Glad you were dealing with a reputable coin dealer who refunded your money on this sub-par PF-69 coin. “Modern” U.S. coins used to not even be accepted for grading by PCGS or NGC when they started in 1986 & 1987 respectively. It seems that with modern U.S. Mint coins that don’t grade at 70 are almost given the 69 grade unless the coin is really an ugly mess! There are very few “modern” coins (let’s say since 1982 when the commemorative coin program was restarted by the Mint after a 28-year absence) that they grade below 69 ( usually dealers that submit large quantities tell the TPG companies to send back any coins that do not grade 70 or 69 back to them ungraded & they sell them off to coin wholesalers (like the tv coin dealers!). Like I stated, I have seen some coins graded 69 from PCGS & NGC that should definitely be 68 or lower.

Happy collecting Mark!

-NumisdudeTX

Thanks very much for your insights on my coin “burns” issues.

While I was already aware that slabbed coin grades are not necessarily all that one might expect, the coin in question doesn’t come close to the PF69 designation as described by PCGS, to wit: “Virtually fully struck with miniscule imperfections visible upon close inspection.”

In fact, this coin’s “burns” are quite obvious from arm’s-length view, and not at all “miniscule.” So what about PF68? Nope: “Only the slightest weakness in strike with a few tiny imperfections barely visible.” Again, the two black/blue “burns” are not tiny and are easily visible. Moving down to PF67, “Very well struck with minor imperfections visible without magnification.”

Okay, PF67 is probably the most apt grade/description — although I might argue that anything outside of the normal minting process (i.e., “burns”) is really beyond a “minor imperfection.”

Luckily, the seller (among the most well-known online purveyors) had no problem accepting the coin back — including pre-paid shipping. So, at a ripe vintage of more than a half century, I re-learn the essential truth: caveat emptor.

I was quite surprised and disappointed to learn that the Mint no longer individually inspects Proof coins. That’s a matter of policy and shame on me for not knowing about it.

But what’s PCGS’ excuse? A coin they grade at PF69 that is — at best — a PF67 — how does that happen? After all, their whole rationale for existing is careful, deliberate and meticulous inspection of individual coins with a grade being assigned only after a consensus among multiple judges is reached. I would be quite surprised if these were the standards applied in this case. So, I’m left with the sickening sense that perhaps more — maybe many more — of my treasured slabbed coins are also so much humbug.

In any event, thanks again for your input, including your referral to Mr. Gibbs as a potential source for a genuinely independent opinion on this coin.

Warmest Regards,

Mark D.

I haven’t seen the type of “damage” you describe on this Proof coin. But, the 69 grade is not near perfection as PCGS & NGC would have everyone believe. A 69 grade can have many flaws, scratches, rim nicks etc. Even 70 grade coins are not perfect! The Mint used to hand inspect each Proof coin until about the early 2000s, but now relies on electronic eyes & an occasional random spot check by a human. The quality of even Proof coins has gone down as reflected in the marketplace price difference between Proof-69 & Proof-70 coins.
Coin World newspaper(since 1960) provides a free evaluation service called “Collector’s Clearinghouse” where you can contact them & get permission to send (at your cost for shipping & insurance both ways) a numismatic item to Editor Bill Gibbs at their Sidney, Ohio headquarters. Mr. Gibbs has been reviewing reader’s items since 1976 & prints the more interesting cases in the publication. Make sure you call or e-mail him before you send in an item. Good luck Mark.

-NumisdudeTX

I have just received a PCGS slabbed 2017-S ASE graded PR69 DCAM, First Day of Issue, from the original Congratulations Set to go with the Limited Edition Set from the Mint.

My naked-eye inspection of coin’s reverse detected 2 obvious — very obvious — points of damage/flaws in the star field area.

Each is only slightly smaller than size of the “dots” that separate the USA/1 oz. lettering at outside edge of reverse. They appear to be electronic burn marks, with a blue center point and black outline, similar to what one might see left on metal by welding sparks.
Anyone have any idea what I’m dealing with? How could PCGS miss something so obvious? What could cause this at the Mint? Any chance this could be some sort of value-increasing “error”?
Your input would be greatly appreciated.

There is no difference in the ASE $1 Proof 2017-S coin in either set. They cannot be told apart except for the packaging they are in when you send them to the grading services. No need to pay extra for a “special” label on a slab from a TPG company. The total mintage on this coin is 125,000 making it the 4th rarest ASE $1 in the 31 years of the series.

Happy collecting!

-NumisdudeTX (Keep Austin Weird!)