UPDATED EARLY WITH DECISION - If you owned this coin would you have it conserved?

coinguy1 · January 14, 2004 4:32AM

This 1910 Liberty nickel currently resides in an NGC PR68 Cameo holder. The patina is lighter in person, than in the images and the coin is accurately graded/designated in my opinion.

Someone suggested that we have it conserved, the thought apparently being, that without the toning, it might go Deep/Ultra Cameo (and up in "value", probably to the tune of about $2000-$3000).

I wont reveal until Friday, what the decision was, and, if applicable, the outcome.

Who, here, would have it conserved and why or why not?

Russ · January 14, 2004 4:34AM

Nope, I'd leave it alone. Why? Because I think it looks damned good just the way it is.

Russ, NCNE

dbldie55 · January 14, 2004 4:35AM

I would leave it alone. Why? Experience with NCS and Proof Liberty Nickels.

BillJones · January 14, 2004 4:35AM

No.

I've always like the coppery look on Proof liberty nickels, especially when it is attractive as it is on this coin.

dollardude · January 14, 2004 4:36AM

I'd leave it alone. The reason is that I NEVER touch an "expensive" coin, i.e., over about $1K, no matter what the outcome might be. You can never go back and undo something once you've done it.

291fifth · January 14, 2004 4:37AM

Great original coin. Unfortunately the "white" crowd will probably get ahold of it someday and try for an upgrade. There is a good chance they will ruin it.

BigD5 · January 14, 2004 4:41AM

Tough question. I'd have to get an opinon on what would actually happen with the conservation before attempting that route. I can't stand color like this on Liberty Nickels, so I would persue the conservation route, but would want to make a decision based on what a "professional" thought the coin would look like once finished. The "spotting" on the head, and on the V on the reverse would concern me, and would play a large factor in my decision to conserve. Would those "spots" be more defined upon completion? Look like "stains"?
I know there are hardliners out there that will exclaim NOT to EVER "conserve", any coin. That's ok, and I understand the thinking.
It's not my train of thought though. Certain coins benefit from a "bath". The potential "profit" factor wouldn't be my decision breaker on this coin. The coin is worth enough as it is. My preference on overall "look" for this series would be what I would base my decision on, and if I planned on keeping the coin also.
For strictly sales purposes, I would market the coin as is, and let the potential conservator do the "work".

Stuart · January 14, 2004 4:41AM

Mark: the ONLY reason that I would even consider having this Proof Liberty Nickel conserved would be if one felt that the gray pots were active PVC or other foreign material that could potentially further deteriorate and perhaps damage the coin (i.e. for remediation purposes) -- especially since the copper/nickel alloy used is so reactive and apt to corrosion. They seem to be only on high points.

Otherwise, I would not mess with such a nice original evenly toned gem coin. Reasons not have it conserved include removing the toning could reveal hairlines otherwise not apparent that could decrease the grade and thus the value of the coin. You have an upside potential and also a downside risk.

Another option would be to take advantage of NGC's grading guarantee and cash out of the coin if you feel that it has "turned" since it was graded.

Clankeye · January 14, 2004 4:42AM

To strip it of it's true uniqueness would be akin to a crime to me. Okay, I realize there is a possible gain of a couple grand involved.

It just separates who is in this for the dough, and who is in it because that coin makes their heart beat fast.

I would fall into the category of people who believe that by "conserving" the coin you are altering it's surfaces. And I just can't get behind that.

Clankeye

coinguy1 · January 14, 2004 4:45AM

There is an option when submitting to NCS, to pay a 1% (of the insured value) fee for grade insurance/protection.

I mention this, in case it might affect anyone's answer.

BillJones · January 14, 2004 4:45AM

If you don't like the look of this coin and want to make it white, that's your right if you own it. I'll tell you though that the "white" effect might be temporary. The copper could come up again in a year or so, even if it is properly stored. You could end up with duller coin with the same general look.

The solution is not to buy the coin in the first place, and let someone who likes originality own it instead.

braddick · January 14, 2004 4:47AM

<< There is an option when submitting to NCS, to pay a 1% (of the insured value) fee for grade insurance/protection. I mention this, in case it might affect anyone's answer. >>

That does, for me.
I'd go for it.
You're not chasing a better grade- this one looks maxed out at PR68, but I bet there is a DCAM waiting for you under the gold patina. Also, as mentioned above, if those pinprick spots can also be removed you'de be increasing the overall Eye Appeal.

BillJones · January 14, 2004 4:52AM

Well, it sounds like another original coin is getting ready to go down the drain because someone has no appreciation for the look of age and is ready to pay for an artificial white surface.

Conservation makes sense if the vast majority of collectors view a repairable look as "ugly." In this case there is a body of collectors and dealers who admire coins like this. It's shame what we are doing to the coins for the next generation of collectors.

