This is just my opinion. All of those posted coins in the OP's 17 coin submisison posted early on in this thread look AT'd or Questionable to me. I am personally GLAD PCGS slapped a Gen QC on them. I would like to see PCGS get stricter with allowing color through. Some of the later coins posted look ok to me but some looked cooked as well. In any case, its hard to tell from a single static photo so I would tend to defer to pcgs who saw the coin in hand. I would rather have PCGS err on the side of caution rather let a bunch of cooked coins through with problem free grades. I have seen too many really awful looking AT'd coins lately in problem-free PCGS slabs.
@FadeToBlack said:
Yeah, you'll see pics from me. I'll give you my opinions too. You don't call people out (as I believe the submitter is doing on IG) without showing the full story.
Borderline at best, something about this just bothers me when I ask myself if the toning is natural. Borderline at best, would bag 99% of the time. No Doubt QC Doesn't look right to me QC all day THE ONLY STRAIGHT GRADE Borderline at best Not even close Not even close Not even close Not even close Not even close Ehh... Borderline-ish, but if I'm bagging the prior one, I'm bagging this one too. Nope, if the other two get bagged, so does this. Double heads!! I'll wait for @PCGSPhoto to fix this but those obverse progressions aint right. When in doubt, err on the side of caution You're kidding me right?
Pretty obvious the few borderline coins got lumped in with the rest of the blatant QC's This is the risk of submitting full batches of toners.
Taken as a group , if they actually do things that way , if I'm PCGS I refuse all future packages from that address
I think we've all benefited from some lax grading - at least in the form of color - over the last 3-4 years. I'm happy to see them tightening up even if it means my current sub takes a couple of hits.
I submit almost exclusively toners. Over the past couple of years, it looks like I've submitted 234 coins. TWO graded QC. And only 9 others graded Details, several of which regraded. That's < 1% for QC.
It's a pretty revealing lack of experience and discerning eye when you're getting 94% of your sub as QC. I would have submitted maybe 1 of the coins @FadeToBlack posted, and that's the 1977 Lincoln that I've submitted myself before. I pulled it from a water-damaged Whitman.
Most of the hardest hit are in the Instagram community, where a majority of the users have more time driving with a permit than they do collecting coins. All they've ever known is the slack grading around color.
The four WQs posted by Coppercolor later in the thread have a different "feel", in my opinion, than the previous 17-coin submission. When I view coins already in slabs I attempt to view them as raw coins and determine my own grade first, look for hidden issues and determine if the color or color pattern makes sense. It's great that the TPGs give us a starting point, but truly it should only be a starting point for an advanced collector.
As such, the later group of four WQs would make me think hard about these coins. The 1954-S has a green-to-gold spectrum that I have actually seen on a relatively decent percentage of 1954-S WQs and I believe had been imparted by the original papers from US Mint Sets. However, on this coin the spectrum is not only deeper in overall color, but also has an odd combination of red-blue that I have not seen "in the wild" on such coins. The remaining three coins shared (1948-S, 1951 and 1951-D) just don't look natural at all to my eye and experience and I would kick them out right away. In other words, I agree with PCGS on the call for these four WQs.
What likely did not help for this group of four WQs was also context. That is, there were coins that appear to have been submitted with them (within the sequence of cert numbers that were not linked in this thread) that also seem to be barking at me and human nature might no doubt see a possible pattern of attempted deception. In other words, no matter how impartial graders might be or attempt to be, they might not be able to deny the impulse to engage in guilt by association. Sticking within the solid cert block of 18-coins from 34402659-34402676 (all WQs), I tend to agree with PCGS that nine of the 18 are AT. However, I disagree with PCGS in that one coin they called NT would be a coin I consider AT. Regardless, the overall PCGS call for AT/NT on that group of 18-coins matches what I have seen over the decades looking at raw coins.
The three Lincoln cents posted by BG I know are legitimately toned. I purchased a partial Dansco set of MS Lincoln sets at the Garden State Numismatic Association (GSNA) show back in 2003 and pulled these three coins out of it as the best three coins in the set. I paid nothing extra for these three coins in the set and merely scanned each piece to find those coins that had toned most attractively in the group. I later sold them raw to BG in 2006 and PCGS kicked them out as AT the first time through before grading them on the second attempt. They looked real to me then and still do now and if anyone had seen them in their raw state in the partial Dansco set of MS Lincoln sets then I would think they would realize that these three coins were the fortunate survivors of that set.
