Today I learned...

Ebeneezer

For many years I've understood the meaning of the words cleaned or cleaning and it's affects on appearance not to mention value. I also understand the difference between dipping a coin in acetone and one "conserved" by a third party grader. Both of which are somewhat excepted by the hobby as a whole. To that end I agree somewhat.

What I had not put much thought into on the subject was the why. Yes, some people do so to make them look better. Taking that question one step further comes from an article written by Q. David Bowers I stumbled across this afternoon. In it, he discusses the hobby in 1969 and his early career as a dealer. Before the existence of third party grading coins were classified as mint state or bu. Mint state meaning just that, but what today is an MS63 would have typically sold for the same price as an MS67. BU's, which most collectors sought, might grade as high as MS61-62 today. Toned coins, on the other hand, were considered inferior within both categories and sold for slightly less. Again, no so in today's market. So, to maximize profit it was common practice for dealers to clean their coins multiple times as retoning occurred. The frequency of which he describes blows ones mind. And chemical methods? I suppose we are seeing quite of few of those still floating around, particular on EBAY.

ricko

The fascination with tarnish is a recent (30 years or so) trend.... As you noted, it was not a good thing back then, and dipping was common... well, even other types of cleaning was common. I still prefer coins without tarnish...It is undeniably environmental damage and - for me - detracts from the appearance. I cannot understand how people can pay premiums for tarnish, no matter how colorful... And AT is rampant, so why not just 'do it yourself'...much cheaper. Cheers, RickO