Some Slabs Better Accepted by Market

By Harry Miller, Coins Magazine
January 04, 2012

Other News & Articles

This article was originally printed in Coins Magazine.
>> Subscribe today!

Over the last 30 years coin certification has had a tremendous effect on grading and most would suggest a very positive one. However, there are pitfalls. One very large one is the proliferation of copycat grading services. These are companies that often have names very similar to reputable well-known companies, but are off-shoots of telemarketers. The coins slabbed (certified) by these companies are usually slightly off quality and would not normally certify at a reputable service.

Coins Magazine One Year Subscription
Coins Magazine One Year Subscription

A hobby leader in providing collectors with important and timely information key to making wise decisions.
Get your subscription today!

Experienced numismatists generally avoid these slabs. Very experienced numismatists will examine these same items and locate an occasional bargain where a coin was undergraded or a variety was overlooked.

The first reputable service was created by the American Numismatic Association and its product consisted of a photo certificate with an obverse grade and a reverse grade. Since the coin was not permanently sealed in a holder, there were immediate issues regarding handling and possible guarantees. So the slab was invented.

Today we have perhaps half a dozen reputable services and hundreds of flaky ones. The pitfall mentioned above is that those new to the hobby or those who just wish to put some hard assets away as insurance often get trapped with the second-rate slabs. The typical telemarketer will offer a coin in, say, an MS-66 holder at something under an MS-65 price, convincing the buyer that it is almost as good as the top brands and look at the price at less than half the going rate. Of course, it should probably be nearer to one-quarter the price.

The reputable services have also contributed to the dilemma by promoting ultra-high grade and first issue items under various titles. These are items made for unsuspecting collectors and unknowledgeable investors who are foolish enough to think that these are actual collectible rarities similar to vintage coins that are truly scarce.

There is absolutely no comparison to a superb gem Morgan dollar and an MS-69 or MS-70 silver Eagle, or a modern commemorative coin. If you don’t agree with this, then go to a major show and see what you get offered for properly slabbed MS-69 silver Eagles. Now if you like silver Eagles, slabbed are a nice way to go, but don’t pay huge premiums for them. They are not rare. Yes, I know certain dates in MS-70 are, but will anyone care 10 or 20 years from now? Most people cannot tell the difference between an MS-69 and MS-70 or even an MS-68 for that matter.

Post tags: , , , , , ,

Coin Grading – Practice Your Grading Skills

By Heritage Auction on November 27, 2011 5:19 AM

… Article Tools …

by Stewart Huckaby for Heritage
CoinWeek Content Partner

Over the last few months, a member of one of the coin forums I participate in has been posting images of some of his Lincoln cents a couple of times a week, with a poll of possible grades, and he keeps track of the results as time goes by. This is a fascinating exercise, not so much because I like Lincolns — I appreciate them, but other series are more my style — but because it allows me the chance to practice my grading skills. I’m not going to say that I’m leading the standings, because I’m not. But then, Heritage doesn’t pay me to grade coins.

Third party grading services such as NGC and PCGS have done good business in recent years by encapsulating, authenticating, and assigning third party grades to coins. While I think they do an excellent job at this for the most part, this doesn’t mean that collectors can rely 100% on the grades printed on the slab. Not all coins assigned the same grade are equal.

CAC has come on the scene recently, and for a fee they will review the grades that the major grading services assign. If the coin is at the upper end of the grade, it gets a green sticker. If CAC thinks that the coin should grade higher than the assigned grade, it gets a gold sticker. Examples of both are illustrated here.

As collectors, it serves us to have an idea ahead of time what a coin’s grade is. Does the coin have a chance at a plus grade? Does the coin have a chance at a higher grade? If the coin is raw (and yes, there are still a lot of raw coins out there), what is its grade by today’s standards? Knowing this can save you money and possibly even make you money over time.

There are resources that will help you learn to grade. For many years, the ANA has published The Official American Numismatic Association Grading Standards for United States Coins; this book is now up to its sixth edition. There are several other books about grading on the market; all are good. Even the Red Book, among its many terrific features, has brief guides on how to grade each series.

coingrading.com covers Heritage Co-Chairman Jim Halperin’s book How to Grade US Coins, a classic in the field, especially when it comes to grading uncirculated coins. And if you don’t want to drag a book or six around with you when you’re visiting a coin dealer or at a coin show, PCGS has a smartphone app, PCGS Photograde, that covers grading of all US coin series.

But, no matter how many of these books you own or have read, you need to practice. This is why I participate in the forum threads I mention at the beginning; it helps to keep me on my grading toes. One of the programs I’ve run at coin clubs is to bring in slabbed with the grades covered up and have everyone in the room assign grades. There haven’t been any prizes involved, at least yet, but this gives everyone a chance to practice their grading skills. If you have raw coins, look at them, with reference in hand, and grade them. Maybe not all of them, but enough to get some practice. It will pay off in the end.

Post tags: , , , , ,

Not All Slabs Earn Respect of Market

By Harry Miller, Numismatic News
November 17, 2011

Other News & Articles

This article was originally printed in Numismatic News.
>> Subscribe today!

Over the last 30 years coin certification has had a tremendous effect on grading and most would suggest a very positive one. However, there are pitfalls. One very large one is the proliferation of copycat grading services. These are companies that often have names very similar to reputable well-known companies, but are off-shoots of telemarketers. The coins slabbed (certified) by these companies are usually slightly off quality and would not normally certify at a reputable service. Experienced numismatists generally avoid these slabs. Very experienced numismatists will examine these same items and locate an occasional bargain where a coin was undergraded or a variety was overlooked.

Strike it Rich With Pocket Change
Strike It Rich With Pocket Change

Get the ultimate treasure-hunting tool for coin collectors!
Get your copy today!

The first reputable service was created by the American Numismatic Association and its product consisted of a photo certificate with an obverse grade and a reverse grade. Since the coin was not permanently sealed in a holder, there were immediate issues regarding handling and possible guarantees. So the slab was invented.

Today we have perhaps half a dozen reputable services and hundreds of flaky ones. The pitfall mentioned above is that those new to the hobby or those who just wish to put some hard assets away as insurance often get trapped with the second-rate slabs. The typical telemarketer will offer a coin in, say, an MS-66 holder at something under an MS-65 price, convincing the buyer that it is almost as good as the top brands and look at the price at less than half the going rate. Of course, it should probably be nearer to one-quarter the price.