Hey TomB
I edited the original post to pose this in the form of a question because I didn't intend for the discussion to focus on my submissions. I was more interested in hearing what the rest of the community was seeing and to provide some of my observations to date.
Regarding the four washingtons i posted, one was cracked out of original PCGS graded holder to be graded again, and one I plucked from a double mint set myself and it was a "wondercoin" in the set, having similar traits as all the others but just a more outstanding look. I did not pay a premium for the mint set.
There was also one more washington in that submission that I cracked in an attempt to get upgraded and it dropped a grade. This DOES certainly support the idea that the mind of a grader may have detected something off and then lost confidence in the submission.
I find this very interesting. I have long been of the opinion that too many AT coins were being slabbed and that was driving the AT process...profit always drives these endeavors....That being said, it will certainly impact the amateur 'doctors'..... and could impact the overall market for colorful tarnish. Of course, some just do not care. And the skillful 'doctors' will continue to ply their trade - as long as it is profitable. Cheers, RickO
@FadeToBlack said:
Let's take a second and look at this with statistics, shall we?
Coins graded in the trailing 30 days - 232,175
Coins graded in the trailing 12 months - 3,352,877
QC's in the trailing 30 days - 764
QC's in the trailing 12 months - 8,389
QC % in the trailing 30 days - 0.329% or one in 303 coins.
QC % in the trailing 12 months - 0.25% or one in 400 coins.
That's less than 1 more QC coin per 1000 coins they look at. Doesn't seem that material of a change to me, and could certainly be within normal variance. This order alone constitutes 2% of the trailing 30 day population of QC's.
1 more coin per 1000 could be a lot, considering that of 1000 coins, the vast majority won't have color that would come into play. Hard to determine this, though.
Those already slabbed May treated similarly to Barry Bonds and Clemons. No longer considered hall of fame material. It will be interesting for sure
True AT coins may need to be re-slabbed to avoid being associated with the “baking era”.
@Coppercolor said:
There was also one more washington in that submission that I cracked in an attempt to get upgraded and it dropped a grade. This DOES certainly support the idea that the mind of a grader may have detected something off and then lost confidence in the submission.
Classic "guilt by association." While it would be nice if each coin was evaluated based on it's own individual merits, realistically this does not happen because humans are still grading our coins. Consequently, most dealers I know "salt" their questionable coins into a submission with better coins to increase their odds of successfully getting them into problem-free holders. Because the OP didn't follow this prudent practice, IMO his submission was basically DOA.
I'm addicted to exonumia ... it is numismatic crack!
ANA LM
USAF Retired — 34 years of active military service! 🇺🇸
Toned copper really knocks me out. Some looks are more pleasing and believable than others for sure, depends on the series and who you ask. Getting color in straight graded PC holders is tough, it should remain that way. For better or worse, they get to decide the standard. I think its always been that way.
In regards to Lincoln cents though, It's my observation that there are plenty of raw coins yet to be certified with color in the first place with better shots than getting them processed. I suppose that with the quantities minted there are millions for cooks to practice on with little downside, so Lincoln are likely immediately suspect for that reason.
@FadeToBlack said:
Let's take a second and look at this with statistics, shall we?
Coins graded in the trailing 30 days - 232,175
Coins graded in the trailing 12 months - 3,352,877
QC's in the trailing 30 days - 764
QC's in the trailing 12 months - 8,389
QC % in the trailing 30 days - 0.329% or one in 303 coins.
QC % in the trailing 12 months - 0.25% or one in 400 coins.
That's less than 1 more QC coin per 1000 coins they look at. Doesn't seem that material of a change to me, and could certainly be within normal variance. This order alone constitutes 2% of the trailing 30 day population of QC's.
Can you get the same stats from 3 and 4 years ago?
Some refer to overgraded slabs as Coffins. I like to think of them as Happy Coins.
@WildIdea said:
Toned copper really knocks me out. Some looks are more pleasing and believable than others for sure, depends on the series and who you ask. Getting color in straight graded PC holders is tough, it should remain that way. For better or worse, they get to decide the standard. I think its always been that way.
In regards to Lincoln cents though, It's my observation that there are plenty of raw coins yet to be certified with color in the first place with better shots than getting them processed. I suppose that with the quantities minted there are millions for cooks to practice on with little downside, so Lincoln are likely immediately suspect for that reason.
