@BillJones said:
I have been a collector for about 60 years and have been paying more than face value for coins for about 58 of those years. I have a fairly extensive collection of U.S. gold coins which includes a complete set of U.S. gold type coins (according to the NGC Registry), type sets for the Charlotte and Dahlonega Mints and sets of the Type I and Type II gold dollars. Having tried to establish my credentials, I’d like to give you a couple of my insights.
First, while the weak mint mark on the Charlotte gold coin is normal and part of the minting process, it does affect the value of the coins. Pieces with strong mint marks are more desirable that those with weak mint marks. Therefore, you should look to pay less for coins with the weak letter. This also applies to the Charlotte coins with a weak reverse that were struck with a badly worn die.
Second, a reasonably good number of gold collectors will find the toning on your piece unattractive. I don’t know if this color is natural or not, but it’s not something that I would select. I’m not saying that it is a bad coin, but I am saying is that in the price negotiation process, it’s a factor that buyer needs to consider.
I am not a huge fan of “dirty gold” fan. I prefer pieces which look similar to the day when they were minted with adjustments for the natural aging process that occurs for coins that are at least 86 years old.
I also prefer coins that have not been messed with, although I have some coin have had something done to them. They were a compromise when I was unwilling to pay the sometimes far higher prices for pieces that are totally original. Some collectors on this forum disagree with me on those points, but all of us are different. What I am trying to convey here, is that some factors affect the price and desirably of some coins, and collectors should take that into account.
Sure, some people will not like the color, and those people would pay less for such a coin. Thankfully for Jon, and me, and other fans of toned gold, those people do not set the price on the coins. There are plenty who will always pay a premium for a nicely toned gold coin, and they are the ones who will set the price. The majority opinion is not the factor, the high bidder is.
Note to the "coin sky is falling/Ebay is withering" people on the forum: Jon has been on Instagram for awhile and has posted some really cool coins. He's just one collector but the collector base does skew younger on the platform. Yes, their habits are different but it doesn't mean the hobby is dying. Maybe take off the mustard stained shirt and get off your lawn - there is another world out there.
Love
m
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Thanks for the warm welcome and opinions. When I'm home on the computer I'll reply more specifically. I will also post my avatar and some others in the US coin forum later tonight. It's very hard to offend me and the only way to learn more is to hear all the opinions and not just attaboy. Seems I have come to the right place!
And hey John, Erik, Gary, Shannon and everyone here I know already. Sorry if I missed anyone!
Feel free to keep giving your opinions on this one, and watch out for some new threads later.
Welcome to the Forum Jon. Your 1852-C is a great first post and has generated a few opinions........some critical and others emotional. If your coin had never experienced any exposure to a reactant it would have never toned. I would describe the toning on your coin as unintentional which may be a better description than AT.
I really like the look of that coin. While I'm not a fan of the weak "C" variety, the coin looks very much like an 1848-C QE I used to own and later sold to another forum member when I was paring down my Charlotte QE collection. It had the same look/coloration, and I believe it later CAC'd. It was a lovely piece.
I don't want to hijack this thread with photos of other coins but it reminds me of this one which is currently in my collection...if the 50-C were my coin and I was really interested in exploring the "iodine theory" I'd show it to DW for his opinion...
@jonruns said:
I don't want to hijack this thread with photos of other coins but it reminds me of this one which is currently in my collection...if the 50-C were my coin and I was really interested in exploring the "iodine theory" I'd show it to DW for his opinion...
Comments
Sure, some people will not like the color, and those people would pay less for such a coin. Thankfully for Jon, and me, and other fans of toned gold, those people do not set the price on the coins. There are plenty who will always pay a premium for a nicely toned gold coin, and they are the ones who will set the price. The majority opinion is not the factor, the high bidder is.
Nice coin!
to the forums.
My YouTube Channel
Love
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I very much like toned gold. Like this coin and am sure you are enjoying it.
I see nothing wrong with the color progression and it does not look like any other gold coin that I have seen that has been exposed to iodine.
And welcome here.
Heck of a first post. Gold is not my area but to me I like it.
Thanks for the warm welcome and opinions. When I'm home on the computer I'll reply more specifically. I will also post my avatar and some others in the US coin forum later tonight. It's very hard to offend me and the only way to learn more is to hear all the opinions and not just attaboy. Seems I have come to the right place!
And hey John, Erik, Gary, Shannon and everyone here I know already. Sorry if I missed anyone!
Feel free to keep giving your opinions on this one, and watch out for some new threads later.
Jbknifeandcoin.com
IG: jb_rarities
Wow! and.........Wow!
Weak C, but a strong coin!!
Congratulations. Welcome
Welcome to the Forum Jon. Your 1852-C is a great first post and has generated a few opinions........some critical and others emotional. If your coin had never experienced any exposure to a reactant it would have never toned. I would describe the toning on your coin as unintentional which may be a better description than AT.
We look forward to your contributions.
OINK
I like it...IMHO the toning looks natural...the C is weak but still visible not an issue for me...thanks for posting!
I really like the look of that coin. While I'm not a fan of the weak "C" variety, the coin looks very much like an 1848-C QE I used to own and later sold to another forum member when I was paring down my Charlotte QE collection. It had the same look/coloration, and I believe it later CAC'd. It was a lovely piece.
I don't want to hijack this thread with photos of other coins but it reminds me of this one which is currently in my collection...if the 50-C were my coin and I was really interested in exploring the "iodine theory" I'd show it to DW for his opinion...
Cool looking coin.
Jbknifeandcoin.com
IG: jb_rarities