Is it ethical to repair a coin?
MrEureka
Posts: 24,198 ✭✭✭✭✭
For example, let's say a coin is holed and its owner wants it plugged. Is the owner a bad guy for wanting it plugged? (Never mind that you might be OK with owning a holed coin. It's not your coin.) And would it be wrong for a professional numismatist to plug the hole for a modest fee? And would it be any less ethical if the repair job is virtually undetectable? Or would a better job be more ethical, because a better job was done for the modest fee? And if the owner submits the coin to a TPG because he wants it certified as "genuine", has he done anything wrong? And what if the TPG misses the repair and certifies it as a problem free coin? Would it be wrong of the owner to leave it in the holder? And what if he does, and then he dies, and then his heirs place the coin in an auction?
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
0
Comments
I do not fault someone for having a holed coin plugged
Trying to profit from it by marketing it for something it is not crosses the ethical line
TPG needs to be on their toes - and this is an issue that I suspect I would miss before they would
A Genuine holder becomes problematic unless the issue is identified
If the coin is placed in an auction, the coin needs to be examined and it becomes fair game- it may be a geniune coin with baggage that will be open for debate
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
So, yes, it's ethical to repair the coin, but but only if this is disclosed to whomever is down the chain of ownership (to include TPGs).
Sincerely, An admitted idealist
<< <i>For example, let's say a coin is holed and its owner wants it plugged. Is the owner a bad guy for wanting it plugged? (Never mind that you might be OK with owning a holed coin. It's not your coin.) And would it be wrong for a professional numismatist to plug the hole for a modest fee? And would it be any less ethical if the repair job is virtually undetectable? Or would a better job be more ethical, because a better job was done for the modest fee? And if the owner submits the coin to a TPG because he wants it certified as "genuine", has he done anything wrong? And what if the TPG misses the repair and certifies it as a problem free coin? Would it be wrong of the owner to leave it in the holder? And what if he does, and then he dies, and then his heirs place the coin in an auction? >>
What a coy game. The 'hypothetical (?) owner' should have simply disclosed the repair to the TPG and requested certification as Genuine. Following your scenario, what he did is no different from what coin docs DELIBERATELY do all the time.
So: Yes, he did something wrong.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
According to the (now defunct) PNG coin doctoring definition, it would be unethical to plug the hole and then "represent the condition or value of a coin as being superior to its actual condition or value." If performed by a PNG member, it appears the following chain of events would result in a dealer that is behaving unethically according that definition and that dealer should probably be reprimanded in the effort to make the hobby safe for collectors per their mission statement.
* And if the owner submits the coin to a TPG because he wants it certified as "genuine", has he done anything wrong?
* And what if the TPG misses the repair and certifies it as a problem free coin?
* Would it be wrong of the owner to leave it in the holder?
Steve
World Collection
British Collection
German States Collection
And how one defines "repair".
Is it ethical to hole a coin only to have it worn around the neck on a chain or as a charm on a bracelet, especially if the holed-coin is a classic rarity?
Is it ethical to hollow out a gold eagle and insert the innards of a watch and then place the obv and rev back together to make a classic gold-coin pocket watch?
Is it ethical to carve up a classic silver doller in WWII with grafitti?
Is it ethical to encase a classic coin in plastic?
Is it ethical to counterstamp a classic coin for advertisement purposes?
So, If it is unethical to do the preceding to any coins then I suppose it is just as unethical to "repair" said damages?
At the end of the day, ethics speaks to intent more than the actual outcome of ones deeds. JMHO.
Cheers!
Kirk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BONGO HURTLES ALONG THE RAIN SODDEN HIGHWAY OF LIFE ON UNDERINFLATED BALD RETREAD TIRES
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BONGO HURTLES ALONG THE RAIN SODDEN HIGHWAY OF LIFE ON UNDERINFLATED BALD RETREAD TIRES
<< <i>Not unless they list the coin as something it is not. There needs to be full disclosure. If they don't list the coin as holed/plugged or repaired they are committing fraud "doctor" and should be shot on sight. >>
While I understand your outrage at such deception, I don't believe anyone "doctor" or otherwise "should be shot on sight" for their discretions"
Is this unethical?
