bashing PCGS yet AGAIN

General discussion board about VAMs, but no buy/sell offers
Post Reply
Posts: 2757
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:

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 469 times
not a TRU_T rev.jpg
not a TRU_T rev.jpg (242.5 KiB) Viewed 469 times
Last edited by DHalladay on Mon Jun 13, 2022 5:13 pm, edited 3 times in total.
When in doubt... don't.

Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2018 3:40 am

Re: bashing PCGS yet AGAIN

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


User avatar
Posts: 694
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2018 2:33 pm
Location: San Diego

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
Posts: 115
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