The reputable services have also contributed to the dilemma by promoting ultra-high grade and first issue items under various titles. These are items made for unsuspecting collectors and unknowledgeable investors who are foolish enough to think that these are actual collectible rarities similar to vintage coins that are truly scarce. There is absolutely no comparison to a superb gem Morgan dollar and an MS-69 or MS-70 silver Eagle, or a modern commemorative coin. If you don’t agree with this, then go to a major show and see what you get offered for properly slabbed MS-69 silver Eagles. Now if you like silver Eagles, slabbed are a nice way to go, but don’t pay huge premiums for them. They are not rare. Yes, I know certain dates in MS-70 are, but will anyone care 10 or 20 years from now? Most people cannot tell the difference between an MS-69 and MS-70 or even an MS-68 for that matter.

Post tags: , , , , , , ,

The Coin Analyst: Grading Service Guidelines and Clarification on Bullion Coin in 25th Anniversary Silver Eagle Sets

By Louis Golino on November 11, 2011 12:59 PM

… Article Tools …

by Louis Golino for Coin Week

Since my last column on the 25th anniversary silver eagle sets was published, there have been a couple more significant developments that merit discussion.

Collectors who ordered their sets during the first couple hours of sales on October 27 have either already received their sets, or their sets have shipped.  The other orders should be shipping soon. My own orders were received about 3:30pm and are listed as “in stock and reserved,” and my credit card has been charged.  But the sets have not yet shipped.

With Friday being a federal holiday (Veterans Day), I do not expect my sets to ship before Monday at the earliest.

I hope they ship by the middle of the week since I plan to bring them with me to the Whitman Baltimore Expo coin show at the end of next week, where I will be dropping off two sets for grading by PCGS. Although NGC is not accepting in-person submission of the anniversary sets at coin shows, PCGS is, as I learned when I called on November 10.

Neither service will grade the sets at the show, but it is really helpful that PCGS will accept on-site submission for grading at PCGS headquarters, which allows collectors to save a lot on shipping fees. The anniversary sets must be submitted in their unopened boxes as received from the Mint, and with all the packaging and the fancy display boxes, these sets are heavy.  From what I have read from collectors who already have their sets, each one weighs 3-4 pounds. By the time one pays shipping and insurance, plus all the fees associated with grading, the overall expense will be considerable.  At least return shipping from the grading services is based on the coins’ value, not weight.

I will not re-hash all the pros and cons of third party grading here, but the bottom line is that unless one receives 70′s on the majority of the coins, it may not be worth the expense of having them graded. Because it is hard to get the perfect grade on all five coins, sets in which every coin grades MS/PF-70 should command a nice premium, though perhaps not as much as some early prices.

The proof and burnished West Point coins are made to very high standards, and I expect that a large number of them will grade MS or PF-70, probably something in the neighborhood of 50% of the total coins submitted, especially if sent to NGC.

The same is likely to be true of the reverse proof coin and probably also the burnished San Francisco coin.

As Clair Hardesty has noted in online coin forums, the wild card is the bullion coin, which will probably have a lower number of 70′s than the other four coins.

If past history is any guide, I suspect that more sets will be graded MS/PF-70 by NGC than PCGS, and as a result, the PCGS 70 sets are likely to command higher secondary market values.

I think both companies provide useful services, and I am not suggesting that one service is better or worse than the other.  It is just a fact that when it comes to modern coins, PCGS assigns the top grade to fewer coins than NGC does.

Another difference to bear in mind regarding the grading of the anniversary sets is that each service has a different policy on first strike/early release.

First, PCGS will charge you $18 per coin for first strike designation, but NGC provides coins that meet its early release criteria with this designation free of cost.

Second, PCGS stated on November 10 that to be eligible for first strike designation sets need to be postmarked no later than December 7.

At NGC one must opt-out if one does not wish to have coins designated as early releases if they meet the criteria, and coins must be received by NGC by December 8 to be considered early releases. Again, without debating the pros and cons of these designations, and putting aside the well-known fact that there is no way to prove that these coins were actually made first, or are superior in any way, the fact is that PCGS first strike coins do command higher values in the marketplace.

Finally, after releasing initial submission guidelines on November 8, PCGS issued a follow-up on December 10 regarding the bullion coin included in the sets.

There has been some confusion regarding this coin from the beginning. I inadvertently contributed to this confusion by incorrectly stating in my October 28 column that the bullion coin was made in Denver.  As some astute readers explained, Denver has never produced silver eagles.

When these sets were first announced on August 19 at the Chicago ANA, Deputy Mint Director Richard Peterson stated that the bullion coin is from the San Francisco Mint or the West Point Mint.

But PCGS indicated in its November 10 statement that the Mint has explained that there is no way to know for sure if all coins were made in San Francisco.

Consequently, the Mint explained that some coins were made in West Point, but most were made in San Francisco.

So, for those collectors who are concerned that the information on the certificates of authenticity, which says the coins could be from either Mint, are incorrect, the certificates are accurate. Coin World may have contributed to the confusion by reporting on October 31 that the Mint decided to produce all the bullion coins for the sets at San Francisco.

The only way to know for sure if a bullion eagle came from San Francisco or West Point is from the label on the 500-coin “monster boxes.”  Since the Mint did not track this when assembling the sets, collectors will have to live with not knowing which Mint actually produced the coin.

The launch of the anniversary sets is clearly the event of the year for collectors of modern U.S. coins.

Most people feel the Mint did an outstanding job by creating these attractive, low-mintage sets, although some collectors who have received theirs state that the coins were not packed very securely and that coins either came out of the display case, or even came out of their capsules.

And those who will be forced to buy a set on the secondary market continue to be upset that they could not place an order with the Mint before the sell out. Others have had their orders cancelled for seemingly arbitrary reasons like a small mistake on their mailing addresses.

And lots of people seem to be either jealous, or resentful, about the buyers who purchased a couple sets for resale value, a view I find odd since there is nothing wrong with making a profit, especially if one did not violate the Mint’s policies.

Louis Golino - WriterLouis   Golino is a coin collector and numismatic writer, whose articles on   coins have appeared in Coin World, Numismatic News, and a number of   different coin web sites. His column for CoinWeek, “The  Coin Analyst,”  covers U.S. and world coins and precious metals. He  collects U.S. and  European coins and is a member of the ANA, PCGS, NGC,  and CAC. He has  also worked for the U.S. Library of Congress and has  been a syndicated  columnist and news analyst on international affairs  for a wide variety  of newspapers and web sites.

Coin Rarities & Related Topics: Dimes and Quarters in the ANA Auction in Pittsburgh

By Greg Reynolds on October 19, 2011 11:05 AM

… Article Tools …

News and Analysis on scarce coins,  markets, and the coin collecting community #77

A Weekly Column by Greg Reynolds

The topic this week is several important dimes and quarters that were auctioned by Heritage at the first Fall ANA Convention, on the evening of Oct. 13th, in Pittsburgh. In recent columns, I discussed some gold coins in this same auction event, an 1856-O Double Eagle ($20 coin), the Eliasberg 1796/5 Half Eagle ($5 coin), and the Norweb 1854-S Quarter Eagle.  This auction also included copper and nickel coins, plus other numismatic items. The total of the prices realized was more than fifteen million.

