916 in FH I had been waiting for. After a long wait I found a full head 1916 Liberty Standing Quarter with original surfaces and a great strike. What do you all think? The 1916 FH is always much softer than the 1917 FH. In my opinion the 1916 is not really a "type one" to be grouped with the 1917's. It has a completely different master hub. Look at the stars on the gateway or the letters on the obverse and on "United States of America" on the reverse. The stars have a softer edge on the 16 and the letters of the both the obverse and reverse are more rounded on the 1916 compared to the 1917. See more journals by JTO
  7. JTO

    What do you think, Full Head?...

    I found the 1916 in FH I had been waiting for. After a long wait I found a full head 1916 Liberty Standing Quarter with original surfaces and a great strike. What do you all think? The 1916 FH is always much softer than the 1917 FH. In my opinion the 1916 is not really a "type one" to be grouped with the 1917's. It has a completely different master hub. Look at the stars on the gateway or the letters on the obverse and on "United States of America" on the reverse. The stars have a softer edge on the 16 and the letters of the both the obverse and reverse are more rounded on the 1916 compared to the 1917. To see old comments for this Journal entry, click here. New comments can be added below.
  8. My original thesis was that Marquis coins get preferential treatment but I could not leave well enough alone... I am glad that we got the discussion that we got. 21 people felt it worth their time to write a response and over 200 views. The original Title was "Marquis coins get a pass from PCGS" Then I changed it to "Is this fair grading? See the grade PCGS gave and guess who submitted it." The point made by Mark on his posting was a good one. It did not escape my attention that the holder was an middle generation PCGS holder. It is NOT a BLUE (recent label) nor GREEN (OLD) but blackk print on a white background with the bar code. This dates the slab to the 2004 to 2008 time frame. The consequence of that as pointed out bluntly pointed out by Kaiser14 is that Stacks could not have submitted the coin for grading. But to Kaiser14 don't through the baby out with the bath water. The title was what would you grade this coin. The primary thesis if you will was that Marquis coins seem to get the benefit of the doubt in the grading process. Another way to look at the same thing is that both PCGS and NGC and ANACS and PCI want Marquis coins in their holders. Duh... I made a side comment about the auction house and in fairness probably should've saved that for a separate post. But here we are. Remembering back to my first Heritage auction experience in Santa Clara in 1998 my experience has been that coins graded by auction houses tend to get the benefit of the doubt. No I'm not talking about a conspiracy. Coins fairly graded AU55 are not being put in MS65 holders. But for Kaiser14, I will present the second half of my thesis more clearly and as an opinion. When I send in a coin like this its returned details grade CORROSION. When an organization that measures its revenue stream in 100s of millions of dollars submits the same coin it is viewed as Fine 15 with a granular surface. For them scratch or even gouge become contact marks. You get the picture. My opinion only! I am not opining that there is a great conspiracy but rather this is simple economics. Sure the grading is blinded. But when a coin is number 140 of 750 it's not too hard to figure out that you're dealing with a major player and not a small time collector or even dealer. Simple economics. Kaiser14 is America and for better or worse the hobby that we love is based on a thesis of Capitalism. And just to throw more fecal matter in the air the same coin graded at 11 AM on a Monday may get a different level of scrutiny than a coin that finishes the process at 4:59 PM on Friday, its just life. Thanks for the great discussion John To see old comments for this Journal entry, click here. New comments can be added below.
  9. My original thesis was that Marquis coins get preferential treatment but I could not leave well enough alone... I am glad that we got the discussion that we got. 21 people felt it worth their time to write a response and over 200 views. The original Title was "Marquis coins get a pass from PCGS" Then I changed it to "Is this fair grading? See the grade PCGS gave and guess who submitted it." The point made by Mark on his posting was a good one. It did not escape my attention that the holder was an middle generation PCGS holder. It is NOT a BLUE (recent label) nor GREEN (OLD) but blackk print on a white background with the bar code. This dates the slab to the 2004 to 2008 time frame. The consequence of that as pointed out bluntly pointed out by Kaiser14 is that Stacks could not have submitted the coin for grading. But to Kaiser14 don't through the baby out with the bath water. The title was what would you grade this coin. The primary thesis if you will was that Marquis coins seem to get the benefit of the doubt in the grading process. Another way to look at the same thing is that both PCGS and NGC and ANACS and PCI want Marquis coins in their holders. Duh... I made a side comment about the auction house and in fairness probably should've saved that for a separate post. But here we are. Remembering back to my first Heritage auction experience in Santa Clara in 1998 my experience has been that coins graded by auction houses tend to get the benefit of the doubt. No I'm not talking about a conspiracy. Coins fairly graded AU55 are not being put in MS65 holders. But for Kaiser14, I will present the second half of my thesis more clearly and as an opinion. When I send in a coin like this its returned details grade CORROSION. When an organization that measures its revenue stream in 100s of millions of dollars submits the same coin it is viewed as Fine 15 with a granular surface. For them scratch or even gouge become contact marks. You get the picture. My opinion only! I am not opining that there is a great conspiracy but rather this is simple economics. Sure the grading is blinded. But when a coin is number 140 of 750 it's not too hard to figure out that you're dealing with a major player and not a small time collector or even dealer. Simple economics. Kaiser14 is America and for better or worse the hobby that we love is based on a thesis of Capitalism. And just to throw more fecal matter in the air the same coin graded at 11 AM on a Monday may get a different level of scrutiny than a coin that finishes the process at 4:59 PM on Friday, its just life. Thanks for the great discussion John See more journals by JTO
  10. Hi Rick, I may be completely wrong but I think that what you have is a case of Strike Doubling rather than a product of a Doubled Die. With almost 3.4 million sets produced in San Francisco and 50 years for the discovery the odds are against a Doubled Die. If the Die were to have moved between strikes from the Hub (a Doubled Die) there should be at the least hundreds if not thousands of examples. But look, it took more than 60 years to find the Medium High Relief Proof Peace dollar in a dealers junk dollar bin. Although in that case there were less than 20 likely closer to 10 produced. I hope you have found a real 21 century treasure... good luck. John
  11. ridiculous variations in grading standards depending on the coin and who submitted it. I have said it before; Marquis coins submitted by auction houses get upgraded and put in holders that regular coins submitted by regular people would never dream of getting. But was told: "Oh no the grading is completely anonymous and above Board". This coin is in the Stack's auction and as a chain cent would qualify as Marquis coin. If I submitted this coin it would come back with details grading, corroded. How can you explain this coin getting a pass on the corrosion and being slabbed in a regular PCGS Holder? The reverse is worse. Look at the coin and then at the holder, can you honestly tell me that coin belongs in that holder? See more journals by JTO
  12. ridiculous variations in grading standards depending on the coin and who submitted it. PCGS is like a politician, you get the grade you pay for. I first recognize that something was not kosher about 6 years ago when I bid on and won a 1934--S Peace Dollar in a PCGS AU-58 holder from Heritage. The photographs were washed out and that when I got the coin in hand... WOW talk about ugly. At best, the coin should have graded XF-45. I concluded; Marquis coins submitted by auction houses get upgraded and put in holders that regular coins submitted by regular people would never dream of getting. But was told: ...Oh no the grading is completely anonymous and above Board... This coin is in the Stacks auction and as a chain cent would qualify as Marquis coin. If I submitted this coin it would come back with details grading, corroded. How can you explain this coin getting a pass on the corrosion and being slabbed in a regular PCGS Holder? The reverse is worse. Look at the coin and then at the holder, can you honestly tell me that coin belongs in that holder? To see old comments for this Journal entry, click here. New comments can be added below.
  13. Wow, Great writing and story. What are you studying in college? From an ~Old Professor (Univ of Cal, now LSU) John
  14. I have always had my eye on reaching 1 million points but never really thought I would get there. I have a strong predilection for New Orleans coinage. So it seems fitting that the coin the put me over 1 million point mark was a New Orleans issue. I have been looking for this coin in and circulated condition for the past 8-10 years. After careful analysis of auction records there are probably less than 20 truly Mint State examples in the market. Many have come to the auction block multiple times; they have had hammer prices for MS-62 examples range from $4500 to > $10, 000. The 1838--O half dime was, potentially, the very first circulating coin to be produced by the new Branch Mint in New Orleans. For whatever reason, it appears that unlike many other first issue coins, this one was not saved or set aside. This may be because concurrently there was the 1838--O dime. It had both a larger mintage as well as being the larger coin. Because the designs are essentially identical it might of made sense to save the dime and not worry about saving any examples of the half dime. Regardless of the reason the 1838-O half dime is rare in any grade but particularly uncommon in Mint State condition. I've lost this coin at auction more times and I care to remember, has the bidding rose above my comfort zone. This time I put in my bid on Heritage Live and walked away for the computer. When I could wait no longer I found that not only had I won the coin but for the reserve, that was less that the last time it changed hands. I have added it to my custom New Orleans issue type set. And, by adding it to my feeble half dime set it bumped my overall point total over the 1 Mil mark. As a self-admitted coin nerd I know that this must seem pretty sad that something like this would register as an actual milestone for me. But there you have it, in all my nerd glory, what a coin! See more journals by JTO
  15. JTO

