How does NGC designate a coin as "SP"? 1 1

[Stephen Parton]

Particularly newly discovered branch mint proofs in the Morgan series. Or more particularly, ones that don't yet have their own SP tier in any database but are obviously unique.

And if something like that is submitted to NGC, should the submitter apply "Variety plus" for closer inspection or would the general graders take some kind of special action?

With the amount of evidence that gets habitually destroyed by the US Mint in just the last 100 years, there would surely be pieces floating around today that don't necessarily have evidence to prove their existence.

[zadok]

assuming u r addressing US coins only in ur inquiry?....

[Alex in PA.]

57 minutes ago, Stephen Parton said:

Particularly newly discovered branch mint proofs in the Morgan series.

You have one?  Could you post a picture?

[Alex in PA.]

There has been much discussion about 'Branch Mint' Proof coins.  Some claims are nothing more than the false designation of 'Proof Like' or 'Deep Mirror Proof Like'.  I would like to hear RWB's take on this.

[Coinbuf]

1 hour ago, Stephen Parton said:

Particularly newly discovered branch mint proofs in the Morgan series. Or more particularly, ones that don't yet have their own SP tier in any database but are obviously unique.

And if something like that is submitted to NGC, should the submitter apply "Variety plus" for closer inspection or would the general graders take some kind of special action?

With the amount of evidence that gets habitually destroyed by the US Mint in just the last 100 years, there would surely be pieces floating around today that don't necessarily have evidence to prove their existence.

I would love to hear more on this subject of "evidence that gets habitually destroyed by the US Mint"; where are you getting your facts from to support this statement.

[RWB]

Philadelphia was the only mint that had the necessary equipment to make true proofs (or master coins a formerly called). Creating proof was much more complicated than simply polishing a die pair and then giving it a hard wack onto a smooth planchet. This far, not one "branch mint proof" has been demonstrated to have been made at the designated mint. Accepting these critters also ignores the practice of Philadelphia making samples from mintmarked dies for use as quality guides for the branch mints. (Examples are San Francisco PPIE commemoratives, new issues at New Orleans, and others.) It is not possible to make a conclusive statement with a simple "it looks like" examination. Some small denomination coins can resemble proofs - at least for a few strikes - but careful comparison with authentic proof coins of the same denomination and date will show clear differences.

Similar "tunnel thought" is seen with some notorious circulation coins -- 1894-S dimes or 1913 Liberty nickels being called "proof."

As for calling a coin "specimen," that is a very risky proposition. There is no accepted definition. It MUST, absolutely, be supported by documentation. Very few exist - notable are the 1921 silver dollars from Denver with their "specimen-ness" engraved on them, or the "first" 1878 Morgan dollar now in the Hayes museum. If there are no documents, then it is simply a nicely produced coin. Collectors and authenticators must accept that die surfaces change during use, and that a piece made from a fresh die will not be identical to one made near the end of use. The two coins mentioned above are good examples, as are the phony "1964 Special Mint Set" coins, and others. These mistakes can be attributed to overzealous examination, and to commercial pressure to make something out of nothing and boost the profit. (Not saying TPGs do this deliberately - but they can be pestered as much as anyone else.)

Edited June 22, 2021 by RWB

[RWB]

2 hours ago, Stephen Parton said:

Particularly newly discovered branch mint proofs in the Morgan series.

Not sure what this refers to. Can the OP elaborate?

[RWB]

As for how NGC or any TPG evaluates a coin and decides it's a "specimen" - the OP will have to ask them. Us mere mortals have no insights.

