OK, time for some discussion regarding submitting toners.
Boom
Posts: 10,165 ✭
* Title edited of my own doing so that there can be no perception of being confrontational.*
________________________________________________________________________
Before I EVEN begin to type, let me make it perfectly clear that I am asking these questions because I'd like some straightforward
answers AND I ask with no Malice intended toward anyone, not our host nor the people ATS!
Since no one mans the Q&A forum and because a LOT of collectors want to know but won't ask - I will.
Exactly WHAT has transpired within the Numismatic Industry (in particular, within the top 2 tpgs) that NOW has coins that exhibit the VERY
SAME type toning that was so pervasive amongst many top, All Time Greatest Registry Sets, being Body Bagged for questionable color?
That's it .... plain & simple. What has happened to facilitate this complete turnaround as toners go?
WHY?
Thank you.
________________________________________________________________________
Before I EVEN begin to type, let me make it perfectly clear that I am asking these questions because I'd like some straightforward
answers AND I ask with no Malice intended toward anyone, not our host nor the people ATS!
Since no one mans the Q&A forum and because a LOT of collectors want to know but won't ask - I will.
Exactly WHAT has transpired within the Numismatic Industry (in particular, within the top 2 tpgs) that NOW has coins that exhibit the VERY
SAME type toning that was so pervasive amongst many top, All Time Greatest Registry Sets, being Body Bagged for questionable color?
That's it .... plain & simple. What has happened to facilitate this complete turnaround as toners go?
WHY?
Thank you.
0
Comments
Let's keep it clean in the hopes we can get some
straight answers from the powers that be.
I'd appreciate it.
Thanx in advance for your cooperation.
The truth in all these threads (and i have been reading dozens of them) gets lost in pointless bickering over and over again - including that one about your quarters.
My theory is that the secret that everyone has always known about is really out this time and due to exposure on forums like this, can no longer be held in denial.
I'm all ears.
ed for typo
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
I ask this seemingly hard question
on behalf of ALL interested collectors.
Please - no name calling, insinuations or inuendoes, OK!?
Let's see if we can get to the Truth of the matter.
No need to get this thread yanked or vaporized guys.
If the premise is true, there are many possible explanations. Market acceptable is a moving target--always has been. Those that think otherwise are fooling themselves. CAC is new in the past two years, so some might cite that as a factor. Another possible explaination would be off the record information obtained from some folks involved with, or complicit with, those making attractive slabbed toners by the bucket full. In this scenario, because the info obtained is off the record, the grading companies can't cite that as a reason. I've been around long enough to know that a lot of stuff happens in the coin hobby with a wink-and-nod kind of understanding. If this is the case, normal folks with normal access will never know why, and those that do know will be extremely reluctant to talk out of school.
/edit to add: I thought of another explanation, at least at NGC. NGC started imaging every coin sent in for grading about a year ago. Maybe that mass imaging and archiving has yielded some interesting information and standards for toner acceptability have changed because of that.
Hoard the keys.
coins recently placed in GENUINE holders that display the SAME EXACT
type toning.
Suffice to say that tonight I saw such a coin and the toning is EXACTLY
the same as some prior PCGS 67. It, however, is in a GENUINE holder.
This, I DO NOT comprehend & is the reason for this thread.
Something pretty darned significant inevitably MUST have transpired
recently within the Numismatic Community to so profoundly affect
BOTH tpgs. Somehow, I knew this would one day come to be & it's
here - NOW! And NO, personally, I DO NOT believe it's Fear of CAC.
This may prove to be a somewhat challenging thread, especially
without photographs but we CAN DO THIS! CIVILLY.
without photographs but we CAN DO THIS! CIVILLY.>>
TTIWWOP's.
I think some of it is directly caused by Cac, and collector awareness.
But, you want it from the powers that be…so ignore this post.
