Options
looks awfully white for a 173 year old coin
ebaybuyer
Posts: 2,984 ✭✭✭
regardless of how many posts I have, I don't consider myself an "expert" at anything
0
Comments
<< <i>link
how does a coin of this age stay so bright white ? >>
It gets dipped.
Coin Rarities Online
<< <i>
<< <i>link
how does a coin of this age stay so bright white ? >>
It gets dipped. >>
One of the easiest questions that I've see for quite awhile.
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>not a spot of tarnish, no luster at all... have to wonder how a coin like this ends up in a top tier holder >>
I keep trying to say originality is not part of the technical grading process for the TPG or CAC. While eye appeal is factored in somewhat for the market portion of the NET overall grade and what grader doesn't love some skin on a coin, if the TPGs and CAC didn't grade coins that have had a bath in their life they would all go out of business in short order save for their modern department.
Market acceptibility can be lustrous and white and that's neither wrong nor right.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
1. it was dipped.
2. it was minted about an hour ago.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
<< <i>Only from two choices:
1. it was dipped.
2. it was minted about an hour ago. >>
take your choice lmao
<< <i>My eyesight is not what it used to be but I would be more concerned that an AU 50 coin doesn't appear to have a single mark in the fields. >>
I agree, that might be why it's an AU 50. Marked down, but no #92 designation.
<< <i>not a spot of tarnish, no luster at all... have to wonder how a coin like this ends up in a top tier holder >>
Not only a top holder but it also has the "holy grail" of the "green football. "
The point is dipping has been an accepted practice in numismatics for a long time. Do I think that it has been done more times than necessary? Yes. Do I think that it should never be done? Decidedly not. There are some ugly, tarnished coins than can be improved by a judicious dip. No coin below the grade of AU-55 should ever be dipped IMO, but there are some pieces that have had their appearance improved and their market value enhanced by dipping.
You have a perfect right to reject any coin that has been dipped for your collection. You do not have a perfect right to impose your opinions upon the grading policies of the TPGs over dipping.
If the truth be known, many of the coins that some people think are beautifully toned and original are pieces that have retoned after they were dipped. I'd challenge any expert who thinks he can spot such coins with perfect accuracy. There are also Brilliant Uncirculated and Proof coins out there that have been dipped that look very much like their undipped counterparts. Once more I challenge the experts.
If all of the dipped silver coins were to be rejected for grading or given a mark to indicate that they had been dipped on the holder the number of "clean grade" 19th century and early 20th century silver coins available to collectors would be considerably diminished. That would drive up prices for the pieces that remain to a point that could do damage to this hobby. Be careful what you with for. The results could be more detrimental than you ever might have dreamed.
If it were original, AU55 seems reasonable.
<< <i>Details are better than AU50. The dip probably did more harm than good.
If it were original, AU55 seems reasonable. >>
I would tend to agree, but one can never know for sure without seeing the before and after photos.
The does have a sort of funky P-L look to it that does not look natural for a 19th century coin.
Pete
Louis Armstrong
<< <i>Details are better than AU50. The dip probably did more harm than good.
If it were original, AU55 seems reasonable. >>
Agree that at first glance it looked better than an AU50. Perhaps the graders felt it was dipped a few too many times and silently net graded it due to the somewhat impaired luster.
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>
<< <i>not a spot of tarnish, no luster at all... have to wonder how a coin like this ends up in a top tier holder >>
I keep trying to say originality is not part of the technical grading process for the TPG or CAC. While eye appeal is factored in somewhat for the market portion of the NET overall grade and what grader doesn't love some skin on a coin, if the TPGs and CAC didn't grade coins that have had a bath in their life they would all go out of business in short order save for their modern department. >>
What does matter is the amount of luster. NGC is far more willing to certify a coin as AU58 if the coin has 58 details even if it has the luster of a 50. On the other hand, PCGS is much more strict about the luster on their AU pieces, and an AU58 must have AU55/58 level luster (almost full mint). Again, like it has been said many times before, it's a difference in grading philosophy and it doesn't make either TPG "superior."
http://macrocoins.com
<< <i>Nice discussion about a coin that has likely been dipped several times over its long lifetime, and likely will again in the future. How unfortunate that this is what the coin market has degraded into, and that coins like this are not only put into respectable TPG holders but also validated by a respectable FPG. >>
It won't get dipped again so long as it is in the PCGS holder. That's one factor collectors forget about slabbing. It discourages "less thoughtful persons"
<< <i>I'm glad that I wasn't the only one who wondered why the coin didn't grade higer than an AU50. My quess is that it's either a fake all the way, or more likely, the luster has been dipped away and it was downgraded because of it.
Pete >>
If it was fake all the way it would not have been graded at all. Maybe the photos were taken in such a light to appear more like an unc. This is another of those coins that has to be seen in person.. Hay, just maybe PCGS made a mistake by typing in the 50 instead of 58 or even higher? We have seen some mixed up holders lately.
Bob
<< <i>crypto79, the popular new orleans hoard was primarily 1841-O quarters. >>
Many thanks
<< <i>
It won't get dipped again so long as it is in the PCGS holder. That's one factor collectors forget about slabbing. It discourages "less thoughtful persons"
Agreed, it would be difficult to dip while it's in that holder. Admittedly the holder is not hermetic but still... :-)
Now, if you're saying that being in a PCGS holder is somehow a magical recipe against ever, ever being cracked-out and resubmitted, I don't think I can agree and I believe you are being shortsighted. This coin is 173 years old! How many owners has it had? How many cleanings, dippings, improper handlings? I'd like to have a crystal ball and see, in the next 10 years...20 years...50 years what this coin goes through. 100 years. 150 years! If our civilization somehow survives that long, it's almost certain there will still be coin collectors around, and the ugly crust that this overcleaned coin develops over time may not be considered attractive to them.
http://macrocoins.com
<< <i>out of focus >>
I agree it's out of focus. It also to freaking white for it's age....
luster is certainly lacking for the details the coin has. Back in the 1970's this coin probably would have traded for a near unc price.....not in today's world though.
<< <i>To make an AU50 grade with unc details this coin has to be at least over-dipped as to kill the luster. It doesn't show enough wear to preclude a MS60 grade. But the
luster is certainly lacking for the details the coin has. Back in the 1970's this coin probably would have traded for a near unc price.....not in today's world though. >>
That coin has "coin world" brilliant uncirculated all over it all while arriving in an envelope that smells like cigarets an has about 19 outdated stamps on it. Ahh it's like a portal to my youth.
For those who forget why pcgs is around or like to focus on a couple of faults, just the fact transactions like that are a joke and not the norm show how far the hobby has come.
<< <i>when i see a coin like this in a problem free slab, i wonder just how far the hobby HAS come >>
That is a fair point too
One thing I have not seen mentioned on this thread is that that older 19th century problem coins that aren't deemed worthy of a body bag often get net graded. I have never before seen a Seated coin which fits this category. Every coin I've seen in this category is a pre 1815 coin graded AU or better.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."