Your thoughts on toned coin grading
deefree49
Posts: 282 ✭✭✭
Hi everyone. This is something that has been on my mind now for some time. I collect Lincolns mostly but this applies to any coin that acquires toning. I'll start with copper though because the distinction is so clear in that case.
When I see a completely brown coin graded say MS64BN, I don't see how a colorfully toned coin with the same date could also be MS64BN and have the exact same value. All the auctions I've watched lately bare this out dramatically. Often the final hammer price will be up to 10X more than the guide price, even more sometimes. I really believe something needs to be done about this.
What I'd like to see is a new line added in the price guide. The numbers should reflect recent results from toned coins. So instead of red, red-brown and brown, I think it should be red, red-brown, brown and toned. This would apply (especially) to proof coins as well.
Please weigh in with your thoughts and add some pictures! If you have a coin designated brown that is toned in a very appealing way, please share it with us. I think the more of these we put up, the more obvious the need for this new designation will be seen as badly needed. I think this will infuse the market with new energy, it will give PCGS a lot of new slabs to do and most of all, people that collect toned coins will have a lot more joy as they buy and sell coins with the new designation.
Now for my contribution. How can this be the same as your average normal 64 brown?
Here is the same coin turned slightly:
Comments
The problem is that toning exists on a continuum. Some coins are a wee-bit toned and others are knock-your-socks off gorgeous. You could create a 0-10 toning scale (as Legend has done for Morgans in their auctions) but it’s still subjective and entirely unrealistic to create a price guide for 10 levels of toning at each grade.
“Let the market decide” is perhaps the best we can do.
In response to your thread title, my personal preference would be to grade a coin’s technical attributes with a number and do away with the ugly toning penalty and gorgeous toning grade bump. There are an awful lot of really pretty but significantly flawed coins in highly graded holders. People can make up their own minds about how attractive something is.
To make sense of what should happen, it’s first necessary to decide if we’re grading to establish value and market acceptability or grading the coin’s objective qualities. Right now, we’re somewhere in the middle, which I suspect is the real impetus for your question.
I don't think it is the same. It should bring a nice premium for that color. I myself collect high color coins. But having a separate value for toning probably wouldn't work as it's too subjective and too variable.
There is no need for a price guide. The toned coin will bring what someone pays for it. The more who like it, the better.
The trouble with your “toned coin” column in the price catalogs is that each toned coin is unique. Some are very pretty and bring premium prices. Others are unattractive and bring less than an untoned coin might bring. Admiration for toning is subjective, and there is no way you can standardize it.
Recently I bought a 1936 Brilliant Proof Cent PR-64, R&B. The obverse is blue with some red and no break in the Proof mirror. The reverse is mostly red. I didn’t find it to be overly attractive, but it didn’t have any spots and the price was right for the purpose of completing a 1936 Proof set.
Would some people find the blue toning attractive? Maybe, but the auction price did not go to the moon.
Sorry that I can’t post any pictures yet because I’m still wrestling with trying to get a decent image of it. It’s one of those coins that I find hard to photograph. It’s not a matter of making it look better than it is; it’s a matter of reflecting how it really looks.
My bad...should have included one with the slab.
Everyone so far has brought up valid points and been very clear and persuasive. I do see the problems with the idea but still it seems there ought to be something PCGS could come up with. I really believe it would bump the market which is something we all would probably like.
I've wrestled with some ideas about it over time and thought maybe a 1-4 number system might at least generally give some guidance. Certainly there is a strong subjective component to this but one could also say there is a subjective component to all grading, yet it does in the end bring more clarity.
There must be some aesthetic to toning that brings universality. I mean, generally wouldn't we all be pretty much in agreement if something had less attractive toning? At least as much as we generally agree on the other grades I would think.
1) Just knockout beautiful
2) very attractive and colorful
3) Pleasing toning
4) toned but not necessarily pleasing enough for anything beyond a small price bump.
I know things like this have been suggested in the past but I think it would be an interesting experiment. I don't see where it would be a catastrophic failure so that leaves me to believe it is worth trying.
It doesn't make sense to add an additional grading scale for such an extremely subjective element and for the sole purpose of determining value, when grades aren't meant to determine value, but condition, in the first place.