Pushkin · January 14, 2004 4:53AM

Not an easy question to answer. If it is strictly a business decision I'm sure you and other experts have discussed the potential upside versus any risk. If I were in the coin business then I would certainly investigate the possibility of significantly increasing the coin's value and make a decision as a business decision. As a collector, I would be much less likely to consider conservation if I liked the coin. For me conservtion is only an option if it involves removing "crud" that will not affect the patina (but I only collect copper and Cu_Ni cents, so this is rarely an option).

Edited to add: I'm not going to conserve my Fugio - Never!

dorkkarl · January 14, 2004 4:54AM

it already has been "conserved"

K S

mgoodm3 · January 14, 2004 4:57AM

Leave it alone.

1jester · January 14, 2004 4:58AM

I can't shake the suspicion that those spots represent corrosion, and as such I'd try to have it removed to avoid further damage to a very nice coin. I think that should be a primary reason for "conservation" anyway--to conserve the coin for the future, and try to remove damage.

Unfortunately, it would also remove the beautiful toning and originality.

But those spots would probably drive me to take the conservation route to minimize damage to the coin.

ms70 · January 14, 2004 5:04AM

That coin is gorgeous just the way it is!

tradedollarnut · January 14, 2004 5:07AM

There is an option when submitting to NCS, to pay a 1% (of the insured value) fee for grade insurance/protection.

Hmmm. If something goes wrong, exactly how much protection does it provide to have a funky looking "PF68" handed back to you after conservation? 25%? 30%? I was lucky - I managed to sell my grossly washed out "MS65" POS for 55% of what I paid....

abuell · January 14, 2004 5:08AM

It never ceases to amaze me why people just can't be satisfied to leave things well enough alone!

stman · January 14, 2004 5:10AM

OK, if this went down like it often does, submit for grading, when you get the coin back there is a note about possible NCS "Conservation".... HECK yeah I would fix it... I mean "conserve" it.

It's all about the upgrade and the numbers.

<< There is an option when submitting to NCS, to pay a 1% (of the insured value) fee for grade insurance/protection >>

Even better. Who cares both company's are affiliated, and of course they can guarantee the grade

Doesn't matter if it ends up looking like the rest of the "artificial white" widgets out there. It's all about the numbers and the insert baby.

And also, who cares if any spots come back later, not important, just dump the thing, and run. I know YOU wouldn't do that though.

What would I do? Nothing because I don't care for this series and wouldn't own it to begin with.

MICHAELDIXON · January 14, 2004 5:11AM

Yes, conserve the coin. NCS did a fantastic job on a Liberty Nickel I sent them.

goose3 · January 14, 2004 5:13AM

First off, I would never buy that coin because I personally don't care for the way it looks at all but if I were to own it I would certainly look into the NCS route and see what they thought they could do with it.

BillJones · January 14, 2004 5:16AM

A couple months ago I had rare Civil War token slabbed. It came back MS-66, R&B with a sticker on the back of it that stated that it could be "improved" by a visit to NCS. That sticker soon found its way to the trash can where it belonged.

Could this "improvement" have made the token an MS-66, red? If so how is that different from coin, excuse me, token doctoring?

Yes, I used NCS to remove some ugly copper stains from a gold coin, and the piece was improved. Still there are limits to this, and they are nearly as extensive as NCS would lead inexperieced people to believe.

I also know a veteran token dealer who told me that in his opinion a few peices he had NCS'd came back worse for the experience.

CarlWohlforth · January 14, 2004 5:16AM

Don't conserve it. I like to buy toned proof nickels with heavy frosting on the devices. I'd rather have that coin in a 68 Cam holder than if it were dipped to blandness and in an 68 Ultra holder.

DMWJR · January 14, 2004 5:21AM

Don't touch that monster!

pmh1nic · January 14, 2004 5:23AM

Leave it as is

tradedollarnut · January 14, 2004 5:24AM

A copy of my post from October 2003:

For certain coins, perhaps. But be very careful what coins you choose. I would only use NCS for a coin that is ungradeable or practically unsellable in its present state. I would NOT use NCS on any coin that already has eye appeal but needs to be 'lightened' in hopes of an upgrade. And forget about the grade guarantee. What good does it do you to have a washed out white coin back in a certain holder if you can't sell it for anywhere near the value that holder should bring?

My results:

NGC MS65 trade dollar conserved to remove dip residue under the appearance review process: sold privately @ a loss of 41%

PCGS MS64 trade dollar lightened in hopes of upgrade - put back into NGC MS64 holder under grade guarantee but practically unsaleable. Dipped it to improve appearance, got it graded MS63 at PCGS and gave it away as a gift. 75% loss.

PCGS PF64 seated half. Lightened and got upgrade to NGC PF65. Sold privately for 33% loss.