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
<< <i>Face it, home made toners went spiraling out of control (because people were willing to pay a premium for toning, they started appearing en-mass at the TPG‘s doorstep) and now every toned coin submitted is subsequently suspect of the unscrupulous deeds. If it does not pass the mustard on the initial inspection, return it to the submitter and not to take any chances of holdering a faux toned coin.
But, you want it from the powers that be…so ignore this post. >>
I like that theory - home mode toners made the professional toners look obvious.
Knowledge is power.
But let's hear it from the bosses- these are all just guesses so far. Right Boom?
FWIW, I am & have always been a very studious person.
I love to read and am a firm believer that Knowledge is Power.
From the time I first learned to speak, till now - the same 2
questions I've always asked are "What's that?" and "Why?"
Nothing has changed in this area with the passage of time.
Like most here have probably done, I've taken the ANA
correspondence courses in Grading US Coins as well as
Detecting Altered & Counterfeit US coins. These two
courses are MUST DOs for any serious collector, IMHO.
Cont'd ~ (Edit - spelling!)
This is just my 2c
<< <i>Before I EVEN begin to type, let me make it perfectly clear that I am asking these questions because I'd like some straightforward
answers AND I ask with no Malice intended toward anyone, not our host nor the people ATS!
Since no one mans the Q&A forum and because a LOT of collectors want to know but won't ask - I will.
Exactly WHAT has transpired within the Numismatic Industry (in particular, within the top 2 tpgs) that NOW has coins that exhibit the VERY
SAME type toning that was so pervasive amongst many top, All Time Greatest Registry Sets, being Body Bagged for questionable color?
That's it .... plain & simple. What has happened to facilitate this complete turnaround as toners go?
WHY?
Thank you. >>
ATTA BOY!!
- Marcus Tullius Cicero, 106-43 BC
After all, it did end up in a slab.
The name is LEE!
I've been a coin collector since I was a Cub Scout in Elementary School. I've handled
countless numbers of coins over the years & am very much "Old School" meaning I
was taught NOT to mess with, dip, wipe or otherwise alter any coin - for any reason.
Imagine the look on my face when I first saw very surreal looking, electrically toned
certified Morgan Silver Dollars!
The first thought that crossed my mind WAS that they were unlike any Silver I had
ever seen. Naturally, this lead to "What's THAT" and "Why/ How?"
I've seen tons of toned coins that frankly, just never set well with me because
they LOOK, TO ME to be very un-natural .... unlike ANY I had ever seen before,
in all my years.
I quickly learned to spot altered surfaces BUT, what were these coins doing, sitting in
reputable grading services' "slabs"? I never bought into it. I didn't like it then and I still
don't but NOW, coins that ARE undeniably Naturally Mint-set toned or Album toned AND
are (to me) readily discernable from torched or chemically altered coins - are wrongly
being BodyBagged!
In my opinion, a Professional grader (one that looks at coins all day - everyday) certainly
should be able to differentiate between NT & AT specimen.... and it's WRONG to make the
good coins suffer for the offenses of past coins. Cooked coins (literallly), torched coins,
chemically burned coins look nothing like NT coins.
Surely, professional graders CAN tell the difference - or at least I'd like to believe that they can.
I am all for bagging such coins BUT why bag coins to which none of the above has been done?
This to bring me right back to my OP. What EXACTLY has transpired to evoke such a widespread
outright phobia/ witchhunt on ALL toned coins? Perhaps this is just a temporary over-adjustment.
I certainly hope so but STILL would like and appreciate some definitive answers to concerns we
apparently all share.
Respectfully,
BOOM ~
*Edit - spelling. (What else!)
<< <i>I've been a coin collector since I was a Cub Scout in Elementary School. I've handled
countless numbers of coins over the years & am very much "Old School" meaning I
was taught NOT to mess with, dip, wipe or otherwise alter any coin - for any reason.
Imagine the look on my face when I first saw very surreal looking, electrically toned
certified Morgan Silver Dollars!
The first thought that crossed my mind WAS that they were unlike any Silver I had
ever seen. Naturally, this lead to "What's THAT" and "Why/ How?"