At its basis grading is based on condition, i.e. technical grade, which can be considered entirely objective. Computers could do all the grading if technical grade were the only thing taken into account. The subjective elements of grading involve the consideration of luster, eye appeal, toning, etc, which in my opinion is a mistake; those elements should be taken into account by the buyer and seller of the coin, not the graders.
But even with those subjective elements, grading is still mostly objective. The quality of beauty of a coin's toning, on the other hand, is pure subjectivity.
No, that's not how it works at all. This is not something that can be categorized, nor should it be.
Gobrecht's Engraved Mature Head Large Cent Model
https://www.instagram.com/rexrarities/?hl=en
Tarnish/toning should not influence the "grade" of a coin - unless the tarnish has damaged the coin. Then....?
Whether one person places a premium or a discount on a coin because of tarnish/toning is strictly a market factor.
I'm having trouble agreeing with this in an absolute sense. You may be right that grade is meant to determine condition in the first place, but it certainly translates to value in the marketplace. It is the guide price listing that I'm referring to in my opening post and we do use grades when determining price.
As far as the subjective element to toning and I'm saying this in general, not to anyone in particular. In the beginning when grades became an accepted method of describing the general state of a coin's preservation, I'm sure there was a period of adjustment as people put the concrete (grades) with the subjective nature of how a particular coin was pleasing or appealing.
When the number system arrived, there would have been a period of adjustment to that too. I think with time, people could learn more about the aesthetics of toning although there will always been some wiggle room - just as there still is some on the number system. People don't always agree with the number grades as I'm sure everyone here has experienced at some time. Things like this eventually come around as people learn more and more how to use new systems.
I think your coin is, ah...unattractive. See the problem? Whether that is true or not, suppose I was one of the graders? Here is something to think about. There are already too many variables involved with pricing a coin and that does not include the skills of the graders. For the most part, things seem to be OK. Let's not rock the boat until big changes come along like decimals, A to F, or a 0-100 system.
I posted on this subject a few months ago. Assigning a grade to toning is too subjective, cannot and should not be done. PCGS has defined the effect of toning on the numerical grade in the grading guide, whereby attractive toning can result in a grade bump.
Toned copper coins are subject to double jeopardy when being graded. By definition, any toned coin cannot get a RD designation, and depending on the amount of toning, may not get a RB destination either. The TPGs tend to also downgrade the numerical grade as the coin slides down the RD-RB-BN grading scale. Do an analysis of numerical grades for Lincoln Cents as compared to color destination, and you will see for yourself.
So rather than grade the toning on copper coins, the TPGs should get rid of the RD-RB-BN designation. It is the equivalent of grading silver coins White-GreyWhite-Grey. It's not done for silver coins, and is not needed for copper coins. That would even the playing field somewhat for attractively toned copper coins.
Interesting idea, but I feel toning is far too subjective. Yes, numerical grading is too, but it’s a bit more clear cut, IMO.
I’ve seen beautifully toned coins go for 5 or 10 time greysheet. There is huge demand for nice, original, un-dipped material. But I’ve also seen ugly toned examples sell for pennies on the dollar.
Beauty is in the beholder?
Dave
I like it! It certainly seems reasonable when you see a gorgeous toned copper coin and it gets lumped in with the lowest drab brown coins. Luster seems at least as important to me as color so I've got that ax to grind too!
"wouldn't we all be pretty much in agreement"
Problem is we wouldn't. We can't even agree on a numerical grade, much less a "toning" grade. Adding additional layers of "objective" criteria will simply give us more things to disagree with. BTW I love the toning on the MP VDB, super nice coin. Worth a big premium in my book, but that's just me.
I like the idea of a new color class for colorfully toned coins -- perhaps TN or something. I wouldn't mind seeing that in both the copper and silver realm (i guess gold too, but toning on gold is kind of rare). That being said it will never happen. TPGs dont like changing their ways. And changing mid-stream would probably cause a lot of confusion? Esp with older slabbed stuff. It's fun thinking about though. Having a price guide reflect prices on a new TN class would be interesting to track, of course there would be a huge spread, with some toners getting 10x to 20x premiums while ugly toning has the opposite effect on price. I would consider all of these to command premiums over guide. A new TN class is a cool idea to conjecture over thoughT
My Coin Blog
My Toned Lincoln Registry Set
just this past weekend I saw a toned 67RB 1944-S Lincoln pop for 10x over PCGS guide on ebay. Some toned coins just pop for moon money. There is NO WAY a 67RD 1944-S would have commanded that high a price.
