Environmental damage is (to me), a catch-all phrase. It's what I get (from out host) when a few coins that look like this, come back in genuine holders. I should put every coin in acetone for days, before submitting. The problem is that some of the natural beauty (crust and sheen) also seems to "wash away" when we get the dirty oils and grime off these beauties. Voila : why higher grades command a premium and why CAC.
And why JA won't sticker every coin. There are impairments our eyes do not detect. And in the act of conservation/preservation we always run a risk. I don't know, really. It's a tricky game.
I think this is why a lot of old men go to their graves never letting anyone "touch" them. Not even the TPGs.
Thanks to everyone for their thoughts and varying opinions. They show, once again that not all people see things the same way, or have the same tastes in the look of a circ coin. I really like this original, problem free key (there is that little obv rim nick, but it looks worse in my pic than it does in hand), and wish it were mine. I just took the pics, and I do need a new camera.
Vern l It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
It's somewhat ironic that when he was at NGC early in their history, JA was well known for rewarding original, deeply toned coins such as this dime with robust grades (while PCGS seemed to reward dipping).
However, my own experience with JA now is that, more often than not, they hold back on stickering such deeply toned coins these days at CAC.
@Kove said:
It's somewhat ironic that when he was at NGC early in their history, JA was well known for rewarding original, deeply toned coins such as this dime with robust grades (while PCGS seemed to reward dipping).
However, my own experience with JA now is that, more often than not, they hold back on stickering such deeply toned coins these days at CAC.
As I recall, after JA had left NGC there was a time in the late 1990's that a darkly toned coin could never be graded over MS-64.
After realizing those green spots are the camera and not PVC.....I would still crack out and soak in acetone if needed....and then send to PCGS for grading. This coin has a lot going for it and would look really good in my Barber Dime set!
OK, so assuming you were not under duress when you bought this coin, you believe you paid a fair price, correct?
Do you like the coin less, now?
Conversely, would you like it more with a CAC sticker on it? After all, it would still be the same coin.
In your opinion, with a sticker, would the value then increase? If so, why? And does that mean that you feel you got a nice coin for less than you would have otherwise been willing to pay?
This 95-O belongs to a friend of mine. If I'd have seen it first I would have bought it, and the basis for this thread wouldn't exist because it wouldn't have been sent to CAC at all. I have respect for John Albanese and his opinion of coins, but it is just an opinion, and IMO not always a consistent opinion, albeit a little more consistent than the graders at the TPG's. When I consider buying a coin, whether it has a CAC sticker or not does not change my opinion of the value of the coin when I'm looking at the coin in hand. When I consider buying a coin that I haven't yet seen in hand (i.e., online) I will definitely give a coin the benefit of the doubt if it has a CAC sticker.
Now, back to the question I originally posted. My friend bought the 95-O in the NGC-53 holder and sent it to CAC. It did not sticker. This surprised the couple of us barber collectors who saw it in hand before it went. It seemed like a lock, original, no problems. and every bit of a 53.
My friend cracked it out, and sent it exactly as it was (no acetone bath, diluted dipping, or any of the other crap that gives me the shudders), to our hosts. Here are the pics of it after it came back:
Vern l It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
As I first posted: Because it is covered in goop! IMO, it is under graded due to all the crap on it. Send it in for conservation. The grade should go up to at least AU-55! This coin is LOADED w/original mint luster!
It is probably too late now as everyone has seen the coin. It should have been conserved! An acetone soak is not enough. I don't know if they give out 55+ grades but I'll guarantee there must be at least a dozen posters
on CU that could turn that coin into a real beauty without EZdip! I still cannot believe it got the "bean" as it stands. Smacks as a preference for one TPGS over another! IMO, a more unbiased result should have been a GOLD BEAN on an AU-53 coin that was under graded by NGC. Then, trip to PCGS for the upgrade with no "bean." Then cracked, conserved, returned as 55+ or gold beaned as a 55. Please don't be harsh on little Ol' me as we all have one. LOL
So, you're right. The opinion doesn't matter. I'm glad you got an upgrade after the crack-out and JA missed a shot at using one of his gold stickers. Maybe he didn't have any in stock that day.