I've seen tons of toned coins that frankly, just never set well with me because
they LOOK, TO ME to be very un-natural .... unlike ANY I had ever seen before,
in all my years.
I quickly learned to spot altered surfaces BUT, what were these coins doing, sitting in
reputable grading services' "slabs"? I never bought into it. I didn't like it then and I still
don't but NOW, coins that ARE undeniably Naturally Mint-set toned or Album toned AND
are (to me) readily discernable from torched or chemically altered coins - are wrongly
being BodyBagged!
In my opinion, a Professional grader (one that looks at coins all day - everyday) certainly
should be able to differentiate between NT & AT specimen.... and it's WRONG to make the
good coins suffer for the offenses of past coins. Cooked coins (literallly), torched coins,
chemically burned coins look nothing like NT coins.
Surely, professional graders CAN tell the difference - or at least I'd like to believe that they can.
I am all for bagging such coins BUT why bag coins to which none of the above has been done?
This to bring me right back to my OP. What EXACTLY has transpired to evoke such a widespread
outright phobia/ witchhunt on ALL toned coins? Perhaps this is just a temporary over-adjustment.
I certainly hope so but STILL would like and appreciate some definitive answers to concerns we
apparently all share.
Respectfully,
BOOM ~
*Edit - spelling. (What else!)
You took the words right out of my mouth Boom. Every single collector I have spoken to is not at all happy with all the unquestionably natural toned coins that not being graded when they should be. I keep seeing forum members mention that if the graders are the slightest bit unsure of the originality of the toning on a coin they will not grade it. If this is really the case (which I question) I feel as though there should not be any submission fee for that coin. After all, the certification is supposed to act as an assurance. I would love to here from PCGS why this is going on at the extreme that it is. It is obvious from reading all the posts recently that we collectors are very concerned and many (such as myself) have stopped submitting coins until some changes in toned coin grading can be seen. If all these NT coins keep showing up in genuine holders I would think that submission numbers are going to go downhill quicker than the economy during Bush's Presidency.
Actually they can't and a lot of AT coins are in slabs because the "professionals" got it wrong. Now they err on the side of caution, which means a lot of NT coins go into "genuine" holders.
Boom - re-read your original post. You emphatically state that the exact same toning used to grade and now it bags. You even shout it in CAPS. That is argumentative in the extreme, and then you request civillity in responses?
If you actually want this questions answered by PCGS, this is not the way to go about asking it.
Why ask your question this way? WHY?
merse
written by Aaron Sorkin
Jessep: You want answers?
Kaffee (Tom Cruise): I think I'm entitled to them.
Jessep: You want answers?
Kaffee: I want the truth!
Jessep: You can't handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has walls. And those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives...You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall.
We use words like honor, code, loyalty...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!
Kaffee: Did you order the code red?
Jessep: (quietly) I did the job you sent me to do.
Kaffee: Did you order the code red?
Jessep: You're goddamn right I did!!
<< <i><<This may prove to be a somewhat challenging thread, especially
without photographs but we CAN DO THIS! CIVILLY.>>
TTIWWOP's.
I think some of it is directly caused by Cac, and collector awareness. >>
I don't think that CAC gives a chit about toning, since they aren't all about eye appeal.
IF I were a grading company who guaranteed coins I slabbed and backed them up that with my money and good name, and...
IF I hosted a public forum for discussion of all things coins, and...
On that public forum one after another claimed to have artificially toned coins which later got into the slabs I guaranty...
Well, I know what I'd do.
<< <i>I don't pretend to know the answers... but...
IF I were a grading company who guaranteed coins I slabbed and backed them up that with my money and good name, and...
IF I hosted a public forum for discussion of all things coins, and...
On that public forum one after another claimed to have artificially toned coins which later got into the slabs I guaranty...
Well, I know what I'd do. >>
Re-examine your process for grading toned coins?
