PCGS Incorrectly certifies California Fractional Gold

[Christopher Terry]

I recently discovered PCGS has one or more graders that do not understand the basics of California fractional gold identification.  Even a beginner understands that a genuine has to have one of the four words on the reverse:  DOLLAR, DOLL, DOL or CENTS.  This is NOT a one time mistake by PCGS. I have discovered several examples: #1. A customer of mine sent me the attached photos of a Cal TOKEN he submitted to PCGS very recently. It is a token even though it has a BG-933 obverse.  It is not a BG-933 as it does not have a BG-933 reverse. #2. PCGS Coinfacts even had 2 example BG-933's showing.  One a genuine and the second an MS64 token example labeled a BG-933 such as the one pictured here.  They have since pulled the incorrect reference photo. #3. In an upcoming Heritage auction a token again is shown incorrectly attributed as a BG-788.  You simply cannot have 2 totally different die designs used as the same variety. I have been specializing in California fractional for over 45 years and have run this mistake by 2 of the contributors to the Breen Gillio reference on Cal fractional.  They both agree that PCGS is making a huge mistake by certifying tokens as fractionals.  I would appreciate your opinion.

[thebeav]

That's a pretty big mistake !

I'm surprised.....Excuse me for a moment while I put together a submission 

[coinman_23885]

I'm sure PCGS will plead "mechanical error" if these are ever submitted under the guarantee.