Lets play....guess why the coin did not grade from PCGS

[coinsarefun]

I will make it fun.........I will put up 3 and you tell me why PCGS did not grade them

[cpm9ball]

1) AT?
2) They don't like Limeys - Altered surfaces?
3) Improperly cleaned/PVC damage?

Chris

[coinsarefun]

1) AT?
2) They don't like Limeys - Altered surfaces?
3) Improperly cleaned/PVC damage?

Chris

1) nope
2) nope
3) close and I cracked out of an NGC slab

[cpm9ball]

I haven't a clue why the 1939 didn't grade.

On the 1919, I noticed some faint parallel lines on the obverse that I thought might be wheel marks and a very tiny spot in the middle of the cheek, and that is why I thought of Altered Surfaces because it may have been "thumbed" or puttied.

On the reverse of the 1870, it looked like those tiny spots along the 2-4 o'clock region have a green tinge to them and that is why I guessed PVC, but since it isn't that, I'll just go with environmental damage.

Chris

[Billy Kingsley]

Questionable toning
cleaned
environmental damage
 
 

[Deagle74]

1. don't no
2. don't no
3. carbon spots?

Rok

[rrantique]

They are all nice Stef. But I think Billy is spot on.

[FilthyBroke]

First, let me start off by saying that I'm terrible at these things, but I'll give it a shot.

The first could be AT, looks suspicious the way the toning has "blotches".

the second....maybe dipped?

and the third could be envirometal damage or PVC, there looks to be something going on with the surface spots (especially on the right side of the reverse)

[Swampboy]

#1 E.D.
#2 Not genuine
#3 A.T.

[coinsarefun]

#1 E.D.
#2 Not genuine
#3 A.T.

#2 correct!!! Not genuine
#1 what does ED stand for?
#3 beeeep, wrong

Excellent pickup on the gold coin!!!!