The gold coins in this auction were relatively more important and famous. These tended to bring stronger prices than the silver coins. Plus, a collector consignment of a set of Liberty Head Quarter Eagles ($2½ gold coins) drew a lot of attention.

There is just not time or space to cover all the significant items in a major coin auction, nor is it practical to discuss herein all the significant dimes and quarters. So, each of my selections is based upon one or more of the following factors: (1) coins that I have personally examined, (2) coins that are rare or are condition rarities, (3) coins that are particularly appealing because of their high degree of originality, (4) coins that have important pedigrees, (5) coins that are traditionally popular with collectors, and/or (6) coins that realized strong prices in this auction event.

I. Expensive or Inexpensive?

Although this is not one of them, many of my columns and articles are directed towards beginners and/or people who cannot afford to spend a lot of money on coins. There is no need to spend a lot of money to collect coins that are considered significant in the traditions of coin collecting in the U.S.

About a year ago, with contributions from a few carefully thinking dealers, I presented advice for beginning and intermediate collectors of U.S. coins. In February, with input from John Albanese and Kris Oyster, I devoted a column to Basics for Beginners. Furthermore, during the spring, I wrote introductory pieces, which are appropriate for beginners and are intended to be useful to non-rich collectors. These include introductions to collecting Two Cent Pieces, Three Cent Nickels and Dimes. It takes just a small amount of money to get started in such quests.

When covering major coin auctions, it makes sense to discuss expensive coins. It is true that most collectors cannot afford the individual coins that tend to be very newsworthy or lend themselves to extended discussions for other reasons. This generally does not, and should not, discourage collectors from reading about expensive coins.

To understand 19th century art, there is a need to read about paintings that only a few people can afford. To understand scarce and rare U.S. coins in general, there is a need to learn about coins that are very expensive.

II. 1796 Dimes

There were three 1796 Draped Bust Dimes in this auction. These are important for several reasons, not the least of which is that U.S. Dimes in general were first minted in 1796.

One of the three is NGC graded “MS-62” and has a sticker of approval from the CAC. It was part of the “Milly Chaykin Collection.” In Jan. 2005, this same dime was auctioned by Heritage as part of the Richard Chouinard Collection. He was one of the few collectors who actually acquired a very large number of scarce or rare coins by attending auctions in person. During the 1990s, Chouinard was present at innumerable coin auctions. He collected coins from the 1940s to around 2003 or 2004.

In Jan. 2005, this NGC graded “MS-62” 1796 dime sold for $16,100. It was then, or soon afterwards, acquired by the late Jack Lee, a famous collector and part-time dealer from Mississippi. According to Heritage, Lee consigned this dime to a November 2005 auction, in which it sold for $14,950.

On Oct. 13, 2011, it brought $21,850, not a very strong price. Current market levels for such a coin are markedly higher than they were in 2005.

This dime seems to have a lot of friction for a “MS-62” grade coin. A certified “MS-62” 1796 dime that is more clearly uncirculated might have brought much more in this auction.

Yes, I know that 1796 dimes tend to be characterized by weakly struck design details. The most famous of the three 1796 dimes in this auction has a particularly weakly struck eagle on the reverse (back of the coin). The NGC graded “MS-64” 1796 in this auction was previously in the Ed Price Collection, which featured incredibly comprehensive sets of Draped Bust Dimes and Bust Right Quarter Eagles.

Ed Price had representatives of all die pairings of 1796 dimes, and this is one of six varieties of 1796 dimes. Heritage auctioned the Ed Price collection on July 31, 2008, just as markets for rare coins in general peaked. This dime then brought $34,500.

Earlier, Heritage auctioned this same 1796 dime in Nov. 2004 in West Palm Beach for $23,000. It was then PCGS graded MS-63. In October 2011, it sold for $54,625, a very strong price.

This Ed Price 1796 dime has naturally toned nicely, mostly brownish-russet, with a lot of blue. There are exceptionally few contact marks on this coin. The weakly struck reverse is unsurprising. Overall, it is a very attractive coin.

A third 1796 dime in this sale is certified by a service other than the PCGS or the NGC, which is unusual. Expensive pre-1934 U.S. coins in major coin auctions are typically PCGS or NGC graded, unless they are judged by the PCGS or the NGC to be ungradable. In any event, I was not impressed by this coin. Jim McGuigan suggests that it has been artificially toned. This circulated 1796 sold for $7475, a strong price and not a good deal.

III. 1832 Capped Bust Dimes

There were two certified “MS-65” 1832 Capped Bust Dimes in this auction. The first is NGC certified and brought $4614.95, not a high price. The second is PCGS certified and CAC approved. I did not see either of them.

Mark Feld regards this second 1832 as “a nice accurately graded coin, though not especially attractive or lustrous.” Feld was a full-time grader for the NGC for more than seven years, in the 1990s. This second 1832 dime went for $8625, a very strong price

IV. “MS-69” 1874 Dime

Only a very small number of business strike Liberty Seated Dimes have been certified as grading “MS-69.” The Eliasberg 1845-O dime is PCGS graded “MS-69.” The Knoxville-Lull 1853 ‘Arrows’ Dime is NGC certified “MS-69” with a star for eye appeal. The 1874 dime in this auction was also formerly in the James Lull type set. The Knoxville-Lull 1853 ‘Arrows’ is, in my view, clearly superior to this Lull 1874. B&M-Spectrum auctioned James Lull’s type set in Fort Lauderdale, on Jan. 9, 2005.

Later, this James Lull 1874 dime was in the “Joseph Thomas” Collection, most of which Heritage auctioned in April 2009. This dime then realized $51,750, the exact same price that it realized on Oct. 13, 2011.

Indisputably, this is a cool coin, with appealing natural toning. In my opinion, its grade is not close to the MS-69 level. If many leading experts determined that it really does merit a grade of “69,” then it would have sold for substantially more than $51,750.

V. 1805 Quarter

An 1805 quarter in this auction is a pleasing representative of a Very Fine grade Draped Bust, Heraldic Eagle quarter. This 1805 quarter is PCGS graded VF-20 and has a sticker from the CAC.

The 1805 quarter issue is not a rarity. Quarters of the Draped Bust, Heraldic Eagle type are somewhat scarce overall. Also, many circulated Draped Bust quarters are ungradable.

