Chinese medals - silver isn't the only composition!

I am disagreeing with you because you'd written: "It would seem as per definition number 5 unique would be an appropriate word to use" You did not contest that, you insinuated that it is correct, when it isn't. As I've already noted, some words have been bastardized (corrupted, debased).

Since it is you who is suggesting that it's appropriate to use a word incorrectly just because a dictionary may misdefine a word, then of course I am disagreeing with you. If President Obama claimed it was appropriate to wrongly use the word, I'd strongly disagree with him. A dictionary is not infallible and can get it wrong sometimes as we have seen in the example you posted.

What you are doing is akin to claiming that you agree that it's appropriate to call all non-denominational round objects "coins" as is done by some people and as indicated by definition 2c here: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/coin

The fact that you did not even acknowledge the etymology of unique and the explicit wrongness of the attribution of "uncommon" to unique is quite revealing, sad, and predictable actually.




.

 

So it would seem that you believe that your definition of a word is the correct one and not that of the dictionary. The dictionary is the recognized worldwide standard for defining what words mean. It is an ever changing reference because language in and of itself is inherently going to evolve and change over time. If one is using a word in a context that is supported by a definition in the dictionary then the word is being used in a correct context.

The reason for not raising the history of the word and how it was derived is because that has nothing to do with the meaning of the term today....even if the derivation of today's meaning started with erroneous attributions years ago.

I am going to stick with the dictionary and I suppose you are free to disagree with dictionary so I will leave it at that.

Back to the topic.....Nice medal by they way......I hope I did not incorrectly use the word nice in this instance.

 

If it was appropriate to misuse "unique" then it could be said that any of the tens of thousands of off center struck coin is unique because they are uncommon in comparison to the billions and billions of coins minted. The real problem and danger of misapplying definitions especially when it comes to numismatics (coin / medal collecting) is that it renders the status of coins and medals that are actually and truly unique like the 1849 $20 gold piece and the Tetradrachm of Aetna, meaningless.

It's the same thing that some people do when they refer to a modern collector coin / medal with a mintage of 12,000 as "rare". Yeah sure, you can probably find a definition in some dictionary which might support that misuse of the word, but it's still an inappropriate use of the word "rare" when it comes to numismatics.


Please stop arguing about this mtforpar....my pointing out the inappropriate use of "unique" was not meant to be an open door for you hijacking a thread just because you side with the misappropriation of a term.




.

 

Don't mind me.. I'm just going to continue chasing my own tail.. HI-HO, COPPER.. AWAAAAAAAYYYYY!
\

 

Please stop arguing about this mmissinglink....my pointing out the appropriate use of "unique" was not meant to be an open door for you hijacking a thread.

 

Really? A talking horse? Who does this guy think he is -- Mr. Ed?? Now where mah brass cousin be at, b?
\

 

Yo Little Boy, where your brass cousin is? He's sleeping at a place called NGC. Those crazies received my goods on 6/29. They're acting like my kid cousin Gatito...very slow. Now they're telling me it is a month and half before they get newly improved slabs (thicker)...better go back to counting sheep coz. hehehehe. by the way, you need more makeup. glad i'm blessed with the better looks coz.

 

Heh.


So tell us more about these thicker slabs.. Any details?

The current ones go up to 15mm..

http://www.ngccoin.com/coin-grading/holders/oversize.aspx


Does this mean they're going even thicker?

Should be interesting, as they'll be able to accommodate things like the 90mm Mammoth (which I don't believe fits in current oversized slabs, according to my crude estimates).


Does the price also increase on these new ones?

 

No dealer dare to try the mammoth since grading fee is expansive for a brasss and no one guarantee ngc slab can fit it. You still need to pay the fee even slab not fit in.

I do not even grade my guan yu 120 mm.

What do u means the price ? Which your are referring ?

 

The thing with the 90mm Mammoth is that it appears only 1 side is mega-ultra high-relief. The back side is comparatively flat.

Meaning, the bulk of the relief on 1 side might equal to a somewhat-lower relief on both sides of another medal which *does* fit in a kilo slab.


Anybody with non-abrasive calipers want to measure?


Either way, I think it's close, judging by photos.. Might barely fit, or might be slightly too thick.


My question re: an increase in price had to do with these new thicker slabs. I don't think NGC would charge more, but who knows.