Here is the side by side, green dots removed by me. I can't imagine he would not have acetoned it first before sending to PCGS. If CAC even gets a whiff of PVC, no chance for a sticker.
@barberkeys said:
After it came back from out hosts, he sent it back to CAC (all of this took place in the past 4 months or so), and it stickered.
So now the answer to my original question........
It wasn't graded high enough.
And to think that many collectors would have sold it off cheaply because it didn't sticker in the NGC AU53 holder and many others would have refused to look at it altogether when sold...
Man, I wish I got a hold of this one. I went to a conservation class and one of the "secrets" is to leave as much of the color you can while removing the debris. Leave the cheek mostly alone while removing the dirt on the rest of the coin. The reverse would come out amazing (AU-58) as there are no broad areas of rub!
Let me state first that this is my coin. I have had the advantage of viewing it in person at length. This coin doesn't need any conservation. Perfect just the way it is. There is no pvc as has been stated a couple times. Every day we have less original coins to choose from. Calling it acetone, ms70 or anything else you want, but it all translates to a coin that is no longer original.
JA has a great eye for coins, no doubt . I very much respect his opinion.
But as Vern so well stated, it's just an additional (alebeit expert) opinion.
For those who don't like this look that's okay. But this coin will never "turn" in a holder. A big plus in my book.
It has been a very interesting thread. Thanks Vern for posting it.
I can't count the number of times I've gotten a crossover and said to myself "man this looks good in the new holder". Pcgs plastic is optically superior
@tradedollarnut said:
I can't count the number of times I've gotten a crossover and said to myself "man this looks good in the new holder". Pcgs plastic is optically superior
It also creates a better "picture frame" I just wish the option was there to not have the edge view. That does nothing for me.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
@No Headlights said:
Let me state first that this is my coin. I have had the advantage of viewing it in person at length. This coin doesn't need any conservation. Perfect just the way it is. There is no pvc as has been stated a couple times. Every day we have less original coins to choose from. Calling it acetone, ms70 or anything else you want, but it all translates to a coin that is no longer original.
JA has a great eye for coins, no doubt . I very much respect his opinion.
But as Vern so well stated, it's just an additional (alebeit expert) opinion.
For those who don't like this look that's okay. But this coin will never "turn" in a holder. A big plus in my book.
It has been a very interesting thread. Thanks Vern for posting it.
Thanks for posting. Great coin! Please forgive me for wanting to properly clean everything I see. It's a personal sickness. Fortunately, it also adds value to collector coins.
IMO, one day someone is going to remove all the dirt from that coin correctly and it will still appear to be totally original (until these images are dug up) and a more attractive piece.
insider2 - Some of us barber collectors are really, really, really glad you didn't get your hands on this 95-O. Please stick to Morgans, Mercs and Walkers with your skills.
Vern l It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
Insider 2
You contributed some great comments to the thread, very insightful. I wish you could see it in person, might change your mind about messing with it. Best wishes
Jim
@No Headlights said:
JA has a great eye for coins, no doubt . I very much respect his opinion.
But as Vern so well stated, it's just an additional (alebeit expert) opinion.
Sure, JA provided an opinion (okay, two opinions). NGC provided an opinion. PCGS provided an opinion. That's all this dance is about.
Nobody, not JA, NGC, PCGS, or any other set of initials are determining the coin's grade ... only providing opinions.
As an aside ... I am awaiting my next set of 20 instructional lessons from JA ... man I hope I pass!
Numismatist Ordinaire See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
@tradedollarnut said:
I can't count the number of times I've gotten a crossover and said to myself "man this looks good in the new holder". Pcgs plastic is optically superior
Interesting ...
@No Headlights Was the coin in older NGC plastic when submitted to CAC? I thought NGC's plastic was changed with the last iteration of their holder so it is now more optically clear.
I disagree that using pure acetone will lead to a coin no longer being original. To leave PVC on a coin* can lead to irreparable damage. Acetone removes PVC and other organic residue without affecting original toning or disturbing original surfaces.
*I am not referring to your 95-O dime
Numismatist Ordinaire See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
I personally like a PCGS holder as compared to NGC. But I would be surprised if that affected JA's opinion, but who knows?