This 1805 quarter has pleasant natural toning and very few contact marks. It was well struck on a relatively high quality planchet (prepared blank). While it is not the most attractive Draped Bust Quarter that I have ever seen, it is very appealing in its own way.

The $1495 result for this 1805 quarter is strong, about in the retail price range. This result is, though, a little less than I expected. It was part of the consignment of a collection. If a collector bought it, he or she obtained an especially desirable coin at a very fair price.

VI. 1807 Quarter

An 1807 quarter in this auction is newsworthy because it is one of only four 1807 quarters that have been certified as grading “MS-66” or “MS-67” by the PCGS or the NGC.

The Draped Bust, Heraldic Eagle type comprises of only five dates, and a very small number have been certified as grading “MS-66.” The Eliasberg 1807 is the only coin of this type that I have ever seen that merits a MS-67 grade. I wonder if the PCGS and NGC listings, respectively, of one “MS-67” 1807 both refer to the same Eliasberg 1807.

This 1807 is NGC graded “MS-66” and it brought $115,000 in this auction, a strong price. Yes, I know that the PCGS price guide retail value is “$225,000.” This value is a little high in general and my guess is that the PCGS would not grade this coin as “MS-66.” It is relevant that the PCGS price guide value for a “MS-65” 1807 is “$120,000.”

I am not comfortable with this coin. Jim McGuigan and I compared our respective notes regarding this specific coin, and our views are mostly consistent. For decades, Jim has been a recognized expert in pre-1840 U.S. coins. This coin does not have enough eye appeal to merit a 66 grade and does not score very high in the category of originality.

Jim and I both noted a substantially imperfect, sizeable area near the first and second stars on the obverse (front of the coin). It is hard to tell whether the strange texture in this area can be largely explained by U.S. Mint caused imperfections that were later lightly cleaned over by a non-knowledgeable collector or whether the imperfections in this area are indicative of serious problems that came about after this coin left the Philadelphia Mint. If such problems are minor, then this coin grades “64 or 65,” in Jim’s view.

I also asked a leading grading expert of gem quality coins about this 1807. While he declined to be named in this context, he stated that he does “not think” that the grade of this coin is close to the MS-66 range. He also suggested that its grade should be a high end “64 or a 65.”

McGuigan points out that “it is pretty well struck” for a Draped Bust, Heraldic Eagle quarter. Yes, the reverse has tremendous detail and Miss Liberty is well struck, too. It is also fair to point out that it has hardly any contact marks. Jim and I are in agreement that, if it has serious problem and it may have, it should not have received a numerical grade. It otherwise grades at least 64, in accordance with prevailing grading standards. The $115,000 result is really more than I expected this coin to bring. The price realized was strong.

VII. 1853 ‘No Arrows’ Quarter

My favorite silver coin in this auction is an 1853 ‘No Arrows’ Liberty Seated Quarter. Because the 1853 ‘Arrows & Rays’ Liberty Seated Quarter is a famous one-year type coin, collectors sometimes forget that the 1853 ‘No Arrows’ Quarter is very scarce, or perhaps rare, in all grades. In contrast, thousands of 1853 ‘Arrows & Rays’ Quarters exist, though these will always be more valuable because they are needed for many type sets. Even so, Mark Feld emphasizes that the 1853 ‘No Arrows’ quarter is “a really tough” date to find in gem grades.

This 1853 quarter is NGC graded MS-67 and has a sticker from the CAC. The NGC holder is of an early vintage as it lacks a hologram on the back. On average, though not nearly always, coins in early PCGS or NGC holders tend to be worth more than equivalently certified coins in later holders.

The catalogue indicates that this coin is from “The George Marin Collection.” It is certainly much more appealing than the Richmond Collection 1853 ‘No Arrows’ Quarter, which DLRC auctioned on March 7, 2005 for $11,212.50 and Heritage auctioned in Jan. 2007 for $13,800. The Richmond coin is also NGC graded “MS-67.”

This Marin 1853 ‘No Arrows’ Quarter is a wonderful coin. It features exceptional natural toning, with soft blue centers and orange-russet outer fields. Other shades of blue and russet are present, as well as some violet hues. In addition, there are almost zero noticeable contact marks. Furthermore, it is sharply struck. It is very attractive to extremely attractive overall. The Marin 1853 ‘No Arrows’ Quarter almost has the eye appeal that would be associated with a MS-68 grade Liberty Seated Quarter.

Mark Feld states that “it looks original and solid for the assigned grade.” I graded this 1853 ‘No Arrows’ Quarter as 67.7 the first time I saw it and as 67.6 the second time. Later, I found that my interpretation of this coin is extremely consistent with that of Matt Kleinsteuber. This is a “very nice coin, solid 67, maybe 67 plus,” Matt declares. Kleinsteuber is the lead trader and grader for NFC coins.

The Marin MS-67 1853 ‘No Arrows’ Liberty Seated Quarter sold for $21,850. In my view, this is a very fair price, less than I expected.

VIII. 1878 Carson City Quarter

The 1878-CC Liberty Seated Quarter in this sale was also “From the George Marin Collection,” according to the catalogue. Mr. Marin had some excellent coins. Furthermore, Carson City, Nevada Mint coins tend to have a special allure and a devoted following. (Please see my report about a set of CC Half Eagles that was sold privately in 2010.) Some people collect only Carson City Mint coins and others integrate Carson City Mint coins into extended type sets, especially sets that include representatives of each Branch Mint.

The Marin 1878-CC quarter is PCGS graded “MS-66” and has a CAC sticker. “A coin with a highly pleasing appearance, particularly on the obverse,” says Mark Feld about this 1878-CC. Mark “wouldn’t be the least bit surprised to see it in a 67 holder one day.”

Like several of the other coins in this collection, this 1878-CC quarter is in an old holder. This one is from the 1980s. Unless such an old holder is badly scratched or damaged, it is usually a good idea for the old holder to be maintained. Coins in old PCGS or NGC holders often realize premiums in auctions.

I very much like this coin. There is no doubt that its grade is at least in the middle of the MS-66 range. Moreover, it has terrific cartwheel luster. The obverse has much appealing natural toning. The reverse is mostly white and brilliant. The Marin 1878-CC is more than very attractive. This quarter deservedly brought an extremely strong price, $12,650.

IX. Two 1901-S Quarters

The leading key date in the series of Barber Quarters is the 1901-S. Indeed, this is one of the most valuable of all 20th century coin issues. Even in Good-04 condition, a 1901-S Barber Quarter may retail for more than $4000! Tens of thousands of collectors fervently demand 1901-S Quarters. In this auction, there were two ‘Mint State’ 1901-S Quarters.