[zadok]

14 minutes ago, RWB said:

Philadelphia was the only mint that had the necessary equipment to make true proofs (or master coins a formerly called). Creating proof was much more complicated than simply polishing a die pair and then giving it a hard wack onto a smooth planchet. This far, not one "branch mint proof" has been demonstrated to have been made at the designated mint. Accepting these critters also ignores the practice of Philadelphia making samples from mintmarked dies for use as quality guides for the branch mints. (Examples are San Francisco PPIE commemoratives, new issues at New Orleans, and others.) It is not possible to make a conclusive statement with a simple "it looks like" examination. Some small denomination coins can resemble proofs - at least for a few strikes - but careful comparison with authentic proof coins of the same denomination and date will show clear differences.

Similar "tunnel thought" is seen with some notorious circulation coins -- 1894-S dimes or 1913 Liberty nickels being called "proof."

As for calling a coin "specimen," that is a very risky proposition. There is no accepted definition. It MUST, absolutely, be supported by documentation. Very few exist - notable are the 1921 silver dollars from Denver with their "specimen-ness" engraved on them, or the "first" 1878 Morgan dollar now in the Hayes museum. If there are no documents, then it is simply a nicely produced coin. Collectors and authenticators must accept that die surfaces change during use, and that a piece made from a fresh die will not be identical to one made near the end of use. The two coins mentioned above are good examples, as are the phony "1964 Special Mint Set" coins, and others. These mistakes can be attribute to overzealous examination and to commercial pressure to make something out of nothing and boost the profit. (Not saying TPGs do this deliberately - but they can be pestered as much as anyone else.)

re specimen coins above.....pertains to US minted coins....several foreign nations have coins issued n designated as "specimen" strikes etc n the tpgs so designate if coins submitted with orig packaging, no clue how they decide if coins submitted raw....re branch mint proofs, over the years several coins have been auctioned as such but as rwb states, ive never seen any certified as such...eliasberg had a few he bought as such but later sold off, i purchased some of these, none have been certified as such by either the the major tpgs....

[Coinbuf]

The most famous "specimen" U.S. coin I can think of is the dollar owned by TDN, while I don't fully buy the story that is now being told with the coin it has been graded as a specimen by PCGS. 

Edited June 20, 2021 by Coinbuf

[RWB]

5 hours ago, Coinbuf said:

The most famous "specimen" U.S. coin I can think of is the dollar owned by TDN, while I don't fully buy the story that is now being told with the coin it has been graded as a specimen by PCGS. 

What is this critter? I am very skeptical of "finds" of this sort by anyone with a financial interest in the coin or its sale.

[MarkFeld]

43 minutes ago, RWB said:

What is this critter? I am very skeptical of "finds" of this sort by anyone with a financial interest in the coin or its sale.

This one: https://www.pcgs.com/news/the-neil-carter-1794-specimen-silver-dollar-first-ten-million-dollar-coin

[Henri Charriere]

[Unsolicited editorial comment]

It's getting so now a score card is needed to keep up with members' likes and dislikes...

@RWB dislikes 👎 the term "pedigree."

@VKurtB dislikes buying blind (encapsulated or raw) gimmicky photography, and toning.

@MarkFeld ever unflappable, insists any unsupported claims be substantiated with documentation.

@Just Bob a true Southern gentleman, quietly allows his tokens to speak for themselves by narrating their historical backgrounds.

@Hoghead515 I believe all agree, is likely the humblest member the Forum has hosted, and is incapable of exaggerating, much less telling a lie.

(There's much more, but the Moderator's tolerance is wearing thin.)

[MarkFeld]

16 minutes ago, Quintus Arrius said:

[Unsolicited editorial comment]

It's getting so now a score card is needed to keep up with members' likes and dislikes...

@RWB dislikes 👎 the term "pedigree."

@VKurtB dislikes buying blind (encapsulated or raw) gimmicky photography, and toning.

@MarkFeld ever unflappable, insists any unsupported claims be substantiated with documentation.

@Just Bob a true Southern gentleman, quietly allows his tokens to speak for themselves by narrating their historical backgrounds.

@Hoghead515 I believe all agree, is likely the humblest member the Forum has hosted, and is incapable of exaggerating, much less telling a lie.