Anyway, if large Mammoth doesn't fit, even the new ones, then I'm not buying.

Slab or bust! :lol:


I'd gladly take an 80g Ag version that fits in a standard NGC fatty, though..

 

mtforpar, this discussion was over with the completion of post # 123...there was no need for you to turn this into you trying to one better me for no good reason with your post following that - because you already stated your opinion prior to that post. I simply made a correction to your false claim (the untrue claim that I was "disagreeing with the dictionary") and made it clear why misusing a term like you suggest (in my view and based on the logical, cogent argument I put forth) is a very problematic thing to do. If you don't have anything to add that is going to enhance our understanding of your position, then I suggest you leave it at that, please.


I disagree strongly with your belief and you with my position. That's life...agreeing to disagree is sometimes the best that can be hoped for.



.

 

Barsenault,

prior to the last time I spoke with Becky over at NGC, she told me that the graders who authenticate and grade Chinese medals over in their FLA facility, were actually in China. She didn't tell me how long they'd been there for but that could be part of the reason that there's a longer turn around time than usual for Chinese medal grading at this particular time.




.

 

Hey missing, man, this was unusually long. Crazy. And then I send medals in with COA, from an official mint, and they say, unverifiable, WTH. I was po'd. I'm now working with Lucky to get a letter from the mint letterhead to substantiate the validity of the medal. These guys can be a big royal pain in the arse. I will say, I got my first fake ever though. 2004 Panda 1 oz silver. I would never have known it was fake unless I sent it in. It was double sealed, and looked good to me back 4 years ago. lol. Finally decided to get it graded. I will carry it around as a reminder to seek advice when buying those pesky things. NGC obviously does a good job authenticating. Thanks for the input.

 

That sounds a bit odd -- not to mention not very profitable.

They don't have anybody in the entire state of Florida who can read Chinese?


From what I've heard, sounds like NGC reps sometimes give out wrong / conflicting info.

Wouldn't be the 1st time a company does that. Wonder if that's the case here..

Mind sharing which medals were "unverifiable," according to NGC?

Sort of ironic, considering how not too long ago they were trumpeting their medals-grading service.

The bumbling idiots of corporate America are omnipresent! :lol:


I understand it was years ago, but I'd definitely track down where you bought that fake Panda..

There's a reason why I only buy certain types of pieces on eBay. But if that actually came from the Big A, then the community certainly has something to be concerned about.

 

If I recall accurately, Becky at NGC claimed that the graders for the Chinese medals were getting additional training by the experts in China...which is something I actually would commend them taking time out for because the better trained they are, the better their authentication / grading service will be.




.

 

Yeah, Gatito, I was PO'd. I'm going to call them first thing Monday. Not only that, but I sent in 1st time without COA, they charged me 17.00 each!! Then they say, send them back, but send the COA's this time, I do so, and they charge me again and say the same damn thing. They charge me 17 x 4 again. POS. I'm not happy. Yes, they are the rare Nanjing Panda Antique Copper and Brass. Mintage 30. COA's. Oh, and I wouldn't be so bothered, but they keep the capsule, and put those gems in a cheap flip thing. And now my pouch is destroyed, and no capsule. #nothappy

 

Yo Gatito, I just checked Provident. Bought pandas from them, but not the 2004. I think the 2004 was purchased on eBay. I have too many orders on Apmex to go check there. Not happening. I hope it wasn't from them. 90% sure it was one of the few eBay transactions I made. No way to go back and check since it was so long ago, I'm assuming. However, the exercise of going back to 2011 to see what the prices were, was a painful exercise. Thanks for forcing me to do that. LOL. I can't believe some of the prices I was paying back then. YIKES. Good thing I sold all my eagles and rolled the dough into the kook reminting fiasco (for the collectors back then), because I'm doing just fine. But if I was still holding those thousands of eagles...ouch. I'd be hurting.

 

That's too bad about the unverifiable status and the fake. I have some Pandas from various years that I purchased on eBay like nearly 3 years ago and I have not had them graded. I second Gatito's suggestion for you to share the fake Panda so that we may have a better idea of how to spot a fake...possibly.




.

 

Hey Missing. Yes sir. As soon as I get it back, I'll be taking pictures. I'm sure it will be obvious to many, but of course not me. LOL.

 

Ah, okay.. gotcha.

I think I misunderstood your original post.


Makes sense now.

But to send all of them at once?