Options
2 more proof IHCs that now have a different appearance than they did 2 months ago.
cohodk
Posts: 18,709 ✭✭✭✭✭
Heritage June 2005 NGC PF 63 RB
Ebay Now NGC PF 64 RB
Heritage June 2005 Anacs PF 63 RB
Ebay Now NGC 65 RB
Notice that these coins are on the same submission. There were 25 proof copper coins on this submission. Seven of them were bodybagged as AT. The rest apparently deemed market acceptable.
I do not believe the seller is the person who purchased these coins in the Heritage auction, "removed dirt and debris", and resubmitted to NGC.
Ebay Now NGC PF 64 RB
Heritage June 2005 Anacs PF 63 RB
Ebay Now NGC 65 RB
Notice that these coins are on the same submission. There were 25 proof copper coins on this submission. Seven of them were bodybagged as AT. The rest apparently deemed market acceptable.
I do not believe the seller is the person who purchased these coins in the Heritage auction, "removed dirt and debris", and resubmitted to NGC.
Excuses are tools of the ignorant
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
0
Comments
Heritage June 2005 NGC PF 65 BN
Ebay Now PRIVATE AUCTION NGC PF 65 BN
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Heritage June 2005 NGC 64 RB
Ebay Anacs 62 RB
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
My posts viewed
since 8/1/6
BRAAAAAHAHAHAHA
Circle the wagons boys, here they come again.
Probably just "removed the old shellac/laquer".
BRAAAAAHAHAHAHA
Circle the wagons boys, here they come again.
Is there a doctor in the house?
Edited to add: Nevermind. I see that Michael has posted a link on the NGC Forum.
I see your light bulb is on.
<< <i>Were these coins submitted to NGC before or after our last conversation about MS70 on proof copper? >>
After.
Sean Reynolds
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
shylock
Master Collector
Posts: 5317
Joined: Feb 2001
Monday August 14, 2006 5:29 PM (NEW!)
Both no doubt the same coins. Great post.
my my my my my my my my
This is infuriating! Freak'n greed!
<< <i> Oh my >>
<< <i>Both no doubt the same coins. Great post. >>
I suspect the Tooth Fairy is responsible. This is what happens when you put proof IHCs under your pillow for a few days. They take on monster color and go up a notch or two in grade. Must be the Tooth Fairy and her Magic Wand.
Tootsie, the Tooth Fairy Troll
molarium refundium
Description and Characteristics
This very unusual troll-fairy is the most philanthropic of fairies. She is equipped with a magic wand, chemistry set, and pig necklace. She is always ready to fix coins for her many clients.
Isn't this a nice, simple explanation?
NGC has stepped in ANOTHER one. And it STINKS BAD again.
but make no claims or warranties implied or expressed and he knows he did this doctoring with the intent to gain more lots more money
nuttin nuttin nuttin........
Oh crap....
What's next ? Take a run of the mill 53D Lincoln, give it a gentle once over with a little acetone (to remove the varnish of course
Try it you will see....acetone--- amazing stuff
Put some acetone on a Kennedy and POOF- you got yourself a Walker.....
the possibilities are endless....
I think this entire thread and all of these problems are Mark Feld's fault. If it weren't for him we would all be so much happier (ok, Shylock is also to blame).
I would find it hard to believe that the sellers do not know exactly how these coins have been materially altered, and then do not disclose it in the auction. Maybe I shouldn't be surprised, but I am.
Let's keep outing these coins long and hard.....great post.
<< <i>Let's keep outing these coins long and hard.....great post. >>
I agree completely.
It seems some of the coin docs are getting greedy and not covering their tracks. The only way to be certain (assuming we don't get some confessions) is to out these guys with before and after photographs and to expose their auctions.
Good work here at exposing altered coins.
FrederickCoinClub
<< <i>Wow! I expected this thread to be 100 deep by now. No huge public outcry. No righteous indignation. I guess that photoshopping the picture of a coin you are selling is far worse than selling a coin that has been"photoshoped" itself. Or is it that you just won't blast one of your own? >>
I'll take a stab at answering this and guess that there is less outcry for one or both of two reasons. The first being that last month these coins were written about extensively on these boards and the second because the seller in the ebay auction is a well-known board member and many people feel uncomfortable calling out one of their own.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
wonder if we will see any of these in the near future in new holders
Tim
<< <i>and the second because the seller in the ebay auction is a well-known board member and many people feel uncomfortable calling out one of their own.
Not here...
Me, neither. Although I have spoken to him via IM, Braddick's silence on this topic is deafening...Mike
<< <i>This difference COULD come from lighting. >>
That radical degree of color change does not come from differences in lighting.
Russ, NCNE
I think the coins are ugly now.
I don't know the circumstances behind the coins..... the sellers surely? have a side to it.......
But looks pretty clear cut at this point. Shows me more evidence that this hobby is really destroying coins for profit, whether doctoring, adding color, or dipping.