The more highly certified of the two is NGC graded “MS-66” with an NGC awarded star for eye appeal. Although no pedigree is mentioned in the catalogue, I note that Heritage auctioned this exact same 1901-S quarter in April 2009 for $80,500, when coin markets in general bottomed out. It was then part of the “Joseph Thomas” Collection. Moreover, I believe that I have identified it as being the Richmond Collection 1901-S, which DLRC auctioned on March 7, 2005 in Baltimore. I was not thrilled about it when I saw it then either. I covered the DLRC sales of the Richmond Collection for Numismatic News newspaper. If my pedigree research is correct, this same 1901-S quarter sold for $66,125 in 2005.

Matt Kleinsteuber recollects that this coin reminded him of “Mint State 1913-S quarters because most of them are semi-prooflike like this 1901-S.” Matt says that his coin is “okay for a 6 star” and he “likes it.”

I did not grade it as “MS-66.” I acknowledge, however, that it is flashy and cool in an unusual way. It is entertaining.

The Richmond-Thomas 1901-S just sold for $86,250 on Oct. 13th. While other certified MS-66 1901-S quarters are or should be worth more, this amount is a strong price for this specific coin.

I am more enthusiastic about the NGC graded MS-64 1901-S Barber Quarter in this auction. It has a CAC sticker. Kleinsteuber remarks that it is a “very nice coin, [with] wonderful blue and red original toning, a true gem, [should] really grade 65.”

Although the catalogue does not indicate that is from “the George Marin Collection,” it is in a very ‘old’ holder like many of the coins from the Marin collection. I recommend that the buyer keep this coin in its present ‘old’ holder rather than ‘crack it out’ to seek a “MS-64+” or “MS-65” grade. Great coins in old holders really impress experts and excite collector-buyers. Besides, it may not upgrade.

This 1901-S is exceptionally original overall and has terrific multi-colored natural toning. Viewing it was very pleasurable.

©2011 Greg Reynolds

J&T Coins LLC  is Pleased to Offer Drapped Bust and Capped Bust (1796-1838) 25c Silver Quarters.

Specializing in circulated grades VG thru AU-58 - graded by NGC, PCGS, ANACS, ICG & SEGS and raw coins. All come with a 100% money back guarantee. Good honest coins with good honest wear.  Click here to see our inventory in Draped Bust and Capped Bust 25c Silver Quarters.

Should have any questions at all call us at 866-267-6024.

J&T Coins LLC est. 2001.

 

The Coin Analyst: Are MS-70 Coins “Value Traps”?

By Louis Golino on June 23, 2011 12:01 AM

By Louis Golino for CoinWeek

A quarter century after the establishment of the first professional coin grading companies, many coin collectors remain skeptical of the benefits of third party grading. For many of them buying raw, ungraded coins is a kind of badge of honor that shows they have not succumbed to the mania for plastic holders. They rely on their own ability to grade coins and believe third party grading is a waste of money.

There is no question that the grading companies are not perfect. Sometimes they make mistakes, giving a grade that is clearly too high or too low for a coin. But overall, they perform useful functions by authenticating coins, protecting consumers from subjectively graded coins, adding market value in many cases, and generally facilitating the buying and selling of coins.

The grading of modern U.S. Mint coins has become a huge cottage industry for the grading companies and a major source of revenue for them, especially with all the large bulk orders they receive from dealers. But the grading of these coins continues to be especially controversial for a number of reasons. Some collectors feel slabbing reduces the value of coins, no matter what grade they receive. They think slabs are like caskets and prefer to be able to view the coin more closely. Others are convinced their coins are mishandled during the grading process, or that Mint capsules offer better protection than slabs. I am doubtful of both propositions.

In addition, the labeling of coins delivered to third party grading companies within 30 days of their release as “first strikes” or “early releases” remains controversial. There is no way to prove those coins were actually struck first. But some coins were hard to obtain within 30 days of their release because of delays in processing Mint orders, such as the 2009 Ultra High Relief double eagle, and UHR’s with the first strike or early release labels do bring higher premiums than coins without the label.

Perhaps most importantly, there is a growing preference among collectors and dealers for modern coins in their original government packaging (OGP) over the same coin in a slab of any grade or grading service. Some people view modern coins which are graded MS69 or below as “damaged goods.”

Modern coins which receive the top grade of MS70 are viewed with skepticism by some collectors and dealers. That is because the Mint tends to produce collector coins to very high standards, for the most part, and virtually any coin submitted for grading will receive either MS or PF69 or 70, although once in a while one gets a coin back with a 68 grade or lower. There are some exceptions to this general rule. The bullion versions of the five ounce America the Beautiful coins, for example, have not received grades higher than MS69 from PCGS and NGC, but the collector versions have produced plenty of MS70 coins.

The main problem with modern MS70 coins is that their market value is largely a function of the population numbers for the coin in question in the top grade, and those numbers change all the time as more coins are submitted and come back as 70′s. A lot of collectors of modern U.S. coins make the mistake of paying a high premium for a 70-graded coin when it is relatively new to the marketplace, and over time the value of their coin declines substantially as the population numbers in that grade continue to increase because more people submit their coins.

So the first recommendation I would make is if you are not submitting coins yourself which come back as 70′s, and you are buying previously-graded coins which received the top grade, wait until the coin is no longer new to the market. Track how the premium for that coin in 70 evolves over time before purchasing one. There is no set amount of time, and clearly one can wait too long, but it is a good rule of thumb with modern coins not to get too caught up in the hype that tends to surround recent releases.

In addition, shop around. There are times when one can purchase 70′s for a very small premium over raw coins. For example, last year I was able to purchase a 70 of a certain precious metal coin for virtually the same price the Mint charged for a raw coin. In this case, I acted sooner rather than later because I knew the coin was a great deal. Today it carries a nice premium.

Third, if you collect top-graded modern coins, I would suggest avoiding those from companies other than NGC and PCGS. There are certainly other grading companies which are reputable such as ANACS and ICG, but they tend to use different standards when assigning grades to modern coins than do the two top companies.

Fourth, even experienced collectors and dealers have difficulty telling the difference between a 69 and a 70. Examine your coin from the Mint for possible flaws, and if possible obtain the opinion of a local dealer who has more than likely seen a lot more coins than you have. Grading fees, especially at NGC and PCGS, are costly, especially if you add fees for first strike coins, and in most cases, if you do not receive a 70, you will have overpaid. Dealers send in lots of coins at once and can be assured of getting some 70′s that will recoup a lot of their grading fees, but most collectors are not submitting large numbers of coins at once, so it is a gamble. In addition, the competition for registry sets sometimes drives the prices of very common coins in perfect grades to levels that do not make any sense such as MS70 Lincoln pennies that have sold for more than $10,000.

