Biased nonsense in Coin World re: toned coins

Sunnywood

In the May 30, 2005 issue of Coin World, on p. 16, staff writer Paul Gilkes offers a biased and inaccurate Beginner's Workshop column on toned coins. Gilkes begins with, "Toning is to silver what rust is to iron ..." This statement sums up the article's bias against toned coins. Gilkes writes, "The appeal of beautifully toned coins belies the damage that has actually been caused to a silver coin's surfaces." Gilkes then trots out Weimar White's tired diatribe against toning. White's 1994 piece argues that toning represents damage to the coin's surfaces. I disagree. It represent a reactive change, yes. But damage, no. "Damage" implies a loss in value. Beautifully toned coins are often greatly enhanced in value. Damage is only done when a coin tones heavily and unattractively under unfavorable environmental conditions. Damage also occurs when a toned coin is dipped, and the surface layers of silver atoms (along with the sulfur, oxygen and other atomic partners) are savagely stripped away.

As someone with an extensive background in chemistry and metallurgy, I take strong issue with the comparison of thin film layers of silver sulfides and oxides to the heavily scaled ferric oxide known as "rust." Ferric oxide develops and propagates in an entirely different way from the type of reactions that result in beautiful toning on coins. It is natural for surface reactions to occur on most materials over time. The question is what sort of surfaces are developed thereby. Those who collect anitque furniture and other artifacts usually prefer a uniform and attractive natural patina. The same is true of coins. There are very few serious collectors of older material who prefer a fresh untoned appearance to a beautifully toned surface. White and Gilkes can take their biased spin on natural surface conditions elsewhere. I want a 100 year old coin to have 100 year old natural surfaces. If they are beautiful in appearance due to naturally occurring toning, so much the better.

But you don't have to take my word for it. Just look at the market. Beautifully toned coins have ALWAYS commanded substantial premiums. In the area of Morgan dollars, there are many examples with absolutely spectacular multi-colored toning that formed during the many decades that the coins sat in bank vaults. Such coins were often in Mint-sewn burlap bags, or wrapped in paper coin rolls. The slow reactions with the chemicals that outgassed from the paper or burlap over long periods of time created incredible natural rainbows of color. Similarly, coins left in certain types of cardboard and paper albums may develop magnificent coloration over a period of many years. These spectacularly toned pieces routinely sell for many multiples of their untoned "white" cousins. Gilkes and White would have you believe that these coins are "damaged" goods. I strongly and adamantly disagree. In the Goldberg's January pre-Long Beach Sale, Lot 1850 was an 1881-S silver dollar, graded MS66 by PCGS. [see first image below] A typical untoned, "blast white" specimen of this issue might have brought $350 to $400 at auction. But the spectacular and colorful toning on this piece drove the final sale price to $9775. Thus, the beautiful toning made the coin worth 25 times as much. Many bidders actively chased the coin. And this was not a one-time aberration. Magnificently toned Morgan dollars routinely trade privately for many many times the value of their white counterparts.

Don't be fooled by the academic pretense of atomic and molecular analyses. Beautifully toned coins are very much more desirable than their vanilla white counterparts, and they always have been. Shame on Gilkes for misreporting the coin market to beginners. Beginners would be better advised to learn how to recognize beautiful natural toning, and to learn that it enhances a coin's value, and does not "damage" it at all.

Best,
Sunnywood

tradedollarnut

That nickel is butt ugly - send it to me now!

Justhavingfun

Right on, Sunnywood! Your rebuttal to that horrid article is beautifully done and on target.

Warm regards,


Just Having Fun

Myqqy

"The appeal of beautifully toned coins belies the damage that has actually been caused to a silver coin's surfaces."

Sounds like something iwog would say......

MrHalfDime

Sunnywood:

I could not have said it better myself. With me, you are preaching to the choir. Well said, well written. Perhaps you should send in your post as a "Point of View" response to Paul Gilkes article. Better still, I always have the same comment for people who do not like naturally toned coins - Please send them all to me!

pursuitofliberty

Sunnywood,

What a well thought response to what sounds like a very biased column.

Well written and thought ... with a good close ... and, as no one I know will argue, fully accurate.

I heartily second MrHalfDime's idea that you send this rebuttal to Coin World.

Sad to think of how many new collectors might take his giberish as the truth, and then send their naturally toned coins by way of NCS so they can be, as you put it so eloquently ... "vanilla white" again. Worse yet, they might ruin them for the worse themselves.

Yes, PLEASE send your post as a rebuttal to Coin World!!

semolinapilchard

Thank you for the fantastic information, Mr. Sunnywood, and I agree completely!

fountainheadgold

Great rebuttal

numonebuyer

Good post.