Grafitti on coin from WWII? "ITALY" "43"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BONGO HURTLES ALONG THE RAIN SODDEN HIGHWAY OF LIFE ON UNDERINFLATED BALD RETREAD TIRES
no doubt, an expert could have at ANY time plugged that piece. But, it was not plugged.
A Hole is probably the only major significant damage that is "OK".
The Gobrecht dollar with the engraving that was paraded around ATS last year,
that had went to the hospital and been cleaned up.....now that was damage that
was unacceptable to most collectors but added a patina of personality and age to
the coin for other collectors. The owner made the choice to remove the engraving
and now has a coin which is probably not acceptable to either group, but the owner
seemed happy.
so, no, I think any coin should just be preserved in "as found" condition.
at least, if its an old coin and damage is old...it is honest.
But in the end, its YOUR coin, even though technically you are
only the caretaker for any antique.
but no how,
is it right in any way,
especially when the intent is evil and designed
to make profit or deceive the next, and all future owners of the piece.,
no way is it right to make these repairs so skillfully and secretly that the intent is dishonest...
as a neophyte, I picked up a couple bust dollars with undisclosed repairs. Dunno if the person who had them repaired had ill intent or not but by failing to vigilantly ensure that the repair particulars were kept with the coin, somewhere along the line an ethical lapse occurred.
I am somewhat fond of the holes made by square nails. And, considering that the holes likely were functional, they tend to take me back in time... I just hope holed coins don't become more popular. Don't want profiteers putting holes in the coins now!
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>Great questions. I don't think it's unethical to repair any damage on a coin; however, such repairs should be disclosed when the coin is sold. The problem is that somewhere down the line someone will sell the coin without full disclosure that the coin had been repaired. Is it ethical to repair damage on an antique car or a rare painting that had been damaged? >>
So how many here would NOT DO IT because someone down the road would conveniently forget to remember that it had been repaired?
<< <i>
<< <i>Great questions. I don't think it's unethical to repair any damage on a coin; however, such repairs should be disclosed when the coin is sold. The problem is that somewhere down the line someone will sell the coin without full disclosure that the coin had been repaired. Is it ethical to repair damage on an antique car or a rare painting that had been damaged? >>
So how many here would NOT DO IT because someone down the road would conveniently forget to remember that it had been repaired? >>
Not sure but this would make a great question for a poll.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
So, from the answers to Mr E's question, the consensus would be that this is unethical, too?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>What if you sell someone an AU58 coin with full disclosure that the coin is not mint state and then someone down the line dips that coin and then sells it as a mint state example? How is this any different than selling a repaired coin with full disclose and then someone down the line sells it without mentioning that it had been repaired? >>
A grade is an opinion. A repair is a fact. These two things are quite different.
Just a question?
some question are like mixed bag asking one thing and then throwing in a monkey wrench for something different.
One is free to do what ever they want to do with thier coin or coins
however when it comes time to sell a fair and honest disclosure should be made.
This is not always done and I know this from first hand experiance.
I prefer to trust people but it getting harder to do that.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>
<< <i>What if you sell someone an AU58 coin with full disclosure that the coin is not mint state and then someone down the line dips that coin and then sells it as a mint state example? How is this any different than selling a repaired coin with full disclose and then someone down the line sells it without mentioning that it had been repaired? >>
A grade is an opinion. A repair is a fact. These two things are quite different. >>
Whether a coin has wear or not is also a fact. Also, collectors lose more money overall buying overgraded coins than from buying repaired coins.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
- If you make any modifications to a coin (any form of doctoring, dipping, etc that changes the appearance of the coin itself) you must disclose it to a buyer
- If you know of any modifications that were made (from when you bought the coin, hearsay afterwards supported by evidence, etc) you must disclose it to a buyer
- If you strongly suspect and can point to evidence that a coin has been modified in the past, you must disclose it to a buyer
I suppose this is a fairly high ethical bar, but someone has to take the high ground.
http://macrocoins.com
The question of leaving the coin in a "no problem" slab is a tough one. As an honest person I'd call up the slab company and tell them about the problem. They would need to re-holder the coin and pay the shipping both ways IMO. At any rate the TPG would be on the hook for it if it is detected, and TPG would have to pay up under their gurantees.