1/2 Cents
U.S. Revenue Stamps
I'm just saying... since I have no answers
Plagiarized by WS
Willis: You want answers?
Boom: I think I'm entitled to them.
Willis: You want answers?
Boom: I want the truth!
Willis: You can't handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has plastic holders. And those plastic holders have to be guarded by men with money. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Boom? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for toned coins in PCGS holders and you curse the Genuine holders. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that Genuine coins , while tragic, probably saved jobs. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves jobs...You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me to put your toned coins in plastic holders. You need me to get your toned coins in plastic holders.
We use words like Whizzed, code 92, tooled ...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent grading coins. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very top tier grading service I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up your Genuine holder and not post on the forum. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!
Boom: Did you order the code 91?
Willis: (quietly) I did the job you paid me to do.
Boom: Did you order the code 91?
Willis; You're goddamn right I did
<< <i>A Few Good Coins
Plagiarized by WS
Willis: You want answers?
Boom: I think I'm entitled to them.
Willis: You want answers?
Boom: I want the truth!
Willis: You can't handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has plastic holders. And those plastic holders have to be guarded by men with money. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Boom? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for toned coins in PCGS holders and you curse the Genuine holders. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that Genuine coins , while tragic, probably saved jobs. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves jobs...You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me to put your toned coins in plastic holders. You need me to get your toned coins in plastic holders.
We use words like Whizzed, code 92, tooled ...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent grading coins. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very top tier grading service I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up your Genuine holder and not post on the forum. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!
Boom: Did you order the code 91?
Willis: (quietly) I did the job you paid me to do.
Boom: Did you order the code 91?
Willis; You're goddamn right I did >>
ROFLMFAO
merse
<< <i>I don't pretend to know the answers... but...
IF I were a grading company who guaranteed coins I slabbed and backed them up that with my money and good name, and...
IF I hosted a public forum for discussion of all things coins, and...
On that public forum one after another claimed to have artificially toned coins which later got into the slabs I guaranty...
Well, I know what I'd do. >>
This I why I prefer to stick with blast white coins!
1) Standards have changed. That isn't going to be a happy answer and the grading companies would be reluctant to ever admit to it. Standards do sometimes change when bread and butter big time customers make comments, or market forces start rejecting graded coins (CAC).
2) A big time coin doc retires, confesses to getting 10,000 attractive toners slabbed a year, every year for the past five years. The doc does a show and tell, so that graders now know to look for and to reject those coins, all off the record. Again, grading companies would never want this info out there. A smaller example of this would be company insiders showing the graders coins that they personally toned very quickly using dubious methods, but that look great. Now that they have been show such coins, the graders now reject them.
3) The original premise is wrong. Quite possible, just because one expert believes certain coins look virtually identical to others, doesn't mean that ten other experts will also agree. Just because one expert thinks the game has changed, doesn't mean that it really has. The sample sizes are so small, that it is all anecdotal story telling, not hard data.
4) Change is part of the process. From the day the doors opened, using human graders, consistency has always been the goal, but never could approach 100%.
HRH stated on this very chatroom that PCGS's prior policy was "if we're not 100% sure it's AT, then we'll slab it". As part of their solutions to the coin doctoring problem, PCGS and NGC recently stated that their policy is now "if we're not 100% sure it's NT, we won't slab it".
You need look no further than those creating all those toners for the reason for their change.
Is - Guilty until proven innocent.
It's the wave of the future. Sad but true.
I just know that it is truly a shame that after more than 20 years of Professional Grading Companies, that there is still a constant and changing 'evolution' of grading standards.
This is what I and most other collectors find troubling and very frustrating.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
The services have always had a tough time striking a balance between strict policy and allowing doctored coins into holders. For example, if one studies the population of certified early $10 eagles, one comes quickly to the conclusion that most of the coins have been messed with at some point. Ditto for most early coinage. If the services were really strict about it, there would be so few coins in holders that there wouldn't be enough supply to sustain the market. So there has been a leniency towards "market-acceptable" coins over the years. That leniency was sometimes exploited by those who seek to profit from altering coins. Countervalent forces such as the "coin posse" and CAC represent a swing of the market pendulum back towards strict policy. The current attitude towards toned coins is a natural correllary. I myself have examined and re-examined my own toned coins, and have asked CAC to examine them, in order to ensure that I have natural and original examples.