IMHO, the grade guarantee process associated with NCS is the biggest mistake that NGC is making right now. I feel it puts bad coins into their holder and affects their reputation.

My personal experience with NCS is that the coins come back with a 'greasy' or washed out look. Since the liberty nickel in question is quite sellable as is, I wouldn't even consider the NCS avenue.

keets · January 14, 2004 5:26AM

hey Mark

i've "conserved" many, many nickels, though none have been quite that old. i don't see the color of the coin being a result of the copper bleeding through as Bill Jones suggested, it's more likely just the result of toning which is common on Nickel Coinage and Clads, but why would Bill know about the latter, right??

the thing with NCS that most collectors misunderstand is that they aren't a blanket cleaning service. when we send coins to them, especially already holdered coins, they act more as an evaluation service.

with this coin i feel they would study it a bit harder than most since it's NGC holdered and they would bear liability once cracked out no matter what the final result. my experience with them says they'll consider how much the Cameo is enhanced/hindered by the tone and act accordingly. i part ways with most in preferring the color of the nickel over the tone when the color is this flat golden-brown. the true color of the coin is the "spots" where friction has removed the tone. my hunch is that the coin, if conserved, will be a black and white gem!!!

ironically, since the original crowd has weighed in without the privelage of seeing the after images if the coin is conserved, there will be no objective opinion rendered if NCS improves the appearance, only the howling that another "original" coin has been ruined. pity that.

so, after all that babbling, i would say to submit the coin to NCS in the NGC holder for evaluation and keep in close contact with them. that opinion isn't based on the monetary enhancement it'll enjoy, just the pure beautification of an American Classic!!

al h.

MadMonk · January 14, 2004 5:27AM

I'd leave it alone. I love the original patina on an old coin. The eye appeal seems good. If it had negative eye appeal, I might think differantly.
Leave well enough alone in this case.

besides, I'm chicken!

cosmicdebris · January 14, 2004 5:37AM

I really like it just the way it is. Leave it as it and keep it original.

BillJones · January 14, 2004 5:37AM

I've had experiance with nickels that have been dipped to remove the coppery color on several occasions. A friend of mine had a wonderful Proof 1868 shield nickel back in the 1970s. Today the piece would have graded PR-67. It developed a copper streak so he dipped it. The steak went away, but a few months later it was back. He dipped it again; a few months later the same result. The coin still looked OK after each dip, but as all of us know or should know dipping removes metal. And after a while you remove enough metal and you have a lower grade coin.

A couple of years ago I bought an NGC MS-65 Liberty nickel that was real white blazer. A few months later it developed copper streaks because it had been dipped to make it a white blazer. It's still got luster, but the streaks are there too. They are not dark, but they prevent the piece from being called white.

Yes, Virginia, nickels are really 88% copper, if the metal mix leaves a concentration of copper, you will get copper marks. Ditto for gold coins. They are 10% copper, and that's why they can stain too. AND yes copper stains can come back after they have been dipped to hide or remove them. I've seen it on several occasions.

CalGold · January 14, 2004 5:40AM

Well, if you're a dealer, in business to make money, you'd have to consider it. Lets ignor emotion and stridency here for a minute. Lets say you have investors who finance your business and they expect you to maximize their returns or else they'll pull their capital and kick you out on your butt. How about that. How about losing your income, your house, your wife, the kids and family dog. How about living under an overpass this winter. How would that affect your decsion?

I guess I would look at it this way. What is the current value and what is the potential upside as a percentage of that value and what is the down side risk as percentage of value if that dip goes wrong and exposes hairlines, makes that spot on V stand out more or washes out the mirrors etc.

You have to consider the risk of dipping the particular coin. This is nickel not silver--what is the success rate of dipping coins like this with this kind of toning etc.?

If the upside is $2,000 or $3,000, what is the potential loss on the down side. If it is the same amount, you have to really weigh the risk of messing up the coin, since the risk is not skewed in your favor. Here's what I mean. Say the value of the coin one grade lower is only 30% and the value of getting a DCAM is 200%, then the risk is heavily weighted in your favor so long as the process has a history of reliable success for the particular metal and type of toning. And in that case you'd have to dip it.

Now if it were me and I was a collector and I wanted a DCAM and thought that this was my best or only shot at one, because of price or because they just aren't out there, I'd also have to give it serious consideration, along the same lines, and probably I'd be even more inclined to take the risk since the motivation would be more emotional (owning one of the few DCAMs out there) rather than financial.

Oh, yeah, a bit of bias to disclose. I don't think much of the color on the coin as it is. If it were a multi-color moster I would leave it as is as a collector.

CG

BillJones · January 14, 2004 5:43AM

There's one more risk. What if the coin goes brown again as I have seen them do? Are you going to give the buyer his money back? When if the price of white PR-68 DCAMs goes thought the roof, but the investor can't realize his windfall because the coin has changed color?