My Coin Blog
My Toned Lincoln Registry Set
Too much ATing going on. I doubt any changes will be made. If anything I hope they tighten up to teach the doctors a lesson.
"A dog breaks your heart only one time and that is when they pass on". Unknown
Some tonings are over rated, whereas beautiful subtle toning enhances the coins overall appearance. Garish ugly toning/tarnish devalues a coin 10 fold.
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
One area that I find amusing is how the TPG Guides get stuck in the pricing paradigm where RD > RB > BN. Since BN and RB is typically where "color" shows up, if you have a monstrously toned BN or RB, they can pop for huge multiples over the RD price. However it's true that its on a case by case basis and hard to pigeonhole prices on toned coins.
My Coin Blog
My Toned Lincoln Registry Set
For me, I do find that in some cases toning adds tremendous character to a coin. It's just interesting looking! However definitely subjective (beauty is in the eye of the beholder)
My Coin Blog
My Toned Lincoln Registry Set
Toning on gold does show up occasionally. Always a fun find.
My Coin Blog
My Toned Lincoln Registry Set
VERY true. Some people would dip the exact coin that someone else would pay a premium to own in its "natural state".
Toned coins often get the benefit of the doubt, I would think that even a light dip with strongly toned silver and gold coins would cause a downgrade. That includes the "euro" gold coins with dark shades covering the high points as well as darkly toned silver coins. I realize there is attractive toning that deserves a better grade, but often technically those coins are a little optimistically graded, where the subjectivity comes in.
Ive often wondered how exstensive a spreadsheet would be to thoroughly categorise Lincoln cents based on condition and color combinations then attach ‘moving’ prices to them. That would get complicated quick.
I agree that the current status of attaching BN, RB, RD color attributes to grades is pretty wonky and inconsistent. The grade should describe the coin and lots of times the assigned attributes are all over the place on what we see in holders and when a coin has color on top of that things start to really break down.
Some dealers seem to have a handle on this none the less and make a market in coins that are toned and lets say unique. Using a price guide as a reasonable starting point and paying multiples is hardly a way to justify paying some crazy premium. Either you really dig the coin and have the money or you don’t, its just coins, not food or shelter. When someone runs you up at auction for some amazing toner, thats fine, just be sure to sell it that way yourself (or a dealer that understands the toning market) so you don’t get lowballed by someone using a worthless reference guide as an excuse for their offer.
How this for a "fantasy slab"?
TN = Toned
(The coin is a cut out TrueView photo)
My Coin Blog
My Toned Lincoln Registry Set
Well I can say that every picture Winged Liberty put up here deserves a premium. What that is exactly, well I guess the consensus is simply, "What the market decides." Lately it seems that can be a big jump over the guide price. I've been surprised over and over with the prices realized on nicely toned coins in recent auctions.
Perhaps a short term fix might be to at least consider toned coins as red-brown instead of brown. People see the "BN" on the slab and that can hurt a sale. Maybe just ad an asterisk? BN* or RB*. I've seen red copper that had toning too.
If anything, I just wish PCGS would no longer lump every toned copper coin in with the brown designation. I don't think that reflects the reality of the current marketplace.
...this was so right on that the thread should have immediately been locked and stickied near the top
Thank you for the nice compliment. Andy at Angel Dee's was instrumental in helping me acquire that.
RD implies chemically original surfaces. RB implies some chemically original surface remaining. Toned coins, by definition, are created by chemical reactions at the coin’s surface. Calling a toned coin RB (or anything but BN) would just be confusing. Most people who collect and trade in copper deal with the current system without too much trouble.
"The comet"
Note: not my coin
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
I think it's too complicated to start trying to manage coin prices based on toning. The aspects of toning are too subjective. It would just be another headache for some collectors and the start of a toning game for others. The concept, at least to me, would be less of a guide and more of an unintentional price manipulator for toners.
I think it's best for the market to dictate a coin's destiny based on it's toning. There's already too much going on especially in a day when a coin's price can be boosted simply by the color of it's paper label.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
The RD-RB-BN designation is way overrated in identifying original coins. I'd say that over 90% of RD coins are not original (exclude moderns).
Copper coins with colorful toning can have toning only over a portion of their surface, leaving some portion "red" in color, thus qualifying for RB designation. There should be nothing confusing about that.