If I'm PCGS I'm suspicious of anyone paying to send in a coin with a book value of 26 cents . Either they are soft in the head or they are up to no good. If they force me to take their money whats the downside to body bagging it? They are probably soft enough to resubmit so you can take their money again right? Its not as if there is any great demand for these coins to be in slabs in the first place. That right there is a red flag, I mean does someone have a registry set where they desperately need the 50,000th best 1988D lincoln cent? Beyond the cost of grading there is no downside to doctoring these coins , if you screw them up they are only worth face value , you didnt wreck anything that anyone would care about.
If I'm PCGS and I see people continually submitting coins from , say , 70's mint sets I would send the NFL concussion protocol team to the submitters house to see if they are ok
@WildIdea said:
Toned copper really knocks me out. Some looks are more pleasing and believable than others for sure, depends on the series and who you ask. Getting color in straight graded PC holders is tough, it should remain that way. For better or worse, they get to decide the standard. I think its always been that way.
In regards to Lincoln cents though, It's my observation that there are plenty of raw coins yet to be certified with color in the first place with better shots than getting them processed. I suppose that with the quantities minted there are millions for cooks to practice on with little downside, so Lincoln are likely immediately suspect for that reason.
If I'm PCGS I'm suspicious of anyone paying to send in a coin with a book value of 26 cents . Either they are soft in the head or they are up to no good. If they force me to take their money whats the downside to body bagging it? They are probably soft enough to resubmit so you can take their money again right? Its not as if there is any great demand for these coins to be in slabs in the first place. That right there is a red flag, I mean does someone have a registry set where they desperately need the 50,000th best 1988D lincoln cent? Beyond the cost of grading there is no downside to doctoring these coins , if you screw them up they are only worth face value , you didnt wreck anything that anyone would care about.
If I'm PCGS and I see people continually submitting coins from , say , 70's mint sets I would send the NFL concussion protocol team to the submitters house to see if they are ok
You have linked a coin's value to how it should be considered, treated, graded, or body bagged. That's presents a problem we are stuck with.
It works the other way also, What does it matter what grade we give a 198X Silver Eagle? What does it matter what grade we give a 199X Silver Eagle? Get the point? The coins are not really worth much as 68, 69 even 70! The entire box looks perfect to the naked eye and that's the way they are graded.
Funny thing happens as decades pass. Those MS-70 coins dated 198(something) are now worth? Unfortunately at the time they were graded, the things were like common "dreck." Or were they common "widgets?" And how many of those MS-70's actually stand up to the examination they are subjected to by the "condition freak" with a 16X hand lens today?
Bottom line: IMO a coin should be graded as correctly as possible with no respect to its owner or value. That goes for a Bicentennial Quarter or the Brasher Doubloon! Good Luck with that.
@WildIdea said:
Toned copper really knocks me out. Some looks are more pleasing and believable than others for sure, depends on the series and who you ask. Getting color in straight graded PC holders is tough, it should remain that way. For better or worse, they get to decide the standard. I think its always been that way.
In regards to Lincoln cents though, It's my observation that there are plenty of raw coins yet to be certified with color in the first place with better shots than getting them processed. I suppose that with the quantities minted there are millions for cooks to practice on with little downside, so Lincoln are likely immediately suspect for that reason.
If I'm PCGS I'm suspicious of anyone paying to send in a coin with a book value of 26 cents . Either they are soft in the head or they are up to no good. If they force me to take their money whats the downside to body bagging it? They are probably soft enough to resubmit so you can take their money again right? Its not as if there is any great demand for these coins to be in slabs in the first place. That right there is a red flag, I mean does someone have a registry set where they desperately need the 50,000th best 1988D lincoln cent? Beyond the cost of grading there is no downside to doctoring these coins , if you screw them up they are only worth face value , you didnt wreck anything that anyone would care about.
If I'm PCGS and I see people continually submitting coins from , say , 70's mint sets I would send the NFL concussion protocol team to the submitters house to see if they are ok
You have linked a coin's value to how it should be considered, treated, graded, or body bagged. That's presents a problem we are stuck with.
It works the other way also, What does it matter what grade we give a 198X Silver Eagle? What does it matter what grade we give a 199X Silver Eagle? Get the point? The coins are not really worth much as 68, 69 even 70! The entire box looks perfect to the naked eye and that's the way they are graded.
