Sorry, another AT Thread -- NGC Toned Peace - Opinions

FrattLaw

How'd this coin make it into a NGC holder?

I saw it in person today and IMO (but hey I'm no expert), it's gotta be AT?

Any thoughts?

1924 Peace $ Reverse

Obverse

The Obverse looks nice with an original patina, but the reverse has that pooled liquid look.

Thanks

Michael

littlewicher

It looks alright to me. What makes you think this coin is AT?

Russ

Another excellent example of what creates my befuddlement with this toning issue. If I saw that coin raw, I would immediately assume it was fake, yet it's slabbed by a top tier company. I don't know about anybody else, but I just get more confused each day.

Russ, NCNE

mbbiker

<< <i> If I saw that coin raw, I would immediately assume it was fake, yet it's slabbed by a top tier company >>


Thats exacty why i buy what i like and don't worry about what other people say be it a fourm member or PCGS/NGC. I think that the toning on the peace dollar is real but i don't like it.

Morganluver

Wow, very interesting. The colors don't look quite right to me either. The hues seem a little out of whack. I'll bet it's not in a newer holder.

FrattLaw

Brand spanking new NGC holder.

Michael

agfox

Does it have a pedigree history?

It's interesting.

K6AZ

Slabbed or not, I find the toning on that coin suspicious. Peace Dollars just don't naturally tone like that. At the very least, I would say it had some help.

Dog97

Hey cool, now I can refer to one besides the one stman posted last month. Like his there's nothing I can put my finger on other than it doesn't look right. Rember that being in a holder doesn't mean it's original, only that it's Market Acceptable

dragon

Please keep in mind that others here have said after viewing lots in person that some of the pics may be somewhat more vibrant/colorful than the coin itself, so that pic may be or may not be a true depiction of the actual coin.

dragon

CLASSICS

when they took the picture iam sure the lighting had something to do with the way the colors look. the front looks natural, the back seems to be very bright, again i beleive due to the lighting.

FrattLaw

Dragon

I actually saw this coin in person and IMO, it looks more AT in person then in the pics. The color seems to sit on the surface and pools like liquid. Also, look carefully at the rim between 6-9 o'clock on the Reverse, the color is a gun-metal gray, strange color for a coin. Almost like a lack of toning in the one particular area.

Michael

gemtone65

The reverse is indeed suspiciously toned. This is especially so considering that while the obverse is toned as well, it is in a rather mundane but natural brown. You don't often see such combinations.

For what it's worth, the Goldgerg catalogue shows a Peace dollar, dated 1922, and offered 3 lots earlier, with similar colorful and very unusual toning on both sides. I can hardly imagine that these 2 coins came from different consignors. So, if they came from the same consignor, could his name be A. Swimmer? Maybe Alan is moving up in class faster than we thought.

dakra

I'm not very educated on toning but based on my knowledge of Peace Dollars...

It looks a bit naturally toned but my gut instinct is that it was artificially toned. Just a guess.

-Dave

paigowjohnny

I've got a Morgan that looks a lot like that, not quite as vibrant in the colors...raw though. Assuming it's not AT, I'm in a debate with myself as to whether it sat in a Whitman type paper folder for a long time, thereby giving one side the "unusual" toning, or if it's end of roll toning....

Russ

<< <i>Rember that being in a holder doesn't mean it's original, only that it's Market Acceptable >>



This is another thing that I, as a complete newb, have a problem with; the concept of "market acceptable".

First, what is this nebulous "market" where these are supposed to find acceptance? Wouldn't that be the very people in this thread, many of whom have questioned the authenticity of this coin? Or is this "market" the other graders hanging around the grading service?

The other thing that bugs me, and to my way of thinking this is even more important, is the idea that a coin can be submitted to a service and even if that coin is authentic - and the graders think it is it still has to be "market acceptable". Either a coin is original, or it isn't. Why this game?

Russ, NCNE

dragon

Russ,

A coin appearance does not necessarily have to be 'market acceptable' to be holdered by PCGS or NGC. If a coin is 100% authentic as far as the graders are concerned, it will get holdered, albeit at a lower grade in some cases depending on how negative the eye appeal is. There are many very darkly toned, or otherwise very unattractive coins in PCGS/NGC holders that are 100% original, and at the same time nearly impossible to 'market' due to the negative eye appeal or other reasons.

dragon

coinkat

This is a tough call... but I think NGC got it right. Its unusual for a Peace Dollar no question about that.

Typetone

I have one in a PCGS holder with similar colors (though not as intense) that I bought several years ago. So, I would think it could be original. As far as one side and not the other, placing a coin in an old Whitman or similar holder has one side open and one side fully touching cardboard. Could that do it.

Greg

FrattLaw

Gemtone -- I saw the 22 you mentioned, from what I can tell it's natural and a very pretty coin, however it does have typical spots on it from the wash, that is somewhat distracting from the eye appeal.

That's the one I'd probably go after for my set, though.

Michael

vam44

The graders were too busy to look at the reverse.

gsaguy

So, what you're saying is that there's still hope for ASwimmer?

GSAGUY

lava

<< <i>Slabbed or not, I find the toning on that coin suspicious. Peace Dollars just don't naturally tone like that. At the very least, I would say it had some help. >>



I'm with you k6az. My suspicions would keep my money in my pocket on this one. I don't care if it was graded by NGC, NGC makes mistakes too. Realize, of course, that I'm just a complete idiot on AT toning, because Laura keeps tell me so.

stman

I have no problem calling the obv original. And I also have no problem calling the rev blatent AT. Am I an expert? no, but I'm pretty confident.

stman

BTW, whether it's in a new holder or not doesn't matter. Some people will just get the old one reholdered to look like it's up to current standards. Whether current standards mean anything is another subject that is going down the tube IMO, very fast I might add.

But, I guess all some dealers care about is the "market acceptable" thing. Well I say this one is not "collector acceptable." And since Frattlaw seen it in person and says it looks more AT in person that gives even more weight to it.

K6AZ

<< <i>I'm with you k6az. My suspicions would keep my money in my pocket on this one. I don't care if it was graded by NGC, NGC makes mistakes too. Realize, of course, that I'm just a complete idiot on AT toning, because Laura keeps tell me so. >>



Exactly. I dropped out of the Peace Dollar Series a few years ago selling my complete collection, which I spent 15 years putting together, and I looked at an awful lot of Peace Dollars. They just do not tone like that without help. It makes me worry about NGC, as far as I am concerned that coin should not be in a slab.