bashing PCGS yet AGAIN

General discussion board about VAMs, but no buy/sell offers
Post Reply
DHalladay
Posts: 2694
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 4:38 pm
Location: Boise, ID area

bashing PCGS yet AGAIN

Post by DHalladay » Sun Jun 12, 2022 8:27 pm

Here is a 3rd example of a 1921-D that PCGS has attributed as a VAM 1A TRU_T that is so not it's ridiculous.

The first two I showed in recent months were jokes because they both still very clearly have most of the S showing:
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=6439&hilit=PCGS

But this one... well, it takes attribution ineptitude to a whole new disturbing level.

not a TRU_T obv.jpg
not a TRU_T obv.jpg (210.6 KiB) Viewed 383 times
not a TRU_T rev.jpg
not a TRU_T rev.jpg (242.5 KiB) Viewed 383 times
Last edited by DHalladay on Mon Jun 13, 2022 5:13 pm, edited 3 times in total.
When in doubt... don't.

RogerRock
Posts: 597
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2018 3:40 am

Re: bashing PCGS yet AGAIN

Post by RogerRock » Sun Jun 12, 2022 9:37 pm

:lol:
Stage 3 TERMINAL DIE STATE SILVER DOLLAR EXPLORER

User avatar
alefzero
Posts: 685
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2018 2:33 pm
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Re: bashing PCGS yet AGAIN

Post by alefzero » Mon Jun 13, 2022 2:17 am

It is going to get to the point where VAMs are going to need VARslab confirmation stickers on the backs of the slabs to confirm the attributions (like CAC for the grades) to be market acceptable. I am sure @messydesk wouldn't complain.

User avatar
SilverToken
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri May 14, 2021 2:17 pm

Re: bashing PCGS yet AGAIN

Post by SilverToken » Mon Jun 13, 2022 4:34 pm

I agree with my friend... "When in doubt... don't".... especially on a professional level!
When it's no longer fun, I think I'm done!

Post Reply