NGC coin turned dark in holder. Any recourse?

Smoker · September 30, 2006 8:54PM

I recently returned to the hobby after being away for 15+ years
and a lot of things are new to me. Any advice you offer is appreciated.

During the 1980s I bought PCGS and NGC graded coins and stashed
them in a safe deposit box. This year I noticed that in a few of the
holders, coins that were brilliant white have toned and not always
attractively.

Example... what grade would you say this is and is this toning
considered attractive except to me? Am I worried over nothing?

This particular coin was fully lustrous when purchased in 1989.
It's in an NGC holder. I understand that NCS is affiliated. Do
you think they could/would restore it and guarantee the regrade?
I couldn't find anything about this on their site. Similar has
happened with some PCGS coins. What would you do?

(I'll post the grade label later.)

DNADave · September 30, 2006 9:36PM

I would be suspicious that the coin was dipped prior to being slabbed and then toned that way as a result of the dip. 1854 coins just aren't blast white IMHO.

Barry · September 30, 2006 10:08PM

Hard to say about grade, but 64 or 65 wouldn't surprise me. I don't find the toning unattractive.

If you are a smoker, that may have something to do with it. Think of how your lungs have toned!

Steve27 · September 30, 2006 10:15PM

I think they will say the grade is unchanged; thus, you will end up paying for NCS conservation services if you want them white again.

majorbigtime · September 30, 2006 10:20PM

Looks OK as is to me. MOC went through loops to do what you did!

If you wnat it white again, crack it out and dippedy doo dha, dippedy day. I wouldn't dip or otherwise mess with it.

LeeG · September 30, 2006 10:25PM

Is it in the old "Fatty" holder? The old "Fatty" NGC holders have been known to allow toning. Some pay a premium for coins in these type holders. I think the coin looks fine. I can see a hint of rainbow colors on the reverse? Try adding another light to your pic to brighten it up some. Looks 58-62 to me?

Smoker · September 30, 2006 10:26PM

Haha, my lungs have monster toning!

The coin was in a bank box all these years.
Half of these toned coins look decent with nice colors.
I've always preferred the brilliant/lustrous white. That looks the same to everyone.

I'm happy to get such positive feedback so far.

roadrunner · September 30, 2006 10:28PM

That coin is fine the way it is. Another dipping would probably make it look worse. The toning is not unattractive to me. I'd rather buy one like this than stark white. NGC would stand behind their grade but this coin will not have looked any worse for the toning. In fact if these have been locked away in your box untouched odds are the coins now grade a point higher. That would make it a snap for NGC to stand behind their grade guarantee.

Keep them in the early holders until you are 100% sure what needs to be done with them. Post more pics if you desire as you'll get some reasonable feedback here. Older holder coins bring more money even if the coins won't upgrade. And if you had a half way decent eye for picking your coins back then (clean surfaces with few hairlines) they might go up 2 points. The chances of some of your coins not being a point higher today is almost nil. I always look for coins with decent coloration. I try to stay away from dipped type coins at all costs, not because they will eventually start to turn brown, but because the look is unnatural to 99.9% of 19th century coinage (excepting Morgans).

roadrunner

Smoker · September 30, 2006 10:35PM

I bought it at the 1989 ANA convention. As best I can recall neither PCGS nor NGC had any different holders yet. All my NGC holders are fat. PCGS holders all seem the same except one that's a bit thicker and some of them rattle and the coins rotate in them.

I try to take my pics in filtered sunlight. I'm not very good at using settings yet. Most of my shots make the coins look worse than they are so I end up taking 1,000 pics until I get one close.

Encouraging to hear that old holders can bring more money and the coins shouldn't grade any worse. I'll post some others just for the fun of it.

Smoker · September 30, 2006 10:41PM

roadrunner · September 30, 2006 10:42PM

The old holders almost never bring less than today's coins and in for fresh coins not pillaged by dealers over the years, they will bring hefty premiums, though your local coin dealer will not tell you that.

The very early NGC holders (with gold lettering on back, no hologram) are quite desireable just like the first gen PCGS rattlers you have described. Just on pure odds, I would estimate that at least 50% of a grouping like this should be upgrades. Certain coins such as MS63/64 Morgans for example haven't changed their standards quite as much as say type coins like your 3c silver. But Seated, and esp. Bust material, the standards have moved quite a bit. Commems might be another area where like Morgans, there were enough around, that the services have held more to the earlier standards.