I buy the coin, not the holder. PCGS is my preference since I don't need to cross it for the registry .
Astrorat
You can see the NGC slab in Vern's original post
Just a little "nit-pick" (it's in my nature) as I've used acetone since back in the day when nail polish remover was considered as "acetone."
Bear with me as I'm trying very hard to give the appearance that I know as much about stuff as a particular erudite (first time I ever used this word in my life) poster most of us love and try to understand...
Natural toning on coins is often combined with organic products that can add a deeper intensity to its color. On such coins, acetone will "appear" to remove some of the toning as the coin lightens due to the removal of these products. Is the coin still original? Yes. It the toning affected? YES.
No.
100% positive that is not a 100% true statement. Maybe 99%, but not 100%
@ianrussell said:
PVC would eliminate CAC possibility instantly, I think. I've received coins back from CAC where they have pointed out the PVC. Also remember a rare "holder" that clearly looked like an upgrade to me that had PVC and didn't even green sticker.
@barberkeys said:
After it came back from out hosts, he sent it back to CAC (all of this took place in the past 4 months or so), and it stickered.
So now the answer to my original question........
It wasn't graded high enough.
And to think that many collectors would have sold it off cheaply because it didn't sticker in the NGC AU53 holder and many others would have refused to look at it altogether when sold...
.
.
They would only do that because they were just waiting for this much better coin.
.
.
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
cameonut2011 - I think it's more likely that dealers (not collectors) would sell this coin off cheaply because it didn't sticker in the NGC AU53 holder. And even more so, dealers wouldn't give it a second look (or a fair offer), if it was offered for sale without the sticker.
TDN - With all that experience way before the advent of third party grading/slabbing, I would think you would be a proponent of it's the coin that matters, not the holder. My comments were my attempt at humor, which I thought your first post was.
And as Forrest Gump's mother said, "stupid is as stupid does".
Vern l It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
Sigh. It goes without saying that the coin is what matters the most. But you're fooling yourself if you ignore the financial properties of the holder. And Pcgs plastic flat out is clearer - which allows the positive attributes of the coin itself to be seen better.
I liked the coin before and still like it. It looks like (comparing side by side pic) the coin was lightened a little at PCGS. But still is a very beautiful Barber Dime.
Comments
Environmental damage is (to me), a catch-all phrase. It's what I get (from out host) when a few coins that look like this, come back in genuine holders. I should put every coin in acetone for days, before submitting. The problem is that some of the natural beauty (crust and sheen) also seems to "wash away" when we get the dirty oils and grime off these beauties. Voila : why higher grades command a premium and why CAC.
And why JA won't sticker every coin. There are impairments our eyes do not detect. And in the act of conservation/preservation we always run a risk. I don't know, really. It's a tricky game.
I think this is why a lot of old men go to their graves never letting anyone "touch" them. Not even the TPGs.
What about what looks like a small depression in the center of the coin? Just ear wax stuck in the wreath?
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
I didn't read all the responses here so forgive me if I missed this from someone else:
If you want to know why a coin did not CAC, ask John and he will be happy to tell you.
Coin Rarities Online
I would rather have it in a 53 holder w/o cac.
Thanks to everyone for their thoughts and varying opinions. They show, once again that not all people see things the same way, or have the same tastes in the look of a circ coin. I really like this original, problem free key (there is that little obv rim nick, but it looks worse in my pic than it does in hand), and wish it were mine. I just took the pics, and I do need a new camera.
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
I’ll take the 50 PCGS/CAC combo any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
It's somewhat ironic that when he was at NGC early in their history, JA was well known for rewarding original, deeply toned coins such as this dime with robust grades (while PCGS seemed to reward dipping).
However, my own experience with JA now is that, more often than not, they hold back on stickering such deeply toned coins these days at CAC.
As I recall, after JA had left NGC there was a time in the late 1990's that a darkly toned coin could never be graded over MS-64.
After realizing those green spots are the camera and not PVC.....I would still crack out and soak in acetone if needed....and then send to PCGS for grading. This coin has a lot going for it and would look really good in my Barber Dime set!