(There's much more, but the Moderator's tolerance is wearing thin.)

I believe that RWB has stated that which you attributed to me, above.

[Henri Charriere]

1 hour ago, MarkFeld said:

I believe that RWB has stated that which you attributed to me, above.

Maybe in this thread, but to your credit you have many times requested members substantiate their claims.  Quite frankly, if I were in your line of work, I would expect nothing less.  The traits I've cited are fluid; there are members who flat-out reject the term "specimen," but I don't remember who they are.

[GoldFinger1969]

Isn't "SP" a designation that is quite common today on modern coins ? 

I didn't know there were any/many classic coins with that designation outside of special coins like the one Mark linked to.

[Henri Charriere]

23 hours ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

Isn't "SP" a designation that is quite common today on modern coins ? 

I didn't know there were any/many classic coins with that designation outside of special coins like the one Mark linked to.

I haven't checked his link, but yes, in France, their "Mint State" range is broken into two parts:

FDC (fleur de coin) MS-65 to MS-70, and SPL, sometimes rendered SP (splendide) which apllies only to coins graded MS-63 andMS-64. [SUP (Superbe) covers the range from AU-55 to MS-62. In Angleterre, this correlates conveniently to XF/EF, or Extremely Fine.]

An 1899 French Piedfort Essai (double-thick planchet) 20-franc gold 🐓 graded SP-63 presumably by PCGS' European office, sold for $13,440 + shipping from Luxembourg in early 2019.

Edited June 22, 2021 by Quintus Arrius
Clarification of grading used in some European counyries

[VKurtB]

What about brilliant proof piedfort coins? I have several from Great Britain and they have the prefix PF in front of their numerical grade.

[GoldFinger1969]

19 minutes ago, Quintus Arrius said:

I haven't checked his link, but yes, in France, their "Mint State" range is broken into two parts:  FDC (fleur de coin) MS-65 to MS-70, and SPL, sometimes rendered SP (splendide) with a range of from MS-60 to MS-64.

I was thinking more of coins like the Reverse Enhanced Silver Eagles of a few years ago.....NGC graded many of them (great job, BTW !  )....they say "SP".....maybe that stands for Special Proof ?

[Woods020]

Directly from NGC grading guidelines. I would be curious to see the coin in question as well  

Strike Type

MS

Mint State. Coins struck in the same format as circulation issues. Applies to grades 60 to 70.

PF

Proof. Coins struck in a special format for collectors.

SP

Specimen. A hybrid between Mint State and Proof.

[RWB]

10 hours ago, MarkFeld said:

This one: https://www.pcgs.com/news/the-neil-carter-1794-specimen-silver-dollar-first-ten-million-dollar-coin

Thanks. I thought it was a reference to Morgan dollars.

Edited June 21, 2021 by RWB

[RWB]

"Pedigree" refers to a line of reproductive descent. The term is simply wrong when applied to coins. It's the same sloppy, fuzzy meaning language including "burnished," "sintered," "wire rim," "roman proof," etc.

"Provenance" refers to previous possessors.

RE: "....insists any unsupported claims be substantiated with documentation." Yep, I'll adopt that one, too. "proof of claim" is a very simple concept and absolutely applies to "specimen" or other questionable designations.

Edited June 21, 2021 by RWB

[RWB]

Directly from NGC grading guidelines. I would be curious to see the coin in question as well  

Strike Type

MS - Mint State. Coins struck in the same format as circulation issues. Applies to grades 60 to 70.

PF - Proof. Coins struck in a special format for collectors.

SP - Specimen. A hybrid between Mint State and Proof.

These appear to be extreme simplifications without meaningful definitions. They also seem to differ from actual usage – but that’s up to the TPG to fix.
“Specimen” seems more frequently used to mean a specially prepared or struck piece made as a result of a specific event or occasion. Using the NGC definition so-called "one sided proofs" could be labeled specimen.....It is a mule with no hope of progeny.