While some may consider the obv of your 3cs to be too mottled, I like it. The luster is bold and surfaces clean. I'd guess MS65 today.
There's nothing I see that would make it less than a 64. Though as you probably know, the '89 ANA convention was probably the last peak in prices for most 19th century type coins, incl this 3cs. Though all is not lost. A 2 point bump from 63 to 65 or 64 to 66 would put you in a positive position. And that is not unheard either. The reverse looks fully gem. Obv photo still too fuzzy. Hidden hairlines or faint scratches or scuffs not visible in the photos is what would be grade limiting.

roadrunner

Smoker · September 30, 2006 11:04PM

This is also in the old NGC holder (no holograms). I wouldn't have bought a coin with brown or spots on it.
(Guess the grade if you like. It immediately follows the pics.)

roadrunner · September 30, 2006 11:30PM

The 1921 peace, if the luster is bold enough looks nice enough overall to make 65. Here's a coin that is priced slightly higher in 64 today than it was back around 1988-89. An upgrade to 65 would be a nice reward for having it so long.

roadrunner

Shamika · September 30, 2006 11:31PM

Personally, I think your 3 cent piece looks great. Although I don't collect these, I will say I would never buy one that was blast white. But that's just my own preference.

Shamika · September 30, 2006 11:32PM

P.S. The 21 Peace dollars also looks outstanding for a 64. I would have guessed 65.

anablep · September 30, 2006 11:33PM

I'd leave them in their holders and not touch them.

If they are investment pieces, then you will be happy with leaving well enough alone should you sell in the future.

Good luck!

Smoker · October 1, 2006 12:12AM

This summer I posted photos of my raw 1928 $1 to this forum asking what to do.
You members told me to send it to ANACS. I took your advice and it came back in
August. While waiting I happened to find their old grading cert. of this same coin:

ANACS 1986:

ANACS 2006:

From what I've been reading here (mostly re: PCGS & NGC) there is still big discrepencies today.

roadrunner · October 1, 2006 12:19AM

A good example of how the definition of "cleaned" or "market acceptable" now encompasses many more coins than what was allowed in the 1980's. It's called making money at the grading services. Rejectable coins don't make money as a rule, they don't get sent in as often. The solution was to slack the standards across the board and accept more cleaned/dipped/processed coins.

Back in 1988 it was not unusual for overdipped coins, or even once dipped type coins to come back bagged as "cleaned." They are much more market acceptable today.

roadrunner

Shamika · October 1, 2006 12:36AM

<< <i>Back in 1988 it was not unusual for overdipped coins, or even once dipped type coins to come back bagged as "cleaned." They are much more market acceptable today. >>

The real question is "why are they more market acceptable today"? Is it because...

roadrunner · October 1, 2006 12:46AM

The answer to that last question is in the first paragraph of my last post.............$$$$$$

roadrunner

Smoker · October 1, 2006 1:03AM

Any opinions on this one please? Can you tell from the photo if the Saint looks cleaned and what about the grade?
I thought it was at least a 63. Is it worth submitting again to ANACS, PCGS, NGC, going by today's standards?

Shamika · October 1, 2006 1:05AM

We need better pics but if it's been polished or whizzed, it won't slab.

originalisbest · October 1, 2006 1:06AM

Good advice as usual from roadrunner here - by all means, don't have your coins "serviced" - I really think the examples you've shown are fine, and you shouldn't muck with the surfaces. Are you looking to keep, I'd just leave them in their holders, if you're hoping to upgrade in fresh slabs and then sell, it is possible - but PLEASE don't strip and dip, advanced collectors would much rather have them "as is!"

Nice coins.

originalisbest · October 1, 2006 1:09AM

As to your gold piece, unfortunately from that particular pic it's impossible to tell. If you could make a pic in sunlight, etc. similar to your 3c silver earlier in the thread, we could get a better idea.

There's "cleaned" and then "CLEANED" - as shamika said, if it's been heavily wiped or whizzed, it won't slab.

Smoker · October 1, 2006 1:43AM

I was disappointed that so many of my white coins (my preference was NGC)
in the old holders had toned so much. You all have given me a lot of hope and
faith that these in the old holders could be desirable so I won't worry about that
anymore and will leave well enough alone. I'm not planning on selling. I'm working
on finishing my Dansco albums and getting rid of junk and dupes.

Most of my early Washington quarters are in PCGS holders. My collection is
complete and it used to all be brilliant MS64+/- except these PCGS coins toned
and don't match anymore. The remainder of the set has been stored in 2 Capitol
holders and look the same as when I bought them. I'm concerned that if left in
these PCGS/NGC holders the toning could become very undesirable as there's
nothing to keep them in check. Maybe a matched set isn't so important?

During the 1980s I was very confident in my grading ability. Except I never could
tell if a coin was whizzed, cleaned or otherwise tampered with unless it was plainly
obvious. If I'd ever done it I'd likely recognize it more easily. I know better. The
1928 Peace $1 looked funny and that's why I came here originally.

