NT v. AT. Consider this hypothetical and tell us what you think.
SanctionII
Posts: 12,474 ✭✭✭✭✭
The hypothetical is:
Two coins of the same series, date and mintmark are sitting before you on your desk.
Both coins are graded the same grade by a 1st tier TPG.
Both coins have the same toning pattern and color. Both coins have the essentially the same eye appeal and are equally attractive from a subjective/qualitative standpoint. The marks and other negative aspects of both coins are essentially the same in quality and quantity so that one coin is not appreciably better or worse than the other from a technical standpoint. You know nothing about the history of each of the coins and after looking and and evaluating same, you call it a "toss up" and state you like both coins equally.
After calling the two coins a "toss up", you then are informed that one had been sitting in a Whitman album for 50 years and that the toning resulted from sitting in the album. You are informed that the other coins also sat in the same album for three weeks and that the toning resulted in three weeks instead of 50 years as a result of "human intervention" by either:
a. the best coin doctor alive today; or
b. the owner's 12 year old son who is a genius and who studies metalurgy and chemistry and who did the "human intervention" as a school project; or
c. the owner's wife, a non collector, who got upset at the amount of time her husband spends on the hobby and took out her anger by taking the album hiding it on the shelf in the garage, above the furnace, behind some old open bottles and cans of paint, turpentine, shellack, lawn fertilizer and gasoline.
Does this new information about the history of each coin make you change your mind about them? Do you now dislike the one that toned in three weeks? If so, why?
Does whether or not your opinion about the coin that toned in three weeks changes depend on whether the 'human intervention" arose from the coin doctor, the 12 year old genius son or the wife? If so, why?
Does one's distaste for AT coins (even ones where you can not tell if they are AT) derive solely from the fact that person causing the AT "intended" to change the appearance of the coin in a shorter time period than nature would have taken?; or does the person causing the AT have to "intend" to cause the AT in a shorter time period AND also gain financially from his/her efforts?
I have a difficult time answering the above. If two coins look the same (one AT and one NT) and I like them both equally, one part of me says it should not matter which is AT and which is NT. Another part of me really does not like the idea that someone is messing with the coins to alter their appearance solely to line his/her pockets through the sale of AT coins. Then again, AT coins which can not be distinguished from NT coins and which are attractive and eye appealing are things which cause me to marvel at the talent of the person who created them.
Your thoughts?
Two coins of the same series, date and mintmark are sitting before you on your desk.
Both coins are graded the same grade by a 1st tier TPG.
Both coins have the same toning pattern and color. Both coins have the essentially the same eye appeal and are equally attractive from a subjective/qualitative standpoint. The marks and other negative aspects of both coins are essentially the same in quality and quantity so that one coin is not appreciably better or worse than the other from a technical standpoint. You know nothing about the history of each of the coins and after looking and and evaluating same, you call it a "toss up" and state you like both coins equally.
After calling the two coins a "toss up", you then are informed that one had been sitting in a Whitman album for 50 years and that the toning resulted from sitting in the album. You are informed that the other coins also sat in the same album for three weeks and that the toning resulted in three weeks instead of 50 years as a result of "human intervention" by either:
a. the best coin doctor alive today; or
b. the owner's 12 year old son who is a genius and who studies metalurgy and chemistry and who did the "human intervention" as a school project; or
c. the owner's wife, a non collector, who got upset at the amount of time her husband spends on the hobby and took out her anger by taking the album hiding it on the shelf in the garage, above the furnace, behind some old open bottles and cans of paint, turpentine, shellack, lawn fertilizer and gasoline.
Does this new information about the history of each coin make you change your mind about them? Do you now dislike the one that toned in three weeks? If so, why?
Does whether or not your opinion about the coin that toned in three weeks changes depend on whether the 'human intervention" arose from the coin doctor, the 12 year old genius son or the wife? If so, why?
Does one's distaste for AT coins (even ones where you can not tell if they are AT) derive solely from the fact that person causing the AT "intended" to change the appearance of the coin in a shorter time period than nature would have taken?; or does the person causing the AT have to "intend" to cause the AT in a shorter time period AND also gain financially from his/her efforts?
I have a difficult time answering the above. If two coins look the same (one AT and one NT) and I like them both equally, one part of me says it should not matter which is AT and which is NT. Another part of me really does not like the idea that someone is messing with the coins to alter their appearance solely to line his/her pockets through the sale of AT coins. Then again, AT coins which can not be distinguished from NT coins and which are attractive and eye appealing are things which cause me to marvel at the talent of the person who created them.
Your thoughts?
0
Comments
merse
In all honesty, I think part of my response to the above hypothetical would be how much of a premium I paid for the toning. I have certainly unloaded coins that I originally thought were NT that over time I've learned were AT, and replaced them with not as attractively toned coins that I'm sure are NT.
U.S. Type Set
I throw my hands up at these 'clown car' coins and purchase only blast white coins.
As we know, blast white coins are never doctored. So they are totally safe.
BST Transactions: DonnyJf, MrOrganic, Justanothercoinaddict, Fivecents, Slq, Jdimmick,
Robb, Tee135, Ibzman350, Mercfan, Outhaul, Erickso1, Cugamongacoins, Indiananationals, Wayne Herndon
Negative BST Transactions:
in reality though, I think there would be a marked visible difference and therefore your scenario would never happen.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
Camelot
As for hypotheticals that Sanction presents: The examples where there is an obvious intent to deceive are easy to dismiss immediately. It's the "accidental" examples that seem to be the baby thrown out with the bathwater, for the reason outlined in the opening sentence.
Respectfully submitted as MHO...Mike
Doesnt originality mean the piece is original? How does time factor in to this?