If I were having the job done, or doing it myself, I'd prefer the best possible workmanship.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Ooooh, did I say that out loud?
"Pity the Fool"
My first month in graduate school we spent a class discussing the National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics, which we were actually expected to read before the class. A gasp went though the students when the class started with the instructor's comment the "From your reading the document last night, you've probably come to the correct conclusion that if you are in compliance with 60% of the code you are out of compliance with the other 40%".
Intent to defraud is at the crux of the matter.
Hypothetical. Collector Joe's grandson inherits a slab graded 20 years ago with a coin that was repaired and subsequently TPG graded as not repaired. Collector Joe's invoice shows he bought the coin 30 years prior to that.. Grandson sends it to a major auction company that doesn't catch it either. It fools everyone until someone catches the repair a year after the sale. No one has an discernable or provable intent to defraud.
This seems much less an ethical issue than a legal one.
The idealists who conclude from this that no coin should ever be repaired should be phoning us from Heaven when they have gotten an answer to our conundrum. And very very soon. Sadly, they have not ascended ot transcended. They use their purity as a way to ignore the reality of Living in the Material World. They might consider Teilhard de Chardin's aphorism "We are not human beings trying to be spiritual, but spiritual being trying to be human".
I read a psychoanalytic article on "Narcissism, Niceness, and Naivete"
It differentiates between innocence and naivete in this way.
Innocence is considered to be a result lack of exposure to experiences which connect one to realities of the world and the human condition. Naivete is the often unconscious acting out of the desire to not be exposed to these realities so that they can continue to be ignored. Ignorance is bliss.
Every post I read here that includes some reference to "A Perfect World" scares me. Not for myself, but for the poster.
"Trying to be human" is a lifelong spiritual task. It's hard. The work is never done. Maintenance is perennially ongoing. On good days tt's two steps forward and one step back. Those who don't recognize the need for as well as the obligation to do this work are the people who really scare me. Not just for them. I don't want to be a passenger in their car. They don't call it the "suicide seat" for nothing.
I'm sure I've overstated both sides of this case. If you're angry at what I've said, then so be it. If it saddens you that I'm a fool then you will not consider your pity is a way to avoid your own humanity. If you feel my distress and have compassion for me, and for what we share, that we all walk in blindness, intentionally or not, I'll see you in Baltimore and we can have a few laughs at our own expense.
Sigh....
Another Jessup rant. Always a colonel of truth.
It became Unethical at that point IMO.
<< <i>There is nothing wrong with plugging a hole so long as the restorative work is not "perfect."
If I were having the job done, or doing it myself, I'd prefer the best possible workmanship. >>
Let's put this way.
Many years ago a well known member of the PNG tried to sell me an early half dime that had been plugged without telling me about it. The way I detected it was to note that one of the letters in "LIBERTY" had a small wave in it, which lead me to spot the tell tale signs of the plug.
He had another early half dime that appeared to have light adjustment marks. When I asked him a price he quoted me a number that was quite attractive for an undamaged coin. Upon further examination with a 10X I saw that the "adjustment marks" were over some initials that had been carved into the neck of Ms. Liberty.
When I declined to buy either piece he asked me why. When I explained the problems, he said, "I was going to tell you that."
YEA RIGHT!
When the famous repair guy in Kentucky did his work years ago, he did it well, but not so well as to defy detection. That is ethical. Doing it to hide the problems with the intent to deceive it is not ethical. I remember reading this about his work years ago.
<< <i>There is nothing wrong with plugging a hole so long as the restorative work is not "perfect."