IT IS TIME TO REWARD ORIGINALITY! This has been discussed on the board before, that the TPG should have a designation as such. PCGS.... should really look at this. Or perhaps a new TPG service willing to do so. There would be a HUGH demand in the market place for such a designation. And I suspect the designation would not be easy to come by... since any questions at all on the coin would result in no designation.... and so many have been tampered with already. Think of the marketplace value of any coins that would receive such a designation!! (of course, it would still be an opinion....)
so sad..........
I am starting to see this occurring in rare gold. Dipped and worked coins are struggling, while people are paying a premium for originality. One problem with a TPG designation is that "originality" is a very difficult thing to define and not entirely a black-and-white issue.
Me, neither. Although I have spoken to him via IM, Braddick's silence on this topic is deafening...Mike
I personally would like to hear why the sellers do not state it in their auctions that the coins are artifically toned, when they have personal knowledge of such.
I wonder if the sellers will hold to the explanation given awhile back on the other proof IHC thread, that removal of lacquer alone accounts for the monstrous color changes seen here.
Greg Hansen, Melbourne, FL Click here for any current EBAY auctions Multiple "Circle of Trust" transactions over 14 years on forum
<< <i>IT IS TIME TO REWARD ORIGINALITY!
I am starting to see this occurring in rare gold. Dipped and worked coins are struggling, while people are paying a premium for originality. One problem with a TPG designation is that "originality" is a very difficult thing to define and not entirely a black-and-white issue. >>
Exactly. The marketplace if recognizing that more and more. But that is why if a reputable TPG like PCGS added this designation.... demand would be HUGH because so few would receive the designation. Yes, granted... some will slip through.... and I'm sure the doctors will try like crazy to 'duplicate' original skin using some spray or something..... but I suspect the end result will be very few coins receiving the designation. I see very little risk to PCGS.... as long as they stick to it being an OPINION ONLY.... and NOT GUARANTEED. I would see PCGS getting much business with submitters trying to get the designation...... I really think the business model would work, and the demand is there.
<< <i>Me, neither. Although I have spoken to him via IM, Braddick's silence on this topic is deafening...Mike
I personally would like to hear why the sellers do not state it in their auctions that the coins are artifically toned, when they have personal knowledge of such. >>
Because it is all about the Benjamins. You dont rack up 4600 feedback because you are a hobbyist. It is a business for these guys. And an easy escape is to say "I didn't slab it, I am just selling the professional's opinion." The TPGs need to stop grading this stuff. But they wont, since at least one of the parties is a big submitter to NGC and has several hundred coins being slabbed at any given time. Why would they give up a $3000 per month revenue stream?
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
<< <i>Wow, the lacquer must have been REALLY thick on those coins before treated with acetone.
I wonder if the sellers will hold to the explanation given awhile back on the other proof IHC thread, that removal of lacquer alone accounts for the monstrous color changes seen here. >>
Greg,
These coins were not lacquered. They all came from no problem NGC, PCGS, ANACS slabs. NGC and PCGS will not slab a coin that has lacquer on it.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
The coins I'm offering were encapsulated after NGC was informed and educated. NGC has deemed these coins to be worthy of their holders, even now, today, after the multiple threads and discussions on both forums as to the validity and value of these coins.
I had no opinion, either way, when these were first discussed. In fact, I don't think I contributed to any thread regarding these a couple of months ago. I did read Greg's reply on the NGC forums and it rang true to me.
I know many will disagree, but in my opinion, if these are good enough with NGC, and the experts there have decided to continue to grade and holder these Indian cents after all the discussion that has taken place, then it's good enough with me.
If it's not with you, simply don't support the market. Don't purchase them.
peacockcoins
Note to self: Don't buy any more coins from Braddick.
But.... who decided..... to process these coins? And.... I have to now question..... if this process is ok, then what other processes are being used to 'enhance' coins.... that you consider to be ok?
Oh, and yes.... I will not support the market. I find them ugly, and consider it a shame that this is being done.
<< <i>While not entirely suprising, I am disappointed in your continuing to sell admitted AT coins. Note to self: Don't buy any more coins from Braddick. >>
Mike, I'm sorry to disapoint you. Your a solid collector and one who's opinion I usually agree with. I don't regarding these coins.
I recently had the opportunity of purchasing a blast white 1917 full head MS63 Standing Liberty quarter. In my opinion, it was just too white. It had been currated with NCS before being holdered by NGC.
It wasn't my thing so I passed. I'm sure others would disagree though and find a pure white Standing Liberty quarter highly attractive and desirable and then want to purchase it. I just don't.
I do find these Indian cents to be pretty though. I like the proof reflective fields and the maroon and lavender/blue colors. I try, generally, to only sell coins I would like to own. These proof Indians fit that bill- for me. They don't for you. Understood.
It's what makes collecting enjoyable. We all like different areas within the same market.
peacockcoins