SWANNY Posted January 11, 2016 Posted January 11, 2016 (edited) If you have read my previous posts, and know the story of this coin, please DO NOT post any names, or company names on this thread I have been in communication with the company that rejected my coin for grading, I am ok with the failed result, but I am not happy with the returned condition of my coin, it looks like the coin has been "tooled" (see picture). I have photos of the coin before being posted to the company (with no damage), and a photo of the coin in the slab when it was returned showing the damage (which proves the damage was not caused by myself removing it from the slab). It has been tooled in two places, but pictures of the other tool marks are hard to get, and not as bad as the marks in this picture. So my question is , how much has this affected the value of my coin (max book price £3,000) Please remember NO names in this thread Thanks..... Edited January 11, 2016 by SWANNY Quote
Sword Posted January 11, 2016 Posted January 11, 2016 I think you need to post a photo of the coin before slabbing and another with the coin still in the slab ... Quote
Bronze & Copper Collector Posted January 12, 2016 Posted January 12, 2016 (edited) Firstly, bear with me, as I'm working with cell phone images.. Secondly, I know absolutely nothing of the coin, the tpg, nor its history... That being said, IMHO, I would guess the coin was possibly submitted for conservation. In comparing the 2 slabbed images with the pre-submittal age of the coin, I believe that I can see traces of the damage under the discoloration. As far as I can see, the marks on the right side of the coin in line with the second "I" of BRITANNIAR, definitely existed prior to submittal... Insofar as the left side, just to the right of the space between Victoria & Dei, I believe that I can see the 3 small gouges in the pre-submittal image. Regarding the 3 scratches just to the right of the gouges, I believe them to be just barely discernable under the discoloration. Again, this is just my opinion, without coin in hand, and with absolutely no knowledge of the coins history. No intent to malign the coin, the poster, nor the tpg is intended... Edited January 12, 2016 by Bronze & Copper Collector Quote
Sword Posted January 12, 2016 Posted January 12, 2016 I agree that the marks on the right definitely existed before submittal. Quote
Nonmortuus Posted January 12, 2016 Posted January 12, 2016 1 hour ago, Sword said: I agree that the marks on the right definitely existed before submittal. Same for me regarding the right hand side marks. As for the left side I am finding it extremely hard to tell from the pictures due to different lighting etc. Quote
Stuntman Posted January 12, 2016 Posted January 12, 2016 Bronze & Copper Collector's analysis appears extremely plausible to me as well. For what it's worth, I can understand why the TPG would reject the coin if they routinely reject ones that they think may have been cleaned in some way in the past. Whether this policy makes sense is another matter. Purely on subjective eye appeal based on your photos, I don't think that the current state of the coin is any less appealing - and therefore by extension to me, less valuable - than it was before submittal. If anything, it looks a bit nicer. I hope you continue to enjoy the coin. Quote
SWANNY Posted January 12, 2016 Author Posted January 12, 2016 After reviewing my pre grading picture , I agree there was some kind of old damage on the right hand side, but its not the rejecting of the coin I am moaning about, its the tooling of the coin surface in their tests that I don't agree with. There was no damage to the coin on the right hand side of the coin , but this area has been tooled. If you think this has not devalued the coin, then I will have to live with the damage caused by the TPG Quote
mike Posted January 12, 2016 Posted January 12, 2016 IMO there is absolutely no way you can compare these two images - completely different magnification, lighting conditions including angle of the light. These tiny hairlines/hairline scratches (it is not tooling IMO) are visible only under artificial light and under certain angle. You would need the set of pictures taken under exactly the same conditions. PS generally speaking "tooling" is used on a coin where the details don't stand out very well. But by scraping away some of the field (background) with an implement (tool) you can make the details more prominent. That's tooling. Quote
SWANNY Posted January 12, 2016 Author Posted January 12, 2016 The picture pre grading was a scan on my printer that came out at over 6Mb, and as I can only upload 500Kb I had to reduce it In this process it lost all it colour. Please replace the word "Tooling" for "Scatching" This picture is another pre grading picture Quote
Sword Posted January 12, 2016 Posted January 12, 2016 6 hours ago, SWANNY said: After reviewing my pre grading picture , I agree there was some kind of old damage on the right hand side, but its not the rejecting of the coin I am moaning about, its the tooling of the coin surface in their tests that I don't agree with. There was no damage to the coin on the right hand side of the coin , but this area has been tooled. If you think this has not devalued the coin, then I will have to live with the damage caused by the TPG Swanny No TPG would ever use any "tests" which would cause scratching on coin surfaces. Virtually all coins are graded exclusively by visual inspection and weight. I don't think it is possible to conclude from your photos that any damage has been done to the coin during the grading process. The best thing to do IMO is to therefore assume that no damage has done. Otherwise you would be annoyed every time you look at the coin and will get much less enjoyment owning it. In any case, those marks are really quite insignificant (esp. when there are contact marks on the neck and hair). Quote
SWANNY Posted January 13, 2016 Author Posted January 13, 2016 On 12/01/2016 at 6:00 PM, Sword said: Swanny No TPG would ever use any "tests" which would cause scratching on coin surfaces. Virtually all coins are graded exclusively by visual inspection and weight. I don't think it is possible to conclude from your photos that any damage has been done to the coin during the grading process. The best thing to do IMO is to therefore assume that no damage has done. Otherwise you would be annoyed every time you look at the coin and will get much less enjoyment owning it. In any case, those marks are really quite insignificant (esp. when there are contact marks on the neck and hair). I would like to agree that a TPG should not harm a coin, but you can see from the pictures that the scratches on the left of the coin are new, and the scratches on the right are an old wound been opened up again. You can see by the pictures that the new scratches were not these pre grading This was my first and last time sending a coin to a TPG , another lesson if life learned Quote
Stuntman Posted January 13, 2016 Posted January 13, 2016 Can I ask why you sent it in the first place? Quote
SWANNY Posted January 15, 2016 Author Posted January 15, 2016 (edited) I was told on here Seeing that the coin is a Gothic Crown, it should be authenticated because of all the fakes out there Edited January 15, 2016 by SWANNY Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.