If I were having the job done, or doing it myself, I'd prefer the best possible workmanship. >>
Yes. Me too.
I don't have a problem with this. My problem lies in the fact that this is such a lucrative
area that people are getting extremely expert at it. It's true that the reason it's so lucrative
is a fault of collectors; namely that we overvalue perfect coins and undervalue culls. But any
job where the payoff is many many fold of the effort is generally (at least probably) unethical
or very close to it.
If this were such a noble profession the coin doctors would still be advertising in the coin pa-
pers like they used to do.
I appreciate good workmanship and quality in everything but you don't see any of these
artistes signing their work. You don't see them bragging about their work to the buyer. You
don't see the damage done to the last owner when the deception is discovered.
It's not fair to hang coin doctors but they need to be shut down. This will probably require
a combination of technology, diligence, and some change in attitudes among collectors. This
may well include legal action against the ones that cause the most destruction to buyers and/
or are easiest to catch.
It will most assuredly require the hobby to be united against the most destrutive practices.
<< <i>For example, let's say a coin is holed and its owner wants it plugged. Is the owner a bad guy for wanting it plugged? (Never mind that you might be OK with owning a holed coin. It's not your coin.) And would it be wrong for a professional numismatist to plug the hole for a modest fee? And would it be any less ethical if the repair job is virtually undetectable? Or would a better job be more ethical, because a better job was done for the modest fee? And if the owner submits the coin to a TPG because he wants it certified as "genuine", has he done anything wrong? And what if the TPG misses the repair and certifies it as a problem free coin? Would it be wrong of the owner to leave it in the holder? And what if he does, and then he dies, and then his heirs place the coin in an auction? >>
If you repair a damaged coin, such as one with a hole drilled into it, and then sell it off without disclosing the damage and repair to it, that's unethical.
However, if you have a damaged coin and try to repair it as best you can, and keep it strictly for your own collection, then no.
Is it ethical to repair a coin? Yes! Why not? Is it ethical to dip a coin? I'm generally not in favor, but it's
not unethical.
If the repair is so good, it cannot be detected by experts, then I would define it as "market acceptable"
and see no reason it would be problematic in a regular holder (as long as the "repair" is stable, which
plugging would be).
We're getting into the realm of philosophical arguments here. If the TPG doesn't know, and the buyer
doesn't know, and nobody else knows, or can know, then is it really a problem?
<< <i> people who have absolutist opinions combined with very little practical experience. >>
You called?
Faux marble. Wood laminates. "Repaired" coins. Again, JMHO.
<< <i>
<< <i> people who have absolutist opinions combined with very little practical experience. >>
You called?
Faux marble. Wood laminates. "Repaired" coins. Again, JMHO. >>
Coins market-acceptable 5 years ago that would now "No Grade"?
Coins that are "artificially white"?
I recall someone (TDN?) discussing the "work" on the King of Siam S$1 PR67. Is that OK? The "D" counterpunch in the cloud of the Dexter-Dunham 1804 PCGS PR64?
Where oh where oh where does one draw the line? It's such a messy world. Pity you? I envy you your self-exalted moral clarity.
<< <i>
Nothing scarier that looking in the mirror and seeing your Shadow when you don't know you have one.
<< <i>How can some folks even type out a response, with all the hand-wringing that goes on around here? >>
Per Dickens from Uriah Heep "I am a very 'umble man".
<< <i>Is it ethical to repair a coin? Yes! Why not? Is it ethical to dip a coin? I'm generally not in favor, but it's
not unethical.
If the repair is so good, it cannot be detected by experts, then I would define it as "market acceptable"
and see no reason it would be problematic in a regular holder (as long as the "repair" is stable, which
plugging would be).
We're getting into the realm of philosophical arguments here. If the TPG doesn't know, and the buyer
doesn't know, and nobody else knows, or can know, then is it really a problem? >>
Wow. Somebody knows, the doctor, and that person acted unethically in selling the coin without disclosure. No one is so good at doctoring that it can't be detected, so eventually it will become known that the coin has a problem.
http://macrocoins.com