I like this one...

Coinosaurus

The fact is, toning represents the initial breakdown of the flow lines on the coin. The most lustrous coin would be one that came right off the die and went into a vacuum sealed bag. The point that WWW, et al, are trying to make is that the most "original" coin is a undipped white blazer that looks the exact same as it did when struck. The problem with this line of thought is that it unfortunately encourages excessive dipping.

Sunnywood is absolutely correct when he says that original toning has and always will be valued. The problem with this line of thought is that it encourages the AT crowd and other nefarious practices.

I'm with the toners myself. As long as the coin is not turning and is being correctly stored, why mess with it? You can always dip later, but you can not undo it.

scher

Sunnywood I really enjoy your posts...right on target and well done.
Bruce Scher

nederveit

Nice information; I second the notion that you should send it to Coin World.

Look at that 1887 Morgan!!

mjhoffpauir

uuuhhh.....yay what he said...actually he is right. Blast white Morgans are great...but toned coins are very unique and desireable. Anyone trying to sell that toned coins are damaged in any way have incurred drain bamage...

TonedPeaceNut

I definitely think his article commands a few of us to pen a couple of Letters to the Editor as to its biased and misinformed slant.

I plan on writing a letter myself, but I would agree that perhaps Sunnywood should author his own counterpoint type of article!


TPN

sumnom

At least I am not the only one who is not into toning. I am glad to finally hear a contrary voice. I do not dislike toning but I do not require it either. I am more interested in the coin rather than the coloring.

northcoin

Thanks for sharing that article. Regardless of what bias the author may have, isn't it true that toning is a continuous chemically reactive process such that a beautifully toned coin could end up toned a dull grey a decade from now? I assume that an airtight slab would slow down the process, but then again I had a dealer pull out some slabbed coins from his vault and express shock at seeing spots that had developed on the coins while locked away in the vault.

coinlieutenant

Does anyone want these? They are all damaged. Pls pm me if interested.

northcoin

Coinlieutenant - I think if you rush those to NCS you might be able to get those back to looking somewhat original.

sumnom

I could make some jewelry with some of those...

coinlieutenant

Good idea guys...I will get on it.

NCS, then to a nice bracelet.

mr1931S

"Toning is to silver what rust is to iron ..."

And damage in a demolition derby is a market acceptable thing.

LincolnCentMan

David

Barry

Yes, PLEASE send your post as a rebuttal to Coin World!!

pharmer

<< <i>"Toning is to silver what rust is to iron ..."

And damage in a demolition derby is a market acceptable thing. >>




That statement at the outset gave me a hint that all to follow was bs, and it turned out to be so. As Sunnywood mentions, rust is an oxide of iron. The colorful toning is silver sulfide. There may be other silver compounds present, but the sulfide is causing the beautiful colors, as explained by Rob790's wonderful treatisehere

Note especially oldcameoproofsguy's post on the second page, and the link mentioned.

It will be interesting to see if Coin World will print the rebuttals. But again, for the author to begin with a blatant falsehood to set up a straw man for the rest of his diatribe is shameful, and not good for the hobby.

nwcs

Sunnywood, you are absolutely right. And those coins are just the icing on the cake.

BillJones

I don’t know why Coin World continues to publish this patently wrong bit of misinformation over and over again. Is Wilmer White, the self-proclaimed expert on the chemistry of silver coinage, the son-in-law of one of the editors or what?

Mr. White claims that ALL toned silver coins coin will eventually turn black if they are not “dipped.” Given proper storage, I can tell him that that assertion is decidedly untrue. I have owned some coins for over 30 years, and they have not changed one bit. In fact if you want to start trouble, you can dip a nicely toned coin and watch what often happens to the recently exposed, unprotected surfaces. Tarnishing and more damage are often the result.

I wish that Coin World would stop publishing this poorly researched information or at least give those who disagree with their assertions more coverage than a “Letter to the Editor.” It has caused trouble in the marketplace and needless damage to many toned coins since they published this tripe more than a decade ago.

cohodk

Coinleutenant and lincolncentman......I'll give you face + $1 for the lot

Anyone who knows what I collect knows how I feel about toning

Sunnywood

Thanks to encouragement from all of you, I have submitted an expanded version of my post to Coin World, and they have already accepted it for publication as a "Guest Commentary." I asked them to mention the newly formed Toned Coin Collectors' Society in my author ID as well.

Thanks everyone !!

Sunnywood

BillJones

Congratulations, Sunnywood!

I hope that you will get better coverage for your article than a letter to the editor. That's were CW relegated the responses of experts like Scott Travers and Julian Leidman when they tried to rebut the first line of foolishness back in 1994. Wilmer White got his story on the front page. The real experts got buried in the “Letters to the Editor” section.

