Up until the MOC incident, I was not aware that anyone had prove positive that a coin could be artificially toned in the slab. There is now an abundant amount of proof on this issue. With all the attention it has gotten, I would have thought, and hoped, that PCGS would say something on the subject. If that doesn't happen, I won't be alone in being disappointed in PCGS.
<< <i>Toning "chit" has indeed been going on forever, but the issue here is toning while the coin remains in a PCGS slab. A coin that met with the PCGS stamp of approval is now a different coin, but in the slab there is the false appearance the PCGS has approved the coin and the toning. This is a misrepresentation and a fraud. PCGS should want to clean that up for your sake and for mine. I happen to have first generation holdered coins. Maybe PCGS will offer to waive submission fees for the submission of first generation holdered coins. I could see this going in a lot of directions. If you are so disinterested in the subject, for "Christ sakes" focus your attention on other threads or other hobbies. >>
Lava – you may want to read this thread, pay no attention to it being nearly two years old as this is a new topic “TONING WHILE THE COIN REMAINS IN A PCGS SLAB”. Read FrattLaw's post.
<< <i>Is everyone finally realizing just how realistically meaningless this whole thing is in the grand scheme of things?
I don't think it's meaningless at all- I think you want it to be meaningless, dizzyfox, because it deals directly with toned coins- a segment of the hobby that you are strongly invested in. It's just a piece of the puzzle, and it's indicating that there are a lot of fraud problems in this hobby- and they're likely to keep getting worse as technology improves.... >>
This is just a hobby for me and I love my coins, toned and not so toned. The coin market could inferno and guess what? ...I'll still love my coins. IMO, those who feel so incredibly 'taken-back' by an incident as minuscule as this, should just simply stay away from toned coins of any kind, and my guess is they do already for the most part anyway. I think those who really know the endemism of toned coins and the toned-coin market are really not phased by this at all.(and I'm not saying I know as much as I want to, but I'm happy with what I know at this point). And believe it or not, I appreciate nice original white coins right along with the best of 'em.
My thought on free regrading of first generation holders is to get them off the market before the remaining ones can be tampered with. As the linked thread suggests, a coin can be doctored in the rattler, then resubmitted so the public doesn't make the connection between the toning and the rattler. PCGS obviously will see the connection, but to preserve its reputation I would think PCGS would be a little more proactive on this issue.
I guess I am more naive than I tought. Thanks for the lesson gentlemen.
Comments
<< <i>Toning "chit" has indeed been going on forever, but the issue here is toning while the coin remains in a PCGS slab. A coin that met with the PCGS stamp of approval is now a different coin, but in the slab there is the false appearance the PCGS has approved the coin and the toning. This is a misrepresentation and a fraud. PCGS should want to clean that up for your sake and for mine. I happen to have first generation holdered coins. Maybe PCGS will offer to waive submission fees for the submission of first generation holdered coins. I could see this going in a lot of directions. If you are so disinterested in the subject, for "Christ sakes" focus your attention on other threads or other hobbies. >>
Lava – you may want to read this thread, pay no attention to it being nearly two years old as this is a new topic “TONING WHILE THE COIN REMAINS IN A PCGS SLAB”. Read FrattLaw's post.
Earlier Link
Why would PCGS want to waive submission fees, their are in the business of making money not giving it away.
<< <i>Is everyone finally realizing just how realistically meaningless this whole thing is in the grand scheme of things?
I don't think it's meaningless at all- I think you want it to be meaningless, dizzyfox, because it deals directly with toned coins- a segment of the hobby that you are strongly invested in. It's just a piece of the puzzle, and it's indicating that there are a lot of fraud problems in this hobby- and they're likely to keep getting worse as technology improves.... >>
This is just a hobby for me and I love my coins, toned and not so toned. The coin market could inferno and guess what? ...I'll still love my coins.
IMO, those who feel so incredibly 'taken-back' by an incident as minuscule as this, should just simply stay away from toned coins of any kind, and my guess is they do already for the most part anyway. I think those who really know the endemism of toned coins and the toned-coin market are really not phased by this at all.(and I'm not saying I know as much as I want to, but I'm happy with what I know at this point). And believe it or not, I appreciate nice original white coins right along with the best of 'em.
My thought on free regrading of first generation holders is to get them off the market before the remaining ones can be tampered with. As the linked thread suggests, a coin can be doctored in the rattler, then resubmitted so the public doesn't make the connection between the toning and the rattler. PCGS obviously will see the connection, but to preserve its reputation I would think PCGS would be a little more proactive on this issue.
I guess I am more naive than I tought. Thanks for the lesson gentlemen.