OK, so assuming you were not under duress when you bought this coin, you believe you paid a fair price, correct?
Do you like the coin less, now?
Conversely, would you like it more with a CAC sticker on it? After all, it would still be the same coin.
In your opinion, with a sticker, would the value then increase? If so, why? And does that mean that you feel you got a nice coin for less than you would have otherwise been willing to pay?
This 95-O belongs to a friend of mine. If I'd have seen it first I would have bought it, and the basis for this thread wouldn't exist because it wouldn't have been sent to CAC at all. I have respect for John Albanese and his opinion of coins, but it is just an opinion, and IMO not always a consistent opinion, albeit a little more consistent than the graders at the TPG's. When I consider buying a coin, whether it has a CAC sticker or not does not change my opinion of the value of the coin when I'm looking at the coin in hand. When I consider buying a coin that I haven't yet seen in hand (i.e., online) I will definitely give a coin the benefit of the doubt if it has a CAC sticker.
Now, back to the question I originally posted. My friend bought the 95-O in the NGC-53 holder and sent it to CAC. It did not sticker. This surprised the couple of us barber collectors who saw it in hand before it went. It seemed like a lock, original, no problems. and every bit of a 53.
My friend cracked it out, and sent it exactly as it was (no acetone bath, diluted dipping, or any of the other crap that gives me the shudders), to our hosts. Here are the pics of it after it came back:
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
After it came back from out hosts, he sent it back to CAC (all of this took place in the past 4 months or so), and it stickered.
So now the answer to my original question........
It wasn't graded high enough.
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
Perhaps just a careful acetone bath in a sonic cleaner? That would remove alot of the gunk with no harm to the surfaces.
Best, SH
What grade did it come back as? That green dot again cracks me up!
Oops, I see you posted the whole shot.
Coins simply look better through Pcgs plastic
As I first posted: Because it is covered in goop! IMO, it is under graded due to all the crap on it. Send it in for conservation. The grade should go up to at least AU-55! This coin is LOADED w/original mint luster!
It is probably too late now as everyone has seen the coin. It should have been conserved! An acetone soak is not enough. I don't know if they give out 55+ grades but I'll guarantee there must be at least a dozen posters
on CU that could turn that coin into a real beauty without EZdip! I still cannot believe it got the "bean" as it stands. Smacks as a preference for one TPGS over another! IMO, a more unbiased result should have been a GOLD BEAN on an AU-53 coin that was under graded by NGC. Then, trip to PCGS for the upgrade with no "bean." Then cracked, conserved, returned as 55+ or gold beaned as a 55. Please don't be harsh on little Ol' me as we all have one. LOL
Why are people still dwelling on PVC when it has been made absolutely clear it is not PVC?
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
I still don't like it.
"It wasn't graded high enough."
Then why didn't it gold bean?
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
It just goes to show ya...opinions change with time.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
So, you're right. The opinion doesn't matter. I'm glad you got an upgrade after the crack-out and JA missed a shot at using one of his gold stickers. Maybe he didn't have any in stock that day.
Here is the side by side, green dots removed by me. I can't imagine he would not have acetoned it first before sending to PCGS. If CAC even gets a whiff of PVC, no chance for a sticker.
-
And to think that many collectors would have sold it off cheaply because it didn't sticker in the NGC AU53 holder and many others would have refused to look at it altogether when sold...
Or maybe both houses have to be uber careful of the line they toe.
Man, I wish I got a hold of this one. I went to a conservation class and one of the "secrets" is to leave as much of the color you can while removing the debris. Leave the cheek mostly alone while removing the dirt on the rest of the coin. The reverse would come out amazing (AU-58) as there are no broad areas of rub!
Let me state first that this is my coin. I have had the advantage of viewing it in person at length. This coin doesn't need any conservation. Perfect just the way it is. There is no pvc as has been stated a couple times. Every day we have less original coins to choose from. Calling it acetone, ms70 or anything else you want, but it all translates to a coin that is no longer original.
JA has a great eye for coins, no doubt . I very much respect his opinion.
But as Vern so well stated, it's just an additional (alebeit expert) opinion.
For those who don't like this look that's okay. But this coin will never "turn" in a holder. A big plus in my book.