I agree with the concept that only the 100% certain NT coins should get into holders at this point (with the likely exception of some early type coins). It is the only way to stop the fraudulent defacement of coins, and the corruption of our collectibles market by those who seek to counterfeit nature's work in search of monetary gain. However, all the AT coins do not diminish my appreciation and enjoyment of the beautifully and naturally toned coins that I prefer.
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
This is what I and most other collectors find troubling and very frustrating.>>
I am not one of those collectors. While I dont like changing standards midstep, I feel this is a change for the better.
Anything questionable should not be slabbed. It should be bagged and only 100% NT no question coins should be slabbed.
<<There is nothing new about people loving toned coins, nor is there anything new about premiums being paid for beautiful toning. There is nothing new about both professional and amateur attempts to tone and retone coins. What is new, perhaps, is a greater onslaught of artificially toned coins in the past few years. For me, it is a real annoyance, as the appearance of these coins devalues and throws into question the legitimacy of the wonderful toned Morgan dollars that I have collected for many years. For this reason, I welcome the new conservatism at the services. When market conditions change, it is only right that the services change their policies in response. I applaud their flexibility in responding to changing market realities.
The services have always had a tough time striking a balance between strict policy and allowing doctored coins into holders. For example, if one studies the population of certified early $10 eagles, one comes quickly to the conclusion that most of the coins have been messed with at some point. Ditto for most early coinage. If the services were really strict about it, there would be so few coins in holders that there wouldn't be enough supply to sustain the market. So there has been a leniency towards "market-acceptable" coins over the years. That leniency was sometimes exploited by those who seek to profit from altering coins. Countervalent forces such as the "coin posse" and CAC represent a swing of the market pendulum back towards strict policy. The current attitude towards toned coins is a natural correllary. I myself have examined and re-examined my own toned coins, and have asked CAC to examine them, in order to ensure that I have natural and original examples.
I agree with the concept that only the 100% certain NT coins should get into holders at this point (with the likely exception of some early type coins). It is the only way to stop the fraudulent defacement of coins, and the corruption of our collectibles market by those who seek to counterfeit nature's work in search of monetary gain. However, all the AT coins do not diminish my appreciation and enjoyment of the beautifully and naturally toned coins that I prefer.>>
Very well said sir!
I have to agree with most, if not all your points in this post.
However, new standards for what get's certified need to evolve. I agree with Sonnywood and stinkinlincoln and think they are on the right track here.
But, Boom's question is still valid. It would be good to hear official word from the "company".
Exactly how have the 'market conditions' changed as of late to warrant a whole new level of conservatism? IMO there are no 'changing market realities' as far as any new hoards of upper end AT'd coins out in the marketplace in the context that this AT was applied to realize a premium for the color only. The fact still remains that the upper echelon of coin docs (those who can and have fooled PCGS/NGC in the past) for the most part apply some degree of AT to mask other issues or repaired problems on coins, and not simply for the sake of applying AT alone. Most of the AT jobs that are done to try and replicate original and colorful bag/rainbow toning alone are done by the at home amateur do it yourself guys and are typically easily detectable.
<< <i><<I just know that it is truly a shame that after more than 20 years of Professional Grading Companies, that there is still a constant and changing 'evolution' of grading standards.
This is what I and most other collectors find troubling and very frustrating.>>
I am not one of those collectors. While I dont like changing standards midstep, I feel this is a change for the better.
Anything questionable should not be slabbed. It should be bagged and only 100% NT no question coins should be slabbed.