Well at least I'm sure that you price is right. From what I've heard Coin World doesn't pay anything from a fair amount of the stuff they publish from columnists and that like. At least your reward will be to dispel some of the ignorance that Coin World has disseminated through the years about toned silver coins.

rays

<< <i>That nickel is butt ugly - send it to me now! >>



I'd be happy to accept the ugly nickel.

pharmer

Good job, Sunnywood.

ms70

coynclecter

Of course the article was biased, opinions usually are. Naturally it called "biased and inaccurate" when it is an opinion you don't share. If it had been an article about the greatness and value of toned coins the term "bias" would have been replaced by "informative".



<< <i>"Damage" implies a loss in value. >>



Where did you get that? When you turn a tree into a hardwood floor the value goes up . But don't say you didn't "damage" the tree. Value is based on supply/demand.
If the damage puts the coin in a higher demand category the value will increase in spite of the damage. Dipping a coin with crud on it is another example of this. It damages the surface but enhances the value ( of course if done properly)




<< <i>Beautifully toned coins have ALWAYS commanded substantial premiums >>



Not true at all. Only over the past few years have we seen such outrageous premiums for common coins with pretty colors. The first 90 years of the 20th century placed small premiums(20-50%) if any on toned coins. This is a short term trend. If it continues for the next 90 years is yet to be seen.



<< <i>spectacular and colorful toning on this piece drove the final sale price to $9775. Thus, the beautiful toning made the coin worth 25 times as much. >>



For now. The coin is still a common date and if will never hold anything near that value for numismatists. The future of the market for collectors of pretty colors (some name other than numismatist) is yet to have any depth to make a judgement about. One thing for sure, once the ability to "create" toning by duplicating the natural process over time (not chemical AT) we will will see more of these than you can count (probably 10-15 years from now.) These huge premiums will be gone (along with this guys retirement fund).

We still all have the right to collect. I just wouldn't put my retirement fund into toned coins at 25X bid unless you like McDonalds work.

Aside from all that.......that sure is a pretty nickel!!!!

nwcs

Did they tell you what year they'll run it?

Sunnywood

coynclector, I respectfully disagree. The article was clearly both biased and (in some points) inaccurate. The article gave much greater emphasis to White's 1994 piece than to Larry Whitlow's 1994 rebuttal. The author also clearly embraced the White position. The market clearly disagrees with this position. Even your post notes that 20% to 50% premiums for beautiful toning were the norm for the first 90 year of the 20th century. I do not consider that to be a small percentage !!!! While it may not compare to the current phenomenon in toned Commems and Morgans, the 20% to 50% premium that you cite clearly supports my point.

Mind you, I do not take issue with collectors who like white coins - although I do not believe in dipping coins to achieve the objective. Some coins (like Morgan dollars) can be found in a reasonably untoned condition due to the long term storage in bank vaults. THe coins closer to the center of each bag remained untoned, as the outer coins in the bag reacted with and essentially "gettered" (i.e. absorbed) the gaseous contaminants that produce toning. Thus, some older coins can be found in a relatively white condition without dipping. I stress "relatively white." Most white Morgans have been dipped one or more times. Most undipped Morgans show an original "skin" of ivory or other toning, not quite the same look as a dipped white coin.

While I myself do prefer beautiful natural toning on 18th or 19th century coins, I do not discourage other viewpoints. But this article was NOT a balanced piece of journalism !!

Best,
Sunnywood

coynclecter

<< <i> 20% to 50% premium >>



Moving from 50% to 2500% is a whole new world. One that has yet to show longevity.




<< <i>But this article was NOT a balanced piece of journalism !! >>



Very true. But it is also not a requirement of journalism. If it was, most newspapers would be 4 pages long and 3 would be advertisements.

Dou think maybe his name "White" had something to do with his opinion.

Sunnywood

coynclector, I do agree with all those points !! ... including the questions raised by 2500% premiums (although I myself have been guilty of paying 20x for a spectacularly colorful piece that is otherwise common and inexpensive). Foolish, perhaps ... but then, I get to own the coolest coins that way !! And I am not planning on selling them any time soon.

Best,
Sunnywood

coynclecter

Great!!!

So did I win that V nickel:

BillJones

The premiums some people are paying for toning have gotten out of hand. No argument about that here. The way some toning expert want-a-bees flock to truly ugly or profoundly AT coins gets to be too much also. No all toning is attractive. In fact most it is pretty ugly. That’s why the eye-popping coins bring a premium. How much of a premium is a bone of contention.