There was a time when most people who collected and traded in copper had a system without RD/RB/BN. IN fact, they valued an original brown coin as much as an original red coin. They didn't have much trouble with their current system... they didn't have TPGs.
There was a time when most people collected and traded in silver coins as blast white without too much trouble. Times change.
You are somewhat uninformed on this issue my friend. To infer that PCGS has the ability to determine if a coin has been "chemically" altered is a little beyond their ability. TPG's will grade ugly RD copper as RD and nice RD coins as .91 Questionable Color. Many existant RD coins have been dipped to maintain their color. Copper is a very reactive substance, and not to just chemicals(undefined), but to air and impurities in ambient air.
Most toned copper has been exposed to air borne reactants. Realistically, copper would never tone in a vacuum, but the implication that all BN and RB coins have been "chemically" toned is an aggregious choice of words. Most RD coins have been chemically restored to eliminate any tarnish they might have incurred over the past 100+ years.
This issue seems to be best left to the market and not to TPG graders who grade coins on much more finely defined subjective values.
OINK
I used the word "implies" instead of "indicates" deliberately.
I didn't say I agreed with the RD/RB/BN system, and I didn't say it was always accurate or that coins assigned an RD label actually had original surfaces. In many cases, it's impossible to know. It's just the way I see the TPGs using it. I might be completely off-base and I'm certainly not an EAC-type person in the way I look at things. In the case of a partially red, partially toned coin, RB is just fine.
Maybe we're speaking a bit of a different language. From a metallurgical or chemical basis, almost all of what we call toning, whether it be on copper, silver, nickel, or gold is a result of chemical reactions between the metal(s) at the surface and the environment. Of course all RB and BN coins have been chemically toned.
Bryce, I almost agree with you on your viewpoint on silver, but:
"Basically all toning, whether it be copper, silver, nickel, or gold is a result of chemical reactions between the metal(s) at the surface and the environment."
is essentially correct. But you are creating a misconception that nicely toned coins are created by a "chemical" process such as artificially creating that color. Certainly a lot of toned Morgan dollars were not created in someone's chemistry set. And some modern copper probably is created in someone's chemistry set, but toning is a natural process with copper, especially old copper. Very rare to find EAC graded RD. And yet just 20-30 years later there are many RD small cents.
OINK
If an implication is misleading, what good is it? You make it sound as if the current system is just fine because most people don't know any better.
I have no problem with the concept that toned copper coins would all grade RB or BN. So if that is the case, what good is the designation?
Sigh. We've strayed too far from the OP's intent.
Perhaps there is too much engineer, biochemist, surgeon, and mathematician in me.
Those with a scientific background will clearly understand that copper coins leave the mint with their copper surfaces more or less chemically intact (yes I'm aware of machine oils, leftover chemical tidbits from planchet preparation, etc), meaning that they consist mostly of metallic copper. Being made of copper and therefore highly reactive, they immediately start to chemically interact with their environment. Usually this happens in pockets, coin albums, cabinets, flips, change drawers, ashtrays, old mayonnaise jars and so forth. Sometimes the rate of change is very slow, as is seen with very old copper that still maintains a truly inact, as-minted "red" surface. A few do exist! Sometimes the changes occur in a coin doc's laboratory. Sometimes the changes are chemically reversed, masked, or undone in a way that really makes it look like original mint surfaces.
When the TPGs look at a coin, they call it RD if it looks like it has chemically native, original, "red" metallic surfaces. If it looks good, and is indistinguishable from a genuine truly original as-minted coin, they smile and they give it a grade. If the coin is pink, pitted, horrific, tie-dyed, or clearly messed with, they don't grade them.
If a little chemistry has happened, and it looks more or less "natural", they call it RB. If a little more chemistry has happened, they call it BN. If a particular fortuitous set of circumstances (be they natural or expertly crafted) has left a layer of chemical contaminants that produce a thin film that refracts light, we call them pretty toners.
Whether they're "natural" environmental processes or laboratory experiments, it's all chemistry.
See, I told you I don't see the world like most EAC guys do.
Perhaps the grading standard for old copper should be RB/BN/Questionable Color (.91). Clearly PCGS grading scale does not reflect market value, especially with coins with a BN designation that have spectacular toning. Here is an example:
1875 PR66BN with PCGS Guide of $1800
or this 1875 PR65RD with PCGS Guide of $5000
and is this RD????????