Funny thing happens as decades pass. Those MS-70 coins dated 198(something) are now worth? Unfortunately at the time they were graded, the things were like common "dreck." Or were they common "widgets?" And how many of those MS-70's actually stand up to the examination they are subjected to by the "condition freak" with a 16X hand lens today?
Bottom line: IMO a coin should be graded as correctly as possible with no respect to its owner or value. That goes for a Bicentennial Quarter or the Brasher Doubloon! Good Luck with that.
Bottom line no coin worth less than the cost of grading should ever be graded.
I think the 68-D Kennedy got caught up in the batch of QC's and didn't deserve it. It's the only coin in the group that shows signs of elevation chromatics .... i.e. pink inside the ear and blue on the ear itself.
On another note, folks here know I've been railing on AT stuff getting into straight graded holders at PCGS. Especially toned silver eagles. I have been proactive in sending PCGS information on the perpetrators. At least two of them no longer have toned inventory. Glad to see they are righting the ship.
@WildIdea said:
Toned copper really knocks me out. Some looks are more pleasing and believable than others for sure, depends on the series and who you ask. Getting color in straight graded PC holders is tough, it should remain that way. For better or worse, they get to decide the standard. I think its always been that way.
In regards to Lincoln cents though, It's my observation that there are plenty of raw coins yet to be certified with color in the first place with better shots than getting them processed. I suppose that with the quantities minted there are millions for cooks to practice on with little downside, so Lincoln are likely immediately suspect for that reason.
If I'm PCGS I'm suspicious of anyone paying to send in a coin with a book value of 26 cents . Either they are soft in the head or they are up to no good. If they force me to take their money whats the downside to body bagging it? They are probably soft enough to resubmit so you can take their money again right? Its not as if there is any great demand for these coins to be in slabs in the first place. That right there is a red flag, I mean does someone have a registry set where they desperately need the 50,000th best 1988D lincoln cent? Beyond the cost of grading there is no downside to doctoring these coins , if you screw them up they are only worth face value , you didnt wreck anything that anyone would care about.
If I'm PCGS and I see people continually submitting coins from , say , 70's mint sets I would send the NFL concussion protocol team to the submitters house to see if they are ok
You have linked a coin's value to how it should be considered, treated, graded, or body bagged. That's presents a problem we are stuck with.
It works the other way also, What does it matter what grade we give a 198X Silver Eagle? What does it matter what grade we give a 199X Silver Eagle? Get the point? The coins are not really worth much as 68, 69 even 70! The entire box looks perfect to the naked eye and that's the way they are graded.
Funny thing happens as decades pass. Those MS-70 coins dated 198(something) are now worth? Unfortunately at the time they were graded, the things were like common "dreck." Or were they common "widgets?" And how many of those MS-70's actually stand up to the examination they are subjected to by the "condition freak" with a 16X hand lens today?
Bottom line: IMO a coin should be graded as correctly as possible with no respect to its owner or value. That goes for a Bicentennial Quarter or the Brasher Doubloon! Good Luck with that.
Bottom line no coin worth less than the cost of grading should ever be graded.
One often doesn’t know the value of the coin until it’s graded. I have several toned coins which have a price guide value under $20 but because of the color are worth many multiples of that. They would certainly have been worth more than $20 raw, but putting them in a graded holder absolutely helps. If they had come back as QC they would be worth substantially less.
@bronco2078 said: "One often doesn’t know the value of the coin until it’s graded. I have several toned coins which have a price guide value under $20 but because of the color are worth many multiples of that. They would certainly have been worth more than $20 raw, but putting them in a graded holder absolutely helps. If they had come back as QC they would be worth substantially less."
...But only until you crack them out and sell them raw.
@WildIdea said:
Toned copper really knocks me out. Some looks are more pleasing and believable than others for sure, depends on the series and who you ask. Getting color in straight graded PC holders is tough, it should remain that way. For better or worse, they get to decide the standard. I think its always been that way.
In regards to Lincoln cents though, It's my observation that there are plenty of raw coins yet to be certified with color in the first place with better shots than getting them processed. I suppose that with the quantities minted there are millions for cooks to practice on with little downside, so Lincoln are likely immediately suspect for that reason.