    I reached a long awaited milestone

    I have always had my eye on reaching 1 million points but never really thought I would get there. I have a strong predilection for New Orleans coinage. So it seems fitting that the coin the put me over 1 million point mark was a New Orleans issue. I have been looking for this coin in and circulated condition for the past 8-10 years. After careful analysis of auction records there are probably less than 20 truly Mint State examples in the market. Many have come to the auction block multiple times; they have had hammer prices for MS-62 examples range from $4500 to > $10, 000. The 1838--O half dime was, potentially, the very first circulating coin to be produced by the new Branch Mint in New Orleans. For whatever reason, it appears that unlike many other first issue coins, this one was not saved or set aside. This may be because concurrently there was the 1838--O dime. It had both a larger mintage as well as being the larger coin. Because the designs are essentially identical it might of made sense to save the dime and not worry about saving any examples of the half dime. Regardless of the reason the 1838-O half dime is rare in any grade but particularly uncommon in Mint State condition. I've lost this coin at auction more times and I care to remember, has the bidding rose above my comfort zone. This time I put in my bid on Heritage Live and walked away for the computer. When I could wait no longer I found that not only had I won the coin but for the reserve, that was less that the last time it changed hands. I have added it to my custom New Orleans issue type set. And, by adding it to my feeble half dime set it bumped my overall point total over the 1 Mil mark. As a self-admitted coin nerd I know that this must seem pretty sad that something like this would register and an actual milestone for me. But there you have it in all my nerd glory and what a coin! To see old comments for this Journal entry, click here. New comments can be added below.