Edited June 21, 2021 by RWB
Fix formatting

[RWB]

"Particularly newly discovered branch mint proofs in the Morgan series. Or more particularly, ones that don't yet have their own SP tier in any database but are obviously unique."

Stephen - Can you elaborate on this from the original post?

Edited June 21, 2021 by RWB
duplicate

[Henri Charriere]

9 hours ago, Woods020 said:

Directly from NGC grading guidelines. I would be curious to see the coin in question as well  

 

Strike Type

MS

Mint State. Coins struck in the same format as circulation issues. Applies to grades 60 to 70.

PF

Proof. Coins struck in a special format for collectors.

SP

Specimen. A hybrid between Mint State and Proof.

There they are succinctly and correctly for everyone to see. 

MS: notice NGC refers to them properly by their given, quasi-legal name: "circulation," as opposed to "business strikes," (likely an invention of the real estate interests who brought us Soho, Tribeca, Dumbo -- and Clinton, nee Hell's Kitchen);

PF:  I could be wrong but my understanding coincides with that of the pre-Sheldon Red Book. Basically, specially prepared planchets (which were exempt from grading, in the sense that a Proof is forever a Proof).

SP:  I will defer to @RWBon this.  (As noted on a thread elsewhere, SP or SPL is an abbreviated form of "Splendide" in Italy and France which denotes coins graded MS-63 and MS-64 in the USA.)  The use of the term hybrid is simply a curious, p/c attempt to introduce the concept of androgyny to numismatics.  

[Woods020]

3 hours ago, RWB said:

Directly from NGC grading guidelines. I would be curious to see the coin in question as well  

Strike Type

MS - Mint State. Coins struck in the same format as circulation issues. Applies to grades 60 to 70.

PF - Proof. Coins struck in a special format for collectors.

SP - Specimen. A hybrid between Mint State and Proof.

These appear to be extreme simplifications without meaningful definitions. They also seem to differ from actual usage – but that’s up to the TPG to fix.
“Specimen” seems more frequently used to mean a specially prepared or struck piece made as a result of a specific event or occasion. Using the NGC definition so-called "one sided proofs" could be labeled specimen.....It is a mule with no hope of progeny.

I couldn’t agree more. And many SP (what I thought was specimen but I’m sure I’m wrong) has nothing to do with proof like qualities. I thought it was to differentiate it as having different qualities whether it be pattern or other. The NGC definition essentially tells us nothing. 

[RWB]

1 hour ago, Woods020 said:

I couldn’t agree more. And many SP (what I thought was specimen but I’m sure I’m wrong) has nothing to do with proof like qualities. I thought it was to differentiate it as having different qualities whether it be pattern or other. The NGC definition essentially tells us nothing. 

That's probably a good thing since it doesn't seem to be followed anyway....

[MarkFeld]

3 hours ago, Woods020 said:

I couldn’t agree more. And many SP (what I thought was specimen but I’m sure I’m wrong) has nothing to do with proof like qualities. I thought it was to differentiate it as having different qualities whether it be pattern or other. The NGC definition essentially tells us nothing. 

From what I recall, nearly every classic coin I've seen that was labeled "Specimen" - and there have been quite a few - displayed proof-like characteristics.

[Woods020]

4 minutes ago, MarkFeld said:

From what I recall, nearly every classic coin I've seen that was labeled "Specimen" - and there have been quite a few - displayed proof-like characteristics.

I’ll be the first to admit the term as used on coin slabs is not clear to me. 

[MarkFeld]

36 minutes ago, Woods020 said:

I’ll be the first to admit the term as used on coin slabs is not clear to me. 

I doubt that it's clear to anyone. To me, the term generally indicates that the grading company felt that the coin was struck with extra care for a special purpose, but that there's no official documentation of such and the coin doesn't measure up to the standards of a Proof.