Finally, the market for MS70 coins as opposed to those in OGP is evolving. I recently attended the Baltimore Expo and had the opportunity to discuss this issue with John Robinson of Edgewood coin store in Florida. He told me that his company pays more for modern coins in their OGP than for slabbed versions, including MS-70′s, which surprised me. In his view thirty party grading is really only suitable for classic coins.

But remember that some coins graded MS70 are worth a lot more than raw or MS69 examples. A case in point is the rare, proof-only 1995-W silver eagle, which has a value in MS70 that is ten times its value in OGP or MS69. In addition, if you are trying to get a good price for an MS70 coin, sell it to a company that specializes in modern coins such as John Maben’s Modern Coin Mart.

Louis Golino is a coin collector and numismatic writer, whose articles on coins have appeared in Coin World, Numismatic News, and a number of different coin web sites. He writes a bi-weekly column for Coin Week called “The Coin Analyst.” He collects U.S. and European coins and is a member of the ANA, PCGS, NGC, and CAC. He has also worked for the U.S. Library of Congress and has been a syndicated columnist and news analyst on international affairs for a wide variety of newspapers and web sites.

Post tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Coin Profiles: San Diego Collection of Proof Seated Dollars

By Dan Duncan on June 7, 2011 7:03 AM

By Dan Duncan

Pinnacle Rarities is proud to announce the purchase of the San Diego Collection of Seated Dollars, an amazing grouping featuring fourteen of the sixteen possible dates from 1858 to 1873. Selected by an astute California numismatist, each example is an exquisite treasure.

Collectively, this accumulation is one of the finest assembled collections of this scarce proof type. All the specimens are at or near the top of the PCGS population report, with every date chosen for premium eye appeal attributes and original patination.

The Seated series is from a captivating period in both the nation’s history and the Mint’s. The series in all its denominations saw at its inception a budding nation pushing west, and during it’s midlife, the Civl War. The Seated coin’s demise came as we had grown industrially to a nation whose monetary concerns were focused on international trade. The demand for silver as a unit of foreign trade caused much of the mint state examples to be exported to the Orient.

Many of the proof survivors are more plentiful today than their mint state counterparts. However, with most mintages under a thousand coins and 150 years of attrition, choice examples of the proofs are quite elusive.

The design was born from desire for new designs that implemented the technological changes the Mint had undergone. Steam presses had been employed and new machinery made the processes to create the dies from plaster models greatly improved. The new Mint Director Robert Patterson and Chief Engraver William Kneass both envisioned a new uniform design that would take advantage of the new machinery and ease production restraints for faster production with better quality output. Design work done previously by Kneass was rejected. Patterson commissioned Thomas Sully, a renowned painter, to create renderings of a seated motif similar to the Britannia coinage circulating at the time. Kneass suffered a stroke in 1836 and the Mint turns to Christian, employing him at first as the second engraver.

Gobrecht prepared dies and dollars were struck for the first time since the early 1800′s. For the obverse of this dollar (now called the Gobrecht dollar), he used Sully’s seated rendering. He modeled the reverse after a sketch by Titan Peale. This “onward and upward” eagle was replaced for minor coinage and the subsequent dollars that the mint began producing in 1840.

The numbers produced of the early Seated coins were remarkably low (most in the 15 to 25 coins range). However, beginning in 1858, proof sets were produced for distribution to the public for the first time. Mintages rarely got above 1000 sets and most years production was under 600. Proof dollars are tough in lower grades for most dates starting in 1858, but lower grade examples appear in auctions and on the bourse floor with some frequency. The higher end and gem plus examples remain extremely scarce and usually trade hands privately.

The Collection:

1858 S$1 PCGS PR64+CAM 1858 S$1 PR64+CAM

Proof sets were offered to the public for the first time in 1858. Previously dated proof coins were struck and sold individually. Mint records are quite clear as to mintage figures for the subsequent years, but the exact number of coins struck in 1858 remains a mystery. Estimates have the total mintage between a hundred and three hundred examples. 145 combined total show on the population reports of both PCGS and NGC. While a number of these are regrades or duplicates, the estimate of 100 – 125 known examples is not far off. In cameo this proof only issue is increasingly scarce with PCGS and NGC only grading four coins each with the cameo designation (no deep cameos are known at time of writing).

1861 S$1 PCGS PR64CAM 1861 S$1 PR64CAM

Mintage figures show 1,000 silver dollars were struck for inclusion in proof sets in 1861. Demand had been overestimated and eventually over six hundred sets were melted along with some sets from earlier years. So distribution numbers and a high rate of attrition makes the 1861 quite elusive in all grades. With only 200 coins certified (undoubtedly many of these regrades) only a ten percent sampling display cameo contrast. This example is one of a dozen PR64Cameos graded by PCGS with only one lone example grading finer within the cameo designation. There are a handful of gems graded higher without the CAM grade.

1862 S$1 PCGS PR65 1862 S$1 PR65

The Civil War had begun in full earnest and the branch mints of the south had been seized by the Confederates. While coinage continued at the Philadelphia mint, mintages were decreased, and many of the smaller silver coins were being hoarded. The west coast was less affected by the ravages of the Civil War, and while circulation of coinage slowed on the east, the west saw a rise in silver coinage in use for commerce. 430 proof sets were sold by the Mint, and individual proof coins were no longer available. The low number of Mint State examples keeps date pressure on the 1862, combined with the already inherent scarcity of this issue. Rarely seen in auction, and one of only eleven coins so graded by PCGS, this proves an excellent opportunity to obtain this tough date.

1863 S$1 PCGS PR66 1863 S$1 PR66

1863 was another low mintage year within the Seated dollar series, for both mint state and proof coins alike. The Civil War had caused the suspension of paper specie payments in 1862, and many of the dollars of the era (both proof and business strikes) were hoarded. While obtaining sets from the Mint was cumbersome, many collectors (mostly north easterners) cherished the examples they plied from the Mint. The result, despite the low mintage, is a good survival rate in the near gem and better grades for the date in relation to other dates, despite low mintage figures.

Higher end examples are infrequently traded in the open market or at auction, and this date is seemingly readily available in PR64 and lesser grades. But superb gem examples are exceedingly rare and the present example resides near the top of the population reports with only 8 coins so graded by PCGS and one example deemed finer.

1864 S$1 PCGS PR65 1864 S$1 PR64

Similar in many aspects to the 1863, this Civil War issue was one of low mintage figures, date pressures from scarce mint state examples and a subject of hoarding in the mid to late nineteenth century. China was buying up all available silver coinage especially the piece of eight. The greenbacks had devalued to be worth only a fraction of face value in silver coin, so hoarding of such coins was commonplace. The examples of proof dollars obtained from the mint came through the sale of sets and as many as 470 sets were sold.