If I'm PCGS I'm suspicious of anyone paying to send in a coin with a book value of 26 cents . Either they are soft in the head or they are up to no good. If they force me to take their money whats the downside to body bagging it? They are probably soft enough to resubmit so you can take their money again right? Its not as if there is any great demand for these coins to be in slabs in the first place. That right there is a red flag, I mean does someone have a registry set where they desperately need the 50,000th best 1988D lincoln cent? Beyond the cost of grading there is no downside to doctoring these coins , if you screw them up they are only worth face value , you didnt wreck anything that anyone would care about.
If I'm PCGS and I see people continually submitting coins from , say , 70's mint sets I would send the NFL concussion protocol team to the submitters house to see if they are ok
You have linked a coin's value to how it should be considered, treated, graded, or body bagged. That's presents a problem we are stuck with.
It works the other way also, What does it matter what grade we give a 198X Silver Eagle? What does it matter what grade we give a 199X Silver Eagle? Get the point? The coins are not really worth much as 68, 69 even 70! The entire box looks perfect to the naked eye and that's the way they are graded.
Funny thing happens as decades pass. Those MS-70 coins dated 198(something) are now worth? Unfortunately at the time they were graded, the things were like common "dreck." Or were they common "widgets?" And how many of those MS-70's actually stand up to the examination they are subjected to by the "condition freak" with a 16X hand lens today?
Bottom line: IMO a coin should be graded as correctly as possible with no respect to its owner or value. That goes for a Bicentennial Quarter or the Brasher Doubloon! Good Luck with that.
Bottom line no coin worth less than the cost of grading should ever be graded.
One often doesn’t know the value of the coin until it’s graded. I have several toned coins which have a price guide value under $20 but because of the color are worth many multiples of that. They would certainly have been worth more than $20 raw, but putting them in a graded holder absolutely helps. If they had come back as QC they would be worth substantially less.
Well to you they are and maybe now just for the near future. And if you personally pulled the coin from whatever environment toned it then you will like it regardless of its present status . But if PCGS really slams the door on certain kinds of toners then people will start questioning the validity of existing slabs. Some generation of holders will then become suspect because they were done when graders were being lenient.
@Rexford said:
So this is what sparked the riot on IG? Ridiculous.
I think the way PCGS has handled their instagram account is what has started the riot. There are right ways and wrong ways for companies to handle social media accounts. Arguing with customers publicly is not the right way.
I see coins like that in change it happens I throw coins in my car center counsel and I see lots of color as we have heat and humidity here. Bought a ton of bicentennial and SBA cheap because of slight toning in sealed sets. Now all I have to do is wait about 15 more years. Bam winning.
it might be helpful if PCGS establishes registry sets for QC (.91) coins. Maybe there are collectors of .91 coins that feel left out of our club........
@WoodenJefferson said:
How do copper coins less than 18 years old tone in such a manner other than with some 'Toner Helper' along the way?
For the most part I agree with your statement, however, I have noticed many 2009-S 1c proofs with violet/lavender toning (still in OGP) and some with coppery-magenta-yellowish toning (also still in OGP), and I have also seen quite a few toned 2010-S proofs and 2011-S.
Not crazy rainbows, on the 2010s and 2011s, but decent toning nonetheless.
However, I agree with the point you made, especially about the rainbow toners on both sides shown in this thread.
In the event it's informative, I resubmitted the 1951P, 1954S and 1948S quarters that were the subject of some commentary, and they graded PCGS 67, 66 and 66 respectively.
There is no doubt if any submission has "suspect" toned coins in it, the whole invoice will be negatively affected. I've seen it many many times. I have also had coins that were previously holdered (with CAC stickers), come back QC. With the grading game in general you have to have a thick skin, perserverance, and deep pockets.
@Coppercolor said:
In the event it's informative, I resubmitted the 1951P, 1954S and 1948S quarters that were the subject of some commentary, and they graded PCGS 67, 66 and 66 respectively.
If PCGS sniff tester can somehow determine NT from AT I think PCGS should confirm a coin to be AT by running it through the sniffer and body bagging the coin as failing the sniff tester. That takes away the second guessing and re-submissions.
As far as ANY COLOR on copper coins, my experience has been that PCGS will default to the body bag rather than give any critical thought to straight grading on everything but the classic toning (like older US Mint Sets). Buying toned copper with the intent to submit is a fools errand for all but the most experienced.