There's more risk here that you have covered so far.

braddick · January 14, 2004 6:10AM

<< It never ceases to amaze me why people just can't be satisfied to leave things well enough alone! >>

With this thinking we'de all still be clubbing our meals over the head, gathering around camp fires instead of now looking to explore Mars as we receive the latest news via an internet connection on our cell phones.

LAWMAN · January 14, 2004 6:11AM

Leave the damn thing alone. It is magnificant, the grade is hefty and all is well in the heavens. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

LAWMAN · January 14, 2004 6:12AM

That would be 'magnificent.' I'm having a cloudy mental day.

dan1ecu · January 14, 2004 6:19AM

I think that the cameo designation is over-rated. I like original coins. My inclination would be to leave it alone!

Dan

keets · January 14, 2004 6:26AM

Yes, Virginia, nickels are really 88% copper, if the metal mix leaves a concentration of copper

hey Bill

Virginia here!!

not to be a stickler for details, but 5-Cent Nickels are actually 25% Nickel and 75% copper, ditto the outer layer of our modern clad coinage. your post, however, highlights a problem i encounter primarily with pre-silver Nickels, that being an improper alloy mixture with the resultant streaky appearance on the surface of the coin. to that end, your friend is to blame for the results he obtained by dipping a coin which i would classify as having been struck on a defective planchet, complicating the problem with his persistent stubbornness.

this last point, the planchet, brings me to my point, evaluation. that is probably the single most overlooked aspect of an NCS submission. i would consider that in the case of the streaky nickels, they might pass working on a problem they know they couldn't resolve.

for what it's worth, NCS has yet to curate a coin i've submitted to them. all have been untouched and returened or subsequently holdered at NGC as is. with the subject coin, i don't view the color as a copper issue, just tone.

al h.

Shamika · January 14, 2004 6:27AM

I agree that the coin will probably go Deep Cameo, but I love the originality of the present look.

Please, Mark, leave it as is.

windwhispersintrees · January 14, 2004 6:49AM

If I intended trying to sell the coin for a profit, and could afford possibly losing money instead: yes to conservation.

If it's for my own collection, have no intention of selling, and assuming that reverse spot is not active corrosion: no to conservation...aesthetics are ok as is.

nepbrs44 · January 14, 2004 6:52AM

Love the way it looks now.........leave it alone would be my vote.

clw54 · January 14, 2004 10:50AM

I'd leave it alone. Why? I hate to see coins tampered with.

braddick · January 14, 2004 11:41AM

<< I'd leave it alone. Why? I hate to see coins tampered with. >>

This is assuming the coin has never been tampered with in the past. I highly doubt that.

Casey · January 14, 2004 11:55AM

Leave it alone. It looks awesome.

uofa1285 · January 14, 2004 12:03PM

I would have it conserved. The toning spots are bothersome. Even if it did not DCAM or CAM, I would be happier with an all white coin vs. a toned coin with spots. Suprisingly, I am a collector that specializes in colorful toning! I just don't find this one attractive with the spots.

Thanks,

Doug

Blade · January 14, 2004 12:04PM

Don't change a thing! Looks DCAM anyway and could be worth more in the future. Not many around with that toning. If most are dipped, won't this be a highly valued, unique piece?

DHeath · January 14, 2004 12:04PM

Nice coin.

Frankly, I think it's a Sophie's choice. The trouble is, in my (probably ignorant) opinion, the coin IS a Dcam and the services would benefit us all if they'd simply recognize it as such. It obviously has great contrast, and I see NO evidence the cameo is incomplete or light in any area. Call it a toned Dcam, and let the collector who decides to conserve it be culpable financially if the coin worsens as a result of their gamble.

Now, back to the real world. Tough call, but I like it well enough to leave it be. I personally see nothing wrong with professional conservation, but I believe the risk associated with conserving that one would cause NCS to pass. JMO

Clankeye · January 14, 2004 12:15PM

<< I just don't find this one attractive with the spots. >>

I think that is totally valid.

My point is though, leave it for the people who do think it's attractive.

If you want white coins--go find them--don't make them.

Clankeye

stman · January 14, 2004 12:20PM

<< If you want white coins--go find them--don't make them. >>

;

uofa1285 · January 14, 2004 12:21PM

<< 

<< I just don't find this one attractive with the spots. >>

I think that is totally valid.

My point is though, leave it for the people who do think it's attractive.

If you want white coins--go find them--don't make them.

Clankeye >>

Clankeye,

Well, the title of the post was..."If you owned this coin...", so my opinion was oriented as such.

Thanks,

Doug

UPDATED EARLY WITH DECISION - If you owned this coin would you have it conserved?

Comments

Leave a Comment