My 1875 PR65RB
If I recall correctly, I paid 65RD $$ for a 66BN coin. Obviously the old RD/RB/BN designation is not reflective of market values.
I totally agree with the OP that TPG grading is based upon old standards that are not relevant in today's market.
OINK
Oh, O.K., I'm with you on all of this. All I'm saying is - TPGs, don't try to rate how much "chemistry" or thin film is on a copper coin. Just give it a numerical grade like you do for silver coins, like you do for gold coins, and be done with it.
That makes sense. We can all look at at copper coin and see how toned, tarnished, red, or brown it is.
Gotta have those RD Registry points though.......
I laugh at posts about dipping copper to achieve something like original red. Sorry, it doesn't work like silver.
I've played around with it for a long time and have never been able to achieve a convincing Mint red. I believe you can touch up copper, maybe even remove some problems. But you cannot restore a brown or RB copper piece to a believable RD. Which perhaps explains the excessive premium for original red copper.
Lance.
I don't know the answer about having a "Toned" category. There is monster toning, nice toning, average toning, and ugly toning. All with different values in the marketplace.
So rather than debate the issue, I will just enjoy coins like this recent purchase (which is NOT for sale):
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
Lance, please do not laugh, you probably cannot today turn a BN or RB coin to a convincing RD coin. But many RD coins today were helped along by collectors over the past 100-150 years to maintain the RD look. With a correct understanding of the reactivity of copper in ambient air conditions, original mint color will degrade. In fact, all UNC and PR RB/BN coins have toned mostly due to environmental (and storage) conditions. But those that maintain their original mint RD condition were either stored in outer space or they were gently restored periodicaly by their owners over the years. Just because you cannot restore them from their existant state does not mean that it is impossible, and I do have a number of QC code.91 IHC's that I bought RAW that should grade RD. And the PR65RB 1875 that I previously posted has practically no brown as contrasted to the 65RD graded cent that I compared it to, which has a great deal of brown toning.
OINK
That nails it.
It is entirely possible for copper to maintain its original red color in many environments, most commonly in rolls. I wouldn't argue that no coins have been helped along. It's true of every series. Why should small cents be different?
We've been down this road before and I recall your beliefs, OINK. I respect your opinion and those of others.
Lance.
Intriguing discussion... and several good points are made. The major issue at hand though, seems to be a desire for a pricing guide for tarnish. Wow.... what about all the threads that say the pricing guides are not reliable? We have enough trouble now with subjective grading - which, unfortunately, also includes 'eye appeal'. If we make things any more nebulous, we may as well discard grading completely. Now, that being said, I am not in favor of such an action. Grading, when based on technical merit, provides good information. There is no doubt that pricing follows grading. There is also no doubt (unfortunately), that pricing also follows tarnish in today's market. That, however, is a matter of taste, and should always be left to the buyer - i.e. 'I really like that and will pay xxx for it.' The premiums for tarnish are what drives the AT market. Like it or not, a great deal of the 'pretty' tarnish on the market today, is artificially induced. Where there is profit, people will find a way to shortcut the path. As I have mentioned many times here, those who are enamored with pretty colors could save a lot of money by doing it themselves. Oh well, this discussion, in various forms, has been going on here for the close to twenty years I have been a member. I expect it will still be a topic twenty years hence. Cheers, RickO
ATS uses a * which collectors and the market seems to like and reward.
Premiums drive many markets. In addition to AT, it drives dipping, putty, lasers, etc. It even drives counterfeits.
I woke up this morning and checked this thread to find it was at the top of the list. That honestly surprised me. I also didn't have expectations about how the responses would be. (I haven't been a very active thread person so where the consensus would end up was something I had no idea about.)
After reading through the latest additions and giving this some thought, I now see that there already exists a kind of general attitude about the toning/pricing question. I get the general idea as something like:
1) let the market decide pricing, no TPG involvement
2) Copper is going to do what copper does either with or without human help
3) Maybe if anything is tweaked, have it be the "RD, RB and BN" designations.
4) As I'm writing there are more comments so, this all might need editing!
I would at least like to see toned coins put in the RB category. That seems more in line with auction pricing and with the actual description of an attractively toned coin. If a coin still has natural luster and toning, I really feel RB would be a more accurate designation on the slab label.
OK. I'm ready. Give me your worst!