Someone pissed away the better part of $500 having these coins graded after being told not to do it. You can lead a horse to water.............
If you do what you always did, you get what you always got.
Some old timers here probably remember the old 2x2 Manila coin holders from the old days. If you had in say 1965 put a coin in one of those and left it in a sdb until now, would YOU consider it at? Not the tpgs, but you. Just curious and wanting your opinions.
No, I would consider anything that toned over a period of 10 years or more to be NT. These crooks that bake something in the over in an hour are doing coins a dis-service.
If you do what you always did, you get what you always got.
Comments
This is just my opinion. All of those posted coins in the OP's 17 coin submisison posted early on in this thread look AT'd or Questionable to me. I am personally GLAD PCGS slapped a Gen QC on them. I would like to see PCGS get stricter with allowing color through. Some of the later coins posted look ok to me but some looked cooked as well. In any case, its hard to tell from a single static photo so I would tend to defer to pcgs who saw the coin in hand. I would rather have PCGS err on the side of caution rather let a bunch of cooked coins through with problem free grades. I have seen too many really awful looking AT'd coins lately in problem-free PCGS slabs.
My Coin Blog
My Toned Lincoln Registry Set
Taken as a group , if they actually do things that way , if I'm PCGS I refuse all future packages from that address
I think we've all benefited from some lax grading - at least in the form of color - over the last 3-4 years. I'm happy to see them tightening up even if it means my current sub takes a couple of hits.
I submit almost exclusively toners. Over the past couple of years, it looks like I've submitted 234 coins. TWO graded QC. And only 9 others graded Details, several of which regraded. That's < 1% for QC.
It's a pretty revealing lack of experience and discerning eye when you're getting 94% of your sub as QC. I would have submitted maybe 1 of the coins @FadeToBlack posted, and that's the 1977 Lincoln that I've submitted myself before. I pulled it from a water-damaged Whitman.
Most of the hardest hit are in the Instagram community, where a majority of the users have more time driving with a permit than they do collecting coins. All they've ever known is the slack grading around color.
Check out my iPhone app SlabReader!
The four WQs posted by Coppercolor later in the thread have a different "feel", in my opinion, than the previous 17-coin submission. When I view coins already in slabs I attempt to view them as raw coins and determine my own grade first, look for hidden issues and determine if the color or color pattern makes sense. It's great that the TPGs give us a starting point, but truly it should only be a starting point for an advanced collector.
As such, the later group of four WQs would make me think hard about these coins. The 1954-S has a green-to-gold spectrum that I have actually seen on a relatively decent percentage of 1954-S WQs and I believe had been imparted by the original papers from US Mint Sets. However, on this coin the spectrum is not only deeper in overall color, but also has an odd combination of red-blue that I have not seen "in the wild" on such coins. The remaining three coins shared (1948-S, 1951 and 1951-D) just don't look natural at all to my eye and experience and I would kick them out right away. In other words, I agree with PCGS on the call for these four WQs.
What likely did not help for this group of four WQs was also context. That is, there were coins that appear to have been submitted with them (within the sequence of cert numbers that were not linked in this thread) that also seem to be barking at me and human nature might no doubt see a possible pattern of attempted deception. In other words, no matter how impartial graders might be or attempt to be, they might not be able to deny the impulse to engage in guilt by association. Sticking within the solid cert block of 18-coins from 34402659-34402676 (all WQs), I tend to agree with PCGS that nine of the 18 are AT. However, I disagree with PCGS in that one coin they called NT would be a coin I consider AT. Regardless, the overall PCGS call for AT/NT on that group of 18-coins matches what I have seen over the decades looking at raw coins.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
The three Lincoln cents posted by BG I know are legitimately toned. I purchased a partial Dansco set of MS Lincoln sets at the Garden State Numismatic Association (GSNA) show back in 2003 and pulled these three coins out of it as the best three coins in the set. I paid nothing extra for these three coins in the set and merely scanned each piece to find those coins that had toned most attractively in the group. I later sold them raw to BG in 2006 and PCGS kicked them out as AT the first time through before grading them on the second attempt. They looked real to me then and still do now and if anyone had seen them in their raw state in the partial Dansco set of MS Lincoln sets then I would think they would realize that these three coins were the fortunate survivors of that set.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Hey TomB
I edited the original post to pose this in the form of a question because I didn't intend for the discussion to focus on my submissions. I was more interested in hearing what the rest of the community was seeing and to provide some of my observations to date.