<<There is nothing new about people loving toned coins, nor is there anything new about premiums being paid for beautiful toning. There is nothing new about both professional and amateur attempts to tone and retone coins. What is new, perhaps, is a greater onslaught of artificially toned coins in the past few years. For me, it is a real annoyance, as the appearance of these coins devalues and throws into question the legitimacy of the wonderful toned Morgan dollars that I have collected for many years. For this reason, I welcome the new conservatism at the services. When market conditions change, it is only right that the services change their policies in response. I applaud their flexibility in responding to changing market realities.
The services have always had a tough time striking a balance between strict policy and allowing doctored coins into holders. For example, if one studies the population of certified early $10 eagles, one comes quickly to the conclusion that most of the coins have been messed with at some point. Ditto for most early coinage. If the services were really strict about it, there would be so few coins in holders that there wouldn't be enough supply to sustain the market. So there has been a leniency towards "market-acceptable" coins over the years. That leniency was sometimes exploited by those who seek to profit from altering coins. Countervalent forces such as the "coin posse" and CAC represent a swing of the market pendulum back towards strict policy. The current attitude towards toned coins is a natural correllary. I myself have examined and re-examined my own toned coins, and have asked CAC to examine them, in order to ensure that I have natural and original examples.
I agree with the concept that only the 100% certain NT coins should get into holders at this point (with the likely exception of some early type coins). It is the only way to stop the fraudulent defacement of coins, and the corruption of our collectibles market by those who seek to counterfeit nature's work in search of monetary gain. However, all the AT coins do not diminish my appreciation and enjoyment of the beautifully and naturally toned coins that I prefer.>>
Very well said sir!
I have to agree with most, if not all your points in this post. >>
Have you or CAC come to the conclusion that any of your coins are questionable? If so, how have you handled it?
I think some toned coins are pretty and very collectable, I feel all toners should be labeled as "Genuine" for the coin itself and no id for toning..
I am going out on a limb and will say in years to come, no toners with multi loud color will be slabbed with a grade, at least not at PCGS or NGC and just graded with a # as Genuine only..
It is a freaking shame that crooks have denounce another cool hobby by forging altered coins to make huge, yes huge money off of collectors and now the Pros/grading companies.. Yaha
No.
For several reasons.
First, I dont own any slabbed coins currently. I sold off the majority of them several years ago. The few toners I did have were looked at by afew experts in those series and all were ok with them, and myself. (Which was good enough for me)
I had one coin when I first started collecting Lincolns fool me. It was maybe my first or second year in coins and I only bought maybe 3-4 slabbed coins up to this point. Well, I saw a coin with some wild toning and jumped on it. It arrived and it looked just like the pictures... But, what I didnt know at the time was how MS70 can and will ruin copper. I bought a dog for several thousand dollars. I had it for maybe 10 hours and after talking with some very helpful people about toning and this series, I sent it back for a full refund. It was slabbed by one of the top two co.'s out there... And it had a Star.
It was really my only bad buy in coins as of yet...
Second, Personally I dont see a need for Cac services when I buy slabbed coins. If I had a coin that was questionable, I would first send it in to PCGS for review. If nothing was done, and I still felt it was questionable, I would send it to JA and Cac.
If it came back with a bean from Cac, and the review from PCGS was ok, I would more than likely sell it anyway. Obviously I had a different feeling of this coin, for what ever reason. Why keep it even if its not questionable. There was something that stood out about that coin so I personally could never truly love that coin. No need to keep it.
Once I start buying some slabbed coins for my N.O. collection, I wouldnt hesitate using Cac to see how they do. When starting a new series or collection for me, I always buy slow and steady. I feel if I do end up buying some toners for this set, and they are questionable at any point to me, I would use Cac to see what they thought. And or PCGS review.
I think with those two services, your chances of getting messed with coins is less likely.
Honestly though, I really feel like if one gets to know the coins they collect and the differences with toning, strike characteristics, planchet and alloy qualities, and everything else involved in the striking of coins, one should be able to use their own eyes to spot the dogs. And the truly nice coins for any grade.
