This is original?

News: Registration is free here at the CPMF!

It's time once again to play pick-on-my-favorite-TPG    But seriously, look at the note below and tell me if you think it's right to call it "original".  Should grading companies grade notes based on what they see in front of them, not what they know, or should notes that are OBVIOUSLY trimmed be treated like washed/pressed/cleaned notes and be barred from being considered "original"?  Moreover, if BCS is reading this, is the fact that the comment field is empty due to the fact that the note is so OBVIOUSLY trimmed?

{http://www.give-a-buck.com/special/1937-100.JPG}

Should grading companies grade notes based on what they see in front of them, not what they know, or should notes that are OBVIOUSLY trimmed be treated like washed/pressed/cleaned notes and be barred from being considered "original"? 

In my opinion if a note is trimmed ...it's NOT Original...but what do I know..I'm not a TPG

According to the BCS website:

"If a note is unaltered and has not gone through a restoring process and receives the grade of EF or higher it will receive an auxiliary designation of ORIGINAL stated on the holder directly beneath the number grade."

A trimmed note is NOT unaltered, so I'm with you there mmars, the note in question is not Original.

Also from the BCS website:

"Commonly seen damage to notes include.

    * Holes
    * Tears
    * Writing
    * Residue
    * Sun staining
    * Trimming"

So trimming meets BCS's definition of "damage", and the BCS site says that:

"Damage to a note, outside of the normal realm of the notes grade, will be mentioned separate from the grade of the note in the comments section of the certificate. Other characteristics of the note will be taken into account for the assessment of the grade, disregarding any unusual damage. No net grade will be given."

So not only should the Original designation be removed, but there should be a comment saying "trimmed", "damaged", or to be kind, "tight margins".

Thank you mmars for finding this example -- another reminder to me to buy the note, not the holder.
 

This is actually quite interesting, if it were one of the older graded notes (ie since BCS started) then I would say its possible that their standards could have changed. However this note was actually graded quite recently (relatively speaking) so I have no clue how it could have gotten the Original designation.

Before this goes too much further, has anyone actually contacted BCS yet to discuss this note?

I have invited BCS's participation in this discussion via an e-mail I sent to the address provided on the BCS homepage.

Hello all

Thank you for bringing this to my attention.  It is possible that we at BCS have overlooked an important element in grading this note.  Without being given the chance to inspect the note in person once again, I cannot comment any further.
With regards to how trimming should be treated, much of what I have read and you have interrupted here on this thread is correct.  If a note has been trimmed, it not only rejects the possibility of it being original, but it necessitates the mentioning of it on the comments section.  Many notes over the years have had "Trimming" mentioned on the comments section, none of which have received an "original" designation.  Trimming is considered out of the ordinary damage and should always be mentioned separately, in the same category as tears, writing, stains, and holes.
It seems in this case that a simple mistake has been made.  We at BCS have certified over 10 thousand notes over our three years of operation.  We would be overly confident to say that none have made it past inspection without some administrative error or oversight.  Whenever error is found, we do all that we can to correct the error.  We would be more then willing to take a second look that the note in question and make any corrections if needed.  Afterall, accuracy is one of our three major tenants and we do all that we can to preserve this.

Once again, thank you for bringing this to our attention.

BCS

Thank you for the reply.

Unfortunately, this note is not likely to return to BCS offices any time soon.  I don't own it, and it is currently being offered by a "reputable" dealer online.

Therein lies one of the serious flaws of third party grading.  No matter how conservative a company grades, the most loosely graded notes from that company will inevitably remain in the original holder and circulate, providing a constant source of negative advertising for that company.  Notes deemed undergraded will be removed from their holders.  There's no incentive for a person to question an overgraded TPG note's assessment or to resubmit it for a second opinion.  Even the most reputable dealers will hide behind the slab knowing full well they bear no responsibility for what is printed on it.

...then I would say its possible that their standards could have changed.

Changing standards?  Isn't that an oxymoron?

I think the old saying "BUY THE NOTE NOT THE HOLDER!" rings into play here.

Mistakes happen and so be it.. but I wouldn't buy this note even though it was graded by BCS as it obviously has issues.

I am surprised this wasn't caught by BCS but mistakes do happen.

The only notes I would purchase that are TPG are BCS Notes but even if Graded by BCS if I don't like the note or agree with the grading I still won't buy it.

IMO... TPG is more of a trust thing and past performance.   I won't buy a note just because it is TPG.  But I will buy a BCS note if I like the note and I agree with the grade.

Again... buy the note and not the holder.. 

Just wondering.. how long did you have to hunt for a BCS Note that wasn't obviously graded incorrectly  just to bash it Mmars?? 

Lol..

Just wondering.. how long did you have to hunt for a BCS Note that wasn't obviously graded incorrectly  just to bash it Mmars?? 

Lol..

Spare me the personal attack.  All I did was post a picture of a note and ask if it should be considered original.  Any company or individual that takes money in exchange for offering professional opinions should be able to stand up and explain why it graded a note a certain way.  And BCS did, and without resorting to personal attacks, BTW.  Case closed.

Spare me the personal attack.  All I did was post a picture of a note and ask if it should be considered original.

It's time once again to play pick-on-my-favorite-TPG

mmars: You're stirring up the pot and you know it, so it should be no surprise that you're getting a little backlash in return.

As for the rest of you folks who have "contributed" to this thread, just because mmars is being antagonistic, that doesn't justify some of the comments I've seen here.

Come on guys... you're all better than this. Grow up and show a little more maturity please.