Regarding the four washingtons i posted, one was cracked out of original PCGS graded holder to be graded again, and one I plucked from a double mint set myself and it was a "wondercoin" in the set, having similar traits as all the others but just a more outstanding look. I did not pay a premium for the mint set.
There was also one more washington in that submission that I cracked in an attempt to get upgraded and it dropped a grade. This DOES certainly support the idea that the mind of a grader may have detected something off and then lost confidence in the submission.
I find this very interesting. I have long been of the opinion that too many AT coins were being slabbed and that was driving the AT process...profit always drives these endeavors....That being said, it will certainly impact the amateur 'doctors'..... and could impact the overall market for colorful tarnish. Of course, some just do not care. And the skillful 'doctors' will continue to ply their trade - as long as it is profitable. Cheers, RickO
Of course any tightening will only increase the value of the questionable toned coins already in PCGS slabs.
K
1 more coin per 1000 could be a lot, considering that of 1000 coins, the vast majority won't have color that would come into play. Hard to determine this, though.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Those already slabbed May treated similarly to Barry Bonds and Clemons. No longer considered hall of fame material. It will be interesting for sure
True AT coins may need to be re-slabbed to avoid being associated with the “baking era”.
Based on the submissions i've seen in this thread, I applaud PCGS for delivering QCs.
Classic "guilt by association." While it would be nice if each coin was evaluated based on it's own individual merits, realistically this does not happen because humans are still grading our coins. Consequently, most dealers I know "salt" their questionable coins into a submission with better coins to increase their odds of successfully getting them into problem-free holders. Because the OP didn't follow this prudent practice, IMO his submission was basically DOA.
ANA LM
USAF Retired — 34 years of active military service! 🇺🇸
Toned copper really knocks me out. Some looks are more pleasing and believable than others for sure, depends on the series and who you ask. Getting color in straight graded PC holders is tough, it should remain that way. For better or worse, they get to decide the standard. I think its always been that way.
In regards to Lincoln cents though, It's my observation that there are plenty of raw coins yet to be certified with color in the first place with better shots than getting them processed. I suppose that with the quantities minted there are millions for cooks to practice on with little downside, so Lincoln are likely immediately suspect for that reason.
Can you get the same stats from 3 and 4 years ago?
If I'm PCGS I'm suspicious of anyone paying to send in a coin with a book value of 26 cents . Either they are soft in the head or they are up to no good. If they force me to take their money whats the downside to body bagging it? They are probably soft enough to resubmit so you can take their money again right? Its not as if there is any great demand for these coins to be in slabs in the first place. That right there is a red flag, I mean does someone have a registry set where they desperately need the 50,000th best 1988D lincoln cent? Beyond the cost of grading there is no downside to doctoring these coins , if you screw them up they are only worth face value , you didnt wreck anything that anyone would care about.
If I'm PCGS and I see people continually submitting coins from , say , 70's mint sets I would send the NFL concussion protocol team to the submitters house to see if they are ok
my hunch is that the problem isn't PCGS' interpretation of what is legitimate tone, but the submitters interpretation of what is AT.
You have linked a coin's value to how it should be considered, treated, graded, or body bagged. That's presents a problem we are stuck with.
It works the other way also, What does it matter what grade we give a 198X Silver Eagle? What does it matter what grade we give a 199X Silver Eagle? Get the point? The coins are not really worth much as 68, 69 even 70! The entire box looks perfect to the naked eye and that's the way they are graded.
Funny thing happens as decades pass. Those MS-70 coins dated 198(something) are now worth? Unfortunately at the time they were graded, the things were like common "dreck." Or were they common "widgets?" And how many of those MS-70's actually stand up to the examination they are subjected to by the "condition freak" with a 16X hand lens today?
Bottom line: IMO a coin should be graded as correctly as possible with no respect to its owner or value. That goes for a Bicentennial Quarter or the Brasher Doubloon! Good Luck with that.
I tried to cross a toned unc seated half from NGC. It came back as QC. But no problem as I always check "do not holder genuine."
Bottom line no coin worth less than the cost of grading should ever be graded.
I think the 68-D Kennedy got caught up in the batch of QC's and didn't deserve it. It's the only coin in the group that shows signs of elevation chromatics .... i.e. pink inside the ear and blue on the ear itself.