All of the above is purely my opinion and may vary wildly from yours. Thanks for reading it and hopefully keeping an open mind.
they are running scared, and afraid to slab what could later sting them. Couple that with the fact that they get paid whether they slab it or not, and it comes up to nothing more than a cash grab.
Any coin in my collection that I determine to be AT (with the further advice and expertise of PCGS, CAC and various people in the business whose opinions I value on this matter) would be cracked out, dipped, and resubmitted as a blast white coin. Period. I will not have any AT coins in my set, nor would I knowingly allow any AT coin out into the marketplace. I have cracked and dipped three coins to date (one Barber quarter and two Morgans). To put that in context, it is over a ten year period, and I have owned over (100) Barber quarters and over (200) Morgans. The two Morgans that I cracked were an ICG coin and an NGC coin (I used to buy coins from other services as well as PCGS, but have changed that strategy over the years).
There is one PCGS coin in my set that I myself questioned, but every other expert has signed off on as NT. So for now it stays, and it will not be cracked and dipped, but I won't sell it either. By the way, I believe that if I had been buying uncertified coins during this period, I would have had many many more opportunities to make mistakes.
dragon, I will disagree with you ... there have indeed been increased attempts lately to put colorful AT on coins for the sole purpose of realizing a premium for the color. The services are right to respond to this by tightening standards.
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
<< <i>The services are right to respond to this by tightening standards. >>
I agree with this statement but I wish the standards had been kept tight from the beginning.
This problem of AT coins might not have been as prolific in this great hobby.
We are now paying for prior lapses in our hobby's security.
Let's hope this lesson is heeded.
"Bongo hurtles along the rain soaked highway of life on underinflated bald retread tires."
~Wayne
The fact that virtually none of my PCGS-certified Morgans failed color scrutiny at CAC (and separate examination by a talented coin doctor who shall remain unnamed), is a testament to PCGS's standards over time. It is NOT true, in my opinion, that PCGS was previously very lax, and has only just recently woken up. They were always quite aware of the AT problem, and have always tried to keep those coins out of their holders. It's just that now, they are perhaps even more strict, with the "burden of proof" being on the coin - it has to 100% walk and talk NT.
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
<< <i>dragon, I will disagree with you ... there have indeed been increased attempts lately to put colorful AT on coins for the sole purpose of realizing a premium for the color. The services are right to respond to this by tightening standards. >>
This seems to make the point that NO ONE is absolutely qualified to determine if any given toned coin is or is not AT. If so, there would be no
need to "tighten standards". The standard would be absolute (yes or no).
Keeping them out is the right thing to do if there has been an increase in the number of coins in that category, produced by profiteers trying to game the system by counterfeiting nature's work and defrauding the collecting community.
Edited to add: by the way, I have no inside track on PCGS's "standards." As far as I can tell, they are tight now, and they have always been tight, and that's it. I am only basing my other comments on what TDN reported above, that apparently HRH indicated a tightening of standards with respect to color. Frankly, I don't see why this needs to be a topic of so much discussion, as it seems rather obvious that they should have tight standards, and should err on the side of caution, and should respond to increased submissions of AT material by becoming even more cautious.
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
I hope this subject remains open for civilized discussion.
If we take what we know as "given", things begin to make sense.
Lets figure according to PCGS.com there are over 17+ million coins graded as of 01/09. Take only 1% of that 17 million which a coin was submitted twice and that's 170,000. Now 170,000 x whatever the submission cost is running (not sure about that) and that's how much extra they make from only 1% being submitted twice. Now figure in the crackouts with resubmission because a dis-satisfied grade, being BBd, or also coming back genuine. That's a lot of extra cash.
Since TPG's are more strict with slabbing toners now, will the new slabs with toners sell for a premium more so than they would have at one time? Due to the tight color standards, it would seem that if less are making it into graded holders, than the ones that are, would be rarer? Since they are obviously 100% NT right?