It has been a very interesting thread. Thanks Vern for posting it.
I can't count the number of times I've gotten a crossover and said to myself "man this looks good in the new holder". Pcgs plastic is optically superior
Wonderful coin.
Fun thread 10/10
It also creates a better "picture frame" I just wish the option was there to not have the edge view. That does nothing for me.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
Thanks for posting. Great coin! Please forgive me for wanting to properly clean everything I see. It's a personal sickness.
Fortunately, it also adds value to collector coins. 
IMO, one day someone is going to remove all the dirt from that coin correctly and it will still appear to be totally original (until these images are dug up) and a more attractive piece.
insider2 - Some of us barber collectors are really, really, really glad you didn't get your hands on this 95-O. Please stick to Morgans, Mercs and Walkers with your skills.
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
Insider 2
You contributed some great comments to the thread, very insightful. I wish you could see it in person, might change your mind about messing with it. Best wishes
Jim
TDN - Are you on their payroll?
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
Or more likely, their largest shareholder.
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
Sure, JA provided an opinion (okay, two opinions). NGC provided an opinion. PCGS provided an opinion. That's all this dance is about.
Nobody, not JA, NGC, PCGS, or any other set of initials are determining the coin's grade ... only providing opinions.
As an aside ... I am awaiting my next set of 20 instructional lessons from JA ... man I hope I pass!
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
@astrorat said: " ... I am awaiting my next set of 20 instructional lessons from JA ... man I hope I pass!"
I hope you have the time and the means to share your "makes & fails" with us here.
Challenge accepted ... I just need to free up some time.
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
Kindly stop being stupid. Neither is the case. I'm sharing my true experience from nearly five decades of collecting and you're just being insulting
If you are offended with the way this turned out, just peel that sticker off.
Interesting ...
@No Headlights Was the coin in older NGC plastic when submitted to CAC? I thought NGC's plastic was changed with the last iteration of their holder so it is now more optically clear.
I disagree that using pure acetone will lead to a coin no longer being original. To leave PVC on a coin* can lead to irreparable damage. Acetone removes PVC and other organic residue without affecting original toning or disturbing original surfaces.
*I am not referring to your 95-O dime
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
I personally like a PCGS holder as compared to NGC. But I would be surprised if that affected JA's opinion, but who knows?
I buy the coin, not the holder. PCGS is my preference since I don't need to cross it for the registry .
Astrorat
You can see the NGC slab in Vern's original post
Just a little "nit-pick" (it's in my nature) as I've used acetone since back in the day when nail polish remover was considered as "acetone."
Bear with me as I'm trying very hard to give the appearance that I know as much about stuff as a particular erudite (first time I ever used this word in my life) poster most of us love and try to understand...
Natural toning on coins is often combined with organic products that can add a deeper intensity to its color. On such coins, acetone will "appear" to remove some of the toning as the coin lightens due to the removal of these products. Is the coin still original? Yes. It the toning affected? YES.
I like the coin regardless of any one else's opinion.
I agree. I would rather have an original coin like this than a dipped out white coin.
No.
100% positive that is not a 100% true statement. Maybe 99%, but not 100%
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
.
.
They would only do that because they were just waiting for this much better coin.
.
.
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
cameonut2011 - I think it's more likely that dealers (not collectors) would sell this coin off cheaply because it didn't sticker in the NGC AU53 holder. And even more so, dealers wouldn't give it a second look (or a fair offer), if it was offered for sale without the sticker.
TDN - With all that experience way before the advent of third party grading/slabbing, I would think you would be a proponent of it's the coin that matters, not the holder. My comments were my attempt at humor, which I thought your first post was.
And as Forrest Gump's mother said, "stupid is as stupid does".
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
This is why I don't really pay attention to if a coin has a sticker or not... unless it is gold
Sigh. It goes without saying that the coin is what matters the most. But you're fooling yourself if you ignore the financial properties of the holder. And Pcgs plastic flat out is clearer - which allows the positive attributes of the coin itself to be seen better.
I liked the coin before and still like it. It looks like (comparing side by side pic) the coin was lightened a little at PCGS. But still is a very beautiful Barber Dime.