On another note, folks here know I've been railing on AT stuff getting into straight graded holders at PCGS. Especially toned silver eagles. I have been proactive in sending PCGS information on the perpetrators. At least two of them no longer have toned inventory. Glad to see they are righting the ship.
One often doesn’t know the value of the coin until it’s graded. I have several toned coins which have a price guide value under $20 but because of the color are worth many multiples of that. They would certainly have been worth more than $20 raw, but putting them in a graded holder absolutely helps. If they had come back as QC they would be worth substantially less.
@bronco2078 said: "One often doesn’t know the value of the coin until it’s graded. I have several toned coins which have a price guide value under $20 but because of the color are worth many multiples of that. They would certainly have been worth more than $20 raw, but putting them in a graded holder absolutely helps. If they had come back as QC they would be worth substantially less."
...But only until you crack them out and sell them raw.
Dip all the toned coins I say. Let PCGS sort em out!
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
BOOMIN!™
Wooooha! Did someone just say it's officially "TACO™" Tuesday????
Well to you they are and maybe now just for the near future. And if you personally pulled the coin from whatever environment toned it then you will like it regardless of its present status . But if PCGS really slams the door on certain kinds of toners then people will start questioning the validity of existing slabs. Some generation of holders will then become suspect because they were done when graders were being lenient.
A beautiful toner with CAC approval is going to become hard to come by. Glad I have some already!
That Kennedy reminds me of this coin:
peacockcoins
Let PCGS SNIFF them out.
Pete
Were the coins bought raw off ebay?
I can' t disagree. Seems to be the same colors. Pink imbedded in the creases. Wow!
So this is what sparked the riot on IG? Ridiculous.
Gobrecht's Engraved Mature Head Large Cent Model
https://www.instagram.com/rexrarities/?hl=en
I think the way PCGS has handled their instagram account is what has started the riot. There are right ways and wrong ways for companies to handle social media accounts. Arguing with customers publicly is not the right way.
"Play the game, bear the pain."
I see coins like that in change it happens I throw coins in my car center counsel and I see lots of color as we have heat and humidity here. Bought a ton of bicentennial and SBA cheap because of slight toning in sealed sets. Now all I have to do is wait about 15 more years. Bam winning.
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
it might be helpful if PCGS establishes registry sets for QC (.91) coins. Maybe there are collectors of .91 coins that feel left out of our club........
OINK
For the most part I agree with your statement, however, I have noticed many 2009-S 1c proofs with violet/lavender toning (still in OGP) and some with coppery-magenta-yellowish toning (also still in OGP), and I have also seen quite a few toned 2010-S proofs and 2011-S.
Not crazy rainbows, on the 2010s and 2011s, but decent toning nonetheless.
However, I agree with the point you made, especially about the rainbow toners on both sides shown in this thread.
In the event it's informative, I resubmitted the 1951P, 1954S and 1948S quarters that were the subject of some commentary, and they graded PCGS 67, 66 and 66 respectively.
Better not, the Buffalo Herd is on its way. Happy thoughts
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
There is no doubt if any submission has "suspect" toned coins in it, the whole invoice will be negatively affected. I've seen it many many times. I have also had coins that were previously holdered (with CAC stickers), come back QC. With the grading game in general you have to have a thick skin, perserverance, and deep pockets.
Let me know your asking on the 1951P.
They need to put in park on the ASE's.
If PCGS sniff tester can somehow determine NT from AT I think PCGS should confirm a coin to be AT by running it through the sniffer and body bagging the coin as failing the sniff tester. That takes away the second guessing and re-submissions.
As far as ANY COLOR on copper coins, my experience has been that PCGS will default to the body bag rather than give any critical thought to straight grading on everything but the classic toning (like older US Mint Sets). Buying toned copper with the intent to submit is a fools errand for all but the most experienced.
Someone pissed away the better part of $500 having these coins graded after being told not to do it. You can lead a horse to water.............
Some old timers here probably remember the old 2x2 Manila coin holders from the old days. If you had in say 1965 put a coin in one of those and left it in a sdb until now, would YOU consider it at? Not the tpgs, but you. Just curious and wanting your opinions.
No, I would consider anything that toned over a period of 10 years or more to be NT. These crooks that bake something in the over in an hour are doing coins a dis-service.