No announcement yet.
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 1893 Half Pond - MS63

    Hello Everyone

    Just to let everyone know that the NGC POP report is not 100% correct. This 1893 Half Pond MS63, is captured as a 1893 1 Pond MS63 on the POP report. The next best 1893 Half Pond is only a AU50. I intend to have this rectified, but under no circumstances will the coin be posted to them to have this fixed. If they do not accept the photos I send them, then the POP report can remain as it is.... INCORRECT

    Attached Files
    Last edited by Coinoisseur; 18-04-10, 23:22.
    Anthony G
    The measure of a numismatist is not how much he profits from the hobby,
    but how much the hobby profits from him.

  • #2
    NGC - poor denomination descriptions

    Thanks Anthony -

    As a matter of interest - I was searching for the 1893 One Pound on NGC's Population report and just realized how extremely confusing their (NGC's) denomination descriptions (abbreviations) for South African coins are. Especially for those that do not visit their site on a regular basis.

    Take for instance a Kruger Pond as an example. A Pond is also called a Pound and a Sovereign - Afrikaans speaking people like me wrongly accept that English speaking people will use the denomination "Pound" or "Sovereign" when referring to a Kruger Pond.

    So when I searched the NGC population report for a Kruger Sovereign/Pound/Pond or whatever it is called by whoever, I find the following alternatives/choices/possibilities to click on:-


    etc. etc.

    Now only one of the above is the correct abbreviation for ZAR Kruger Ponde (Ponds?) and I think I only struck it lucky after the third or fourth attempt (click)

    Maybe NGC must ask for some help from the SA Numismatic society(s) for help to make our SA coin denomination abbreviations on their site VERY EASY to understand without ANY possible CONFUSION.



    • #3
      What an ABSOLUTE GEM of a coin Anthony !
      I agree,you must keep this one safe,very safe !


      • #4
        This coin belongs to someone else. Anthony is just highlighting an issue.



        • #5
          The post is NOT about who owns the coin but rather that NGC suck at their administration, and their inconsistance grading, and they are not preprared to rectify any problems as them deem what they do is the gospel. The issue here is that NGC stats cannot be taken for granted. The owner of the coin is a very private person and this is the way he wants it.

          Anthony G
          The measure of a numismatist is not how much he profits from the hobby,
          but how much the hobby profits from him.


          • #6
            Hi Anthony, George

            This is a VERY serious issue when you consider the impact a "graded" coin has on its "investment" value, especially when it is extremely rare

            As a numismatist it has always been the history behind a coin and the enjoyment of reflecting on it that has been my driving force not a slabbed piece all dressed up like a Tony Barlow doll with nowhere to go...

            Kind regards

            Scott Balson
            Last edited by ndoa18; 23-04-10, 08:35.


            • #7
              There are many coins that are not included in the NGC census, not just those from South Africa. And its also unreasonable to expect that there would be no errors.

              I do agree though, that they could just use the same serial number and move the coin in the population report.