Still the subject was the foolish contention that silver "rusts like iron," is therefore damaged and destined to turn as black as a lump of coal. Anyone who has a decent eye and who has collected coins for more than a couple years knows that assertion is pure fiction.

Sunnywood

by the way, that 1885 Liberty nickel was the first "V" nickel ever to be awarded the star designation by NGC. The coin was in an NGC MS66 holder when I bought it (at a strong premium, of course, for the toning and the quality.) When they announced the "star" I thought it was a shoe-in. Later, when I sold off most of my complete sets of shield and Liberty nickels, I sold that coin in the NGC MS66* holder, to someone who was (fortunately) willing to pay an even stronger premium !! The presence of the die crack was a plus, because it clearly removed any question of the coin being a proof.

coynclecter, I notice you chose a toned coin for your avatar !!! maybe you're a closet toning lover after all !!!! The 1895 Barber avatar appears to be a quarter, and is probably a proof, but it reminds me of my 1895 25c PCGS MS67 which also has beautifully toned surfaces (and they are NOT damaged !!!!!)

Sunnywood

coynclecter

I very much like attractively toned coins. I have a few that I just won't sell.

My contention has been solely based upon the huge premiums in recent years.10,000 for an 1881-S dollar is ridiculous but I also have the same objections to supergraded coins like the 09-S lincoln in 67 that brought $69,000 and $47,000 when a 66 sells for 2500.

gemtone65

Wonderful article, Sunnywood, and congratulations on its imminent publication. The paper is fully deserving of publication and that was the first thought that came to mind as I was reading it.

Incidentally, to those of you who think that a naturally toned coin will continue to tone indefinitely and eventualy turn black: let me assure you as Bill Jones has that this is simply not true. I've owned many toned coins for 33 years. They were stored in Kointains for 16 years, and then in PCGS holders for the past 17 years. None of them show any added toning or any other effect that would change their appearance. So, if the toning rally is ongoing, then it is so slow as to be completely unnoticeable after more than 3 decades. Which means, you don't have to worry about it if you take proper care of your toned coins -- which applies eqaully if not more so to white coins which do not have a layer of patina to protect them.

TONEDDOLLARS

coynclecter. I know of collectors who have been paying many multiples of sheet, for over 25-30 years for A quality toned Morgans. To them this is not a five year old fad.
TD

morgannut2

Well written rebuttal to this unscientific CoinWorld garbage. Look, any college chem. student knows the chemical reaction process to produce ferric iron (Rust Fe3O4) is fundamentally different that the reactions that add surfur componds to the surface of a copper/silver/gold alloys.
One is protective, the other distructive. A chemist does NOT say a toned coins surface is "damaged", he says it is "changed"--in fact so should any objective newspaper man!!

I'm glad that CoinWorld will set the record straight. If you want to argue over market premiums for toned coins being too high that's another subject. Let's add in a discussion on the "correct" value of 10 Million Dollar and up Fine Art market too---but on the opinion page where it belongs.

Excellant objective response Thanks--

Shamika

Sunnywood,

I'd add something if I could, but I think you pretty much said it all.

numonebuyer

To disregard toned coins is to not acknowledge how silver reacts to its surroundings. Naturally toned coins add a depth to coin collecting. I only own a couple, but I really enjoy studying them. I like completely bright white specimens, PL specimens, DMPL specimens, specimens with that hint of gold edge toning and the completely toned ones. I also like circulated coins of all kinds. It makes no sense to me to ignore a group of coins or to attempt to compare toning with rust.

pursuitofliberty

Thanks to encouragement from all of you, I have submitted an expanded version of my post to Coin World, and they have already accepted it for publication as a "Guest Commentary." I asked them to mention the newly formed Toned Coin Collectors' Society in my author ID as well.

Thanks everyone !!

Sunnywood






Glad to hear it ...

p.s. I don't subscribe to Coin World, and I rarely even buy one anymore, but please ... someone let me know when it comes out so I can get a copy.

ArtR

sunnywood:
Excellent Rebutal:

ArtR

<< <i> coynclecter. I know of collectors who have been paying many multiples of sheet, for over 25-30 years for A quality toned Morgans. To them this is not a five year old fad >>



Jack, you really need to stop talking about me.

TONEDDOLLARS

Hey Art, I may have gone back even further if I was only talking about you.

mr1931S

"Still the subject was the foolish contention that silver "rusts like iron," is therefore damaged and destined to turn as black as a lump of coal. Anyone who has a decent eye and who has collected coins for more than a couple years knows that assertion is pure fiction."

I agree with this. Silver coin only turns black, the color of silver sulfide, if exposure is allowed to a sufficient concentration of Hydrogen sulfide gas.