An amazing example and surely one of the finest with only sixteen coins so graded and one lone example deemed finer by PCGS.

1865 S$1 PCGS PR65CAM 1865 S$1 PR65CAM

1865 was the last year of the Civil War, and the mint continued to scale back production of the dollar coinage, but continued work in earnest on the other denominations including the new two cent coinage from 1864 and the first nickel coins, which began the following year. 500 proof dollars were produced and delivered in lots of 100. These were sold alongside the other denominations in silver proof sets. While lower grade examples from this date frequent the auction block, gem and cameo examples remain quite elusive.

This Cameo example is one of only eight coins so graded by PCGS, with nothing graded finer within the designation and only a lone 66DCAM with no 65DCAMS.

1866 S$1 “Motto” PCGS PR66CAM 1866 S$1 PR66CAM

This was the first year that the motto “In God We Trust” was added to the dollar coinage. With only a couple 1866 “No Mottos” known, collectors have to settle for one type of this year. Being the first year for the type, this dollar gets collector pressure from both type collectors and date collectors who find the MS examples extremely scarce. With the mintage of only 725, the coin remains scarce in the gem plus grades, especially with cameo and deep cameo designations.

The present example is one of only four coins so graded with a lone 68CAM better. A number of deep cameos have been graded, with nothing achieving a numerical grade higher than six. With that, and the spectacularly original appearance it is no stretch to place this example near finest known.

1867 S$1 PCGS PR66+ 1867 S$1 PR66+

During the middle of the nineteenth century much of the silver dollar production was not used to circulate commercially. Rather many of the commercial strikings were exported for their silver content mainly to China. Despite jockeying the alloy weights, which stimulated the need and use of the smaller coinages and circulating gold denominations, the Orient and other places abroad absorbed most of our nation’s silver dollar production. This scarcity in mint state examples pressured the availablility for the date in proof condition. By 1867, demand for proof sets had risen slightly, but mintages remained fairly low with only 725 sets produced in 1867. The dollars again were only distributed through these silver proof sets.

This is the highest numerically graded proof example for the date with a lone non-plus six having the DCAM designation, technically making this the coveted finest graded, barre none. Examples of this quality are often sold via private treaty with few superb gem example reaching the auction block.

1868 S$1 PCGS PR65+ 1868 S$1 PR65+

Our dollar traded in the Orient at a discount to the other coinage that was circulating internationally at the time – namely the Spanish milled dollars. Newly appointed director Dr. Henry Richard Linderman realized our dollar was not accepted by Chinese merchants except at a discount. He began to push for a new dollar. A number of individuals had begun a push for international currency and bimetallic coinages. Regardless, proof sets continued to be produced by the Mint with 600 silver sets being coined in 1868. As with previous years, the bulk of the mint state examples were gobbled up (albeit at a discount). The phenomenon again puts date demand pressure on choice proof examples from type and seated date collectors alike.

This is an amazing example with a small population of only one example with four coins grading finer. No cameos are graded by PCGS better than PR65.

1869 S$1 PCGS PR65 1869 S$1 PR65

Previous decades had seen the United States import nearly all of the silver used in production of the nation’s coinage. This changed with the discovery of the Comstock Lode. A new tax on the Mexican peso spurred a renewed demand for silver dollars. The Mint again upped their mintage figures, but despite increased foreign demand and increased supply, newer coined dollars often found their way into government vaults as a practical way to store silver. However, even with the higher mintage, the date as a whole remains quite scarce in both mint state and proof.

1870 S$1 PCGS PR65 1870 S$1 PR65

By 1870 a number of bills were introduced to either suspend the dollar coinage or readapt the denomination either with more or less silver content. Arguments were from a number of angles, but in a nutshell they are based on the fact that four quarters wasn’t equal to the silver in a dollar, and the silver in a dollar coin wasn’t equal to that of a gold dollar. The greenbacks still circulated, but not on par with their gold and silver counterparts. There was a hue and cry to rectify this. The new mints in Carson City NV, and San Francisco CA had begun churning out coinage including a limited number of silver dollars. Dollars from both branch mints remain extremely scarce today. Proof mintage was upped to 1000 examples, and Philadelphia produced 415,000 dollar meant for circulation.

Only a handful of examples have been graded Proof 65 with four non-cameos grading higher. There are a few gem cameos and DCAMs, with a lone PR66DCAM at the top of the population report.

1871 S$1 PCGS PR65+CAM 1871 S$1 PR65+CAM

Proof sets were becoming increasingly popular and the dollars were issued in both minor and silver proof sets. 1871 was the second highest proof mintage for the motto series. The flurry of patterns continued to pour out of the mint toward the ultimate demise of the seated coinage in the coming few years.

This date is not as available with cameo designations as the previous few years.

1872 S$1 PCGS PR65+ 1872 S$1 PR65+

Business strike mintage figures had swollen to 1,105,500 coins, a record for dollars to the date. While some were exported as with earlier decades, many found their way into domestic commerce channels. The proof mintages were only slightly lowered with 950 coins for sale in sets delivered throughout the year, indicating a demand for the silver, and minor sets which included these coins.

This example has some of the doubling in the letters IN GOD, that is mentioned by Walter Breen in his Encyclopedia of U.S. Coins, and by Bowers in the first of his Silver Dollar tomes. With only a couple cameo designated examples in 65 and 66, it is hard to believe any coin available is much nicer than the present example. This is spectacular gem with electric colors residing at the top of the pop report.

1873 Seated S$1 PCGS PR66 1873 Seated S$1 PR66

By 1873 the seated dollar had finally worn out its welcome. The approval of the Trade dollar design and weights caused the dollar to loose any usefulness and was discontinued by the Act of 1873. This act also removed the two-cent piece, the three cent silver and the half dime from the mint’s obligations. The weights of the other minor coinages were changed. Undistributed examples were melted as were 2,258 proof dollars of unspecified years (including 1873).

This specimen was struck using the same reverse dies as in 1872 and 1871, showing a doubling of the letters IN GOD. The present example is an uncannily beautiful coin and is among the finest with only one deep cameo grading higher than PR66.

The proof seated dollar series is one that spans a historical period where the west was won, a civil war was fought, and the United States went from a fledgling nation to a international industrial power. Seated dollars are scarce today, but were also scarce during the times in which they were supposed to circulate. Many business strikes were melted overseas, and most dates remain elusive in both proof and mint state gem and better grades. We are exceptionally delighted to have the opportunity to purchase this outstanding collection of one of America’s most storied series.

