Num-con

You're completely right... In their case, industrial grading speeds and quality simply cannot coexist. This is one of the most glaring mistakes I’ve ever come across, but I don’t often buy slabbed coins, so there are bound to be others. I’ve seen adverts for their cleaning service, but I haven’t actually seen any for a while now...

And they also wrote "Raised line on hull" on the ticket...

By the pictures you can see some gunports

Yoy're right

Ok, clear Thank you for your answer! I add more pictures, hope they are better than the others.

P.s.: I will add other pictures tomorrow

You’re absolutely right. In this case, it turned out to be a bargain because of the incorrect grading. I think there are various levels of cleaning, and unfortunately even light cleaning falls into the same category as more aggressive cleaning methods. That said, in my opinion it’s a fine specimen with a lovely colour, and I reckon it’ll soon be freed from its plastic cage.

Hi Rob, thank you very much for your reply, which, as always, is very detailed. I’m attaching a few photos which I hope will help to determine the correct classification. If it’s of any help, there’s a rust spot (or at least I think it is) in exactly the same place where I’ve noticed it on other P-1242s. Given that this is a late SOHO, is there a time frame within which it might have been minted, even if it’s just hypothetical??

Just to clear up any misunderstanding, it wasn’t me who sent it in for grading, but in this case I believe there are two errors: one regarding the proof/unc status and the other concerning cleaning. If that were the case (regarding my coin), some of the proof coins I’ve seen graded PF 62/63/64/65 would have to be considered as having been cleaned, but this isn’t always ‘noticed’ by the graders. For this reason, I believe that everyone should rely on their own experience and not blindly place their trust in these companies.

Good evening. I have this 1799 halfpenny graded as "UNC details – cleaned." Leaving aside the debate over whether or not it has actually been cleaned, I noticed that—given the three incuse dots on the truncation of the shoulder—it should have been graded at least as "Proof details." Is it possible that the grader missed the detail of the three incuse dots, or did he deliberately downgrade the coin from Proof to Uncirculated? If I am not mistaken, the coin should be classified as P-1242. If this is indeed an error, what should I do in your opinion? Send it in for regrading or simply crack it out of the holder? Thanks for your opinions.

True! It has a beautiful style and I prefer it to the 1806 type

Thank you for your comment, I like it as well, I also find the reliefs and the colour particularly attractive.

Many thanks for your answer, Rob. I really appreciate it I'm just getting into this coinage, so I could ask for your help again.

Good morning, and thank you for your opinions! After doing some research, I was also leaning towards classifying it as a currency issue, but I wanted to get some authoritative views before "closing the matter." What about the break on the reverse rim and the die flaw on the drapery at the front of the shoulder? Are both due to die wear, or does the reverse break have a different origin? I haven't found any other specimens showing a similar feature. Thank you very much for your input; I am fascinated by these coins—which I find very beautiful—and I am trying to learn more about them.

Good evening, I'm new here and I would show this penny to receive your opinion. It shares the features of a currency coin, but the colour, the relief and the die flaws makes me think of a proof or prooflike coin. It has the ship with 5 gunports. And, also: what happened to the rim of the reverse? Thank you in advance🙂