Click HERE To View A Slideshow of the Collection

The Coins will be posting to the Pinnacle website inventory page beginning June 6, 2011.

Defendants Turn Tables in New Suit

By Numismatic News
April 11, 2011

Other News & Articles

This article was originally printed in Numismatic News.
>> Subscribe today!

Claims that a widely publicized law suit was demonstrably false and that its high profile corporate plaintiff maliciously prosecuted it against three well-known coin dealers, is now on the docket in southern California in a case filed March 24 and assigned to Judge Robert J. Moss.

Superior Court, Orange County, is the venue for a suit against Collectors Universe (the parent company of the Professional Coin Grading Service), three lawyers, and a respected Tustin, Calif., business and real estate law firm.

The suit is brought by three dealers who had been accused by PCGS last May 13, 2010, of conduct that violated the federal “Lanham Act” and the California Unfair Competition statute.

Coins Magazine One Year Subscription
Coins Magazine One Year Subscription

Since its inception, in 1955, Coins magazine has been a hobby leader in providing collectors with important and timely information.
Get your subscription today!

Collectors Universe claimed then that these three experienced numismatists tried to pull the wool over their eyes and submitted coins for “slabbing” on which “work” had been done to improve their visual appearance.

PCGS also claimed breach of contract – submitters must contractually pledge not to knowingly submit doctored coins (no use of putty, lasers and the like to enhance a coin’s appearance and its putative value), and common law fraud, which requires no written agreement at all.

At the heart of the PCGS claim against the dealers, is that “ ‘coin doctors’ have submitted ‘doctored’ United States coins to PCGS for grading on multiple occasions for a period of years, either directly through dealers … or indirectly through other dealers.”

They give examples of that including a claim that “Defendants knew that these coins had been “doctored,” by themselves and/or by other persons engaged by them for that purpose. Their methods included lasering the surfaces of extremely rare proof gold coins to remove surface imperfections, building up commonly worn or weakly struck portions of coins with exotic metals and other physical and chemical processes.”

On Dec. 13, 2010, the court dismissed with prejudice Collectors Universe’s claim.

This allows all three men to claim that the underlying prosecution of the civil claim was improper – and to bring a claim for damages against Collector’s Universe. Their theory: malicious prosecution.

Malicious prosecution is a tort action and is the remedy for baseless and malicious litigation.

The three dealers seek damages of at least $100,000 and punitive damages from Collectors Universe. Thus far, the defendants who must be served with process have yet to respond.

Anticipate that the next legal action will be either an answer to the complaint or a motion addressed to it.

Featured News

Coin Rarities & Related Topics: The PCGS SecurePlus Program, Part 1: An Explanation
By Greg Reynolds on Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Filed Under: Coin Grading & Authentication, Column: Coin Rarities, Commentary and Opinion, Featured, PCGS

News and Analysis regarding scarce coins, coin markets, and the coin collecting community #28

A Weekly Column by Greg Reynolds

On March 25, 2010, David Hall and Don Willis, the top officials at the Professional Coin Grading Service (PCGS), announced and explained the PCGS SecurePlus™ program, known for weeks before as “The Big One”! For most grades between EF-45 and MS-68 inclusive, the PCGS begin assigning plus grades when warranted, such as 45+ or 63+. As the rival of the PCGS, the NGC, incorporated plus grades into their system two months afterwards, and the PCGS later allowed for standard submissions to be eligible for plus grades, not just coins submitted via the SecurePlus tier, plus grades now seem to be a secondary aspect of the program. In my view, the emphasis should always have been, as it is now, on the ‘Secure’ aspects of the SecurePlus program, which are truly revolutionary and have tremendous implications for the future of markets in rare coins.

I hope that those who are not entirely familiar with the PCGS SecurePlus program find this column (part 1) to be very clear and educational. In my opinion, the explanation of the PCGS SecurePlus program on the PCGS website is not extremely clear and, over the past six months, I have found that many collectors are confused about this program.

Collectors who are already very familiar with the PCGS SecurePlus program, and with PCGS policies in general, may wish to wait for part 2, next week. In part 2, Don Willis, the president of PCGS, responds to my explanation and a proposal for the reform of PCGS submission policies is put forth. The views of John Albanese, Mark Feld and Ira Goldberg are included.

In the first section, I provide a definition of the SecurePlus program. In the second section, I explain the benefits of the coin identification part of the SecurePlus program. In Section III, I emphasize that submitters of coins to be graded by the PCGS may choose between the SecurePlus program and standard submission options.

I. The PCGS SecurePlus Program

The SecurePlus program brings three new technologies to coin grading. (1) The introduction of a new technology for scanning and coin identification, through the use of CoinAnalyzer devices that are produced by Richard Haddock’s CoinSecure firm. An image and data from each scanned coin is entered into a database, and, if the same coin is scanned at the PCGS in the future, it will be identified as a coin that was previously scanned.

(2) The use of ‘Sniffer’ technology to detect added foreign substances and changes in the surfaces, the metal, on coins that have been deliberately harmed by coin doctors for the purpose of deceiving experts and others into believing that doctored coins merit higher grades than were (or would have been) assigned before such coins are doctored. Additionally, the adding of metal to the surfaces and/or the deliberate heating of the metal on the surfaces of a coin will, hopefully, be detectable by ‘coin sniffer’ technology as well. The PCGS has already begun using ’sniffer’ technology to an extent, and will be phasing additional sniffer applications into the PCGS SecurePlus grading program over time. I will devote a future piece to coin sniffer technology. The subject is so complicated that it must really be treated in a long article.

To gain some understanding of coin doctoring and the urgent need to contain the coin doctoring problem, please read five previous pieces of mine. Last year, I devoted a series of three articles to the reasons why naturally toned coins are preferred and the topic of coin doctoring is discussed at length therein (part 1, part 2 and part 3). This year, I wrote two columns that address the PCGS lawsuit against alleged coin doctors, on June 3rd and on Sept. 8th. In these two columns, coin doctoring is defined, the lawsuit is analyzed, and the seriousness of the matter is emphasized.

(3) The third ‘Security’ issue relating to the PCGS SecurePlus program is the anti-counterfeiting technology incorporated into the new inserts. In each PCGS holder, there is a paper insert that provides information about the coin contained therein. A gold eagle with a shield is pictured on an insert in the PCGS holder that houses each coin that has been graded under the PCGS SecurePlus program. Unethical businesses in China have produced forgeries of PCGS holders with misleading grades printed on fake inserts. New anti-counterfeiting features are important, though less so than the coin identification and sniffer technologies that constitute the core of the PCGS SecurePlus program.

Newer Posts »