I'll get you better and bigger pics of this Saint. Well, maybe not better but bigger
and in natural light.

roadrunner, your advice and knowledge is well taken. Thank you and thank you all.

roadrunner · October 1, 2006 3:42AM

The color on that Saint is odd and washed out. So certainly ANACS' opinion of a cleaned 60 is probably not far off. I'd get some opinions on it at some local shows you attend. Most will be honest. It's more than likely not worth sending back for grading imo. And Saints in the AU to 61 range are all worth about the same.

roadrunner

Shamika · October 1, 2006 4:07AM

<< <i>You all have given me a lot of hope and faith that these in the old holders could be desirable... >>

They ARE desirable! There's absolutely no doubt about it.

I would like to add that there appears to be some serious rim damage on the Saint. Is it true?

Connecticoin · October 1, 2006 4:08AM

Whatever you do, do not dip the 3CS or the 21 Peace -- they are much more desirable the way they are!

You might want to consider cracking and re-submitting the coins (to PCGS or NGC) so they will not tone in the holder any further -- a newer holder should help with that. Also I agree the 21 has an excellent shot at going 65.

PerryHall · October 1, 2006 4:11AM

<< <i> And Saints in the AU to 61 range are all worth about the same.

roadrunner >>

NOT true. Check any price guide. Got any 1927-D's for sale?

roadrunner · October 1, 2006 4:14AM

Do not crack any of these coins. The only thing you should consider is sending them back to each service in their old holders. There is no chance of downgrades or BB's. And if you decide to go this route it should only be with those coins that have a >50% probability of upgrading. You will lose a substantial premium of any coins that are PQ but fail to upgrade (ie 20-30% or more). If you have no reason to do anything now, just leave them. These kinds of FRESH coins bring very strong prices at auction. It is not unusual for a coin like your 1921 Peace to bring nearly 65 money just as it stands. Crack out players like to get coins that have not yet been tried as the odds are better. Enjoy your old holders, there are fewer and fewer of them left around.

roadrunner

mozin · October 1, 2006 4:28AM

Normally, I reholder my early style NGC/PCGS holdered coins, scratched or not. I like my Classic Commems blast white, or nearly so. I cannot afford the superbly toned ones, and I dislike about 95% of those with toning. The exceptions are those coins which are toning nicely in the holder, those I think will benefit from further toning. As far as I can see, the old styles of NGC holders that are called "fat", allow considerable toning to take place.

Coxe · October 1, 2006 4:29AM

I am not buying that old holder nonsense, especially when it comes to the NGC fatties. I sent in about a quarter million bucks in old DMPLs of very rare dates for their photo proof service and they reholdered/retagged them in the process. (BTW, the tag numbers are still really old ones, though I know upgrades from old ones will be like that too. In the end, a coin is a coin, despite the plastic. The knowledgeable collectors are not buying the plastic. The new guys are not as in-tune with the NGC fatties as they are with the PCGS rattlers. The big money is usually (but not always) smart and knowledgeable money. For that reason, I wouldn't hesitate to reholder a scratched fat NGC holder on a very rare coin.

Connecticoin · October 1, 2006 9:38AM

<< <i>Do not crack any of these coins. The only thing you should consider is sending them back to each service in their old holders. There is no chance of downgrades or BB's. And if you decide to go this route it should only be with those coins that have a >50% probability of upgrading. You will lose a substantial premium of any coins that are PQ but fail to upgrade (ie 20-30% or more). If you have no reason to do anything now, just leave them. These kinds of FRESH coins bring very strong prices at auction. It is not unusual for a coin like your 1921 Peace to bring nearly 65 money just as it stands. Crack out players like to get coins that have not yet been tried as the odds are better. Enjoy your old holders, there are fewer and fewer of them left around.

roadrunner >>

True, perhaps a re-grade at NGC woujld be the best route. I would not keep the 3CS in the old holder though -- the toning looks fine (nice IMO), but if I kept it in the old holder I would be afraid it would tone further and turn ugly.

roadrunner · October 1, 2006 9:41AM

Over the past 18 years I've dealt primarily with NGC coins. My own holdings are 80% or more NGC. I would never just send in an old holdered NGC coin for reholder service just to remove scratches.

As long as there are 2 people out there willing to pay premiums for old NGC fatties (I'm one of them), it makes no sense just to change holders. Let the next guy get the clear holder.

As much as we'd like to say that sharp collectors and dealers do not buy the plastic, we know just the opposite is true. Compare the price of a pre-1990 holdered coin vs the same coin placed in new plastic. In most cases the older (fresher & untried) will realize more money. That's the coin I will pay more money for as well. It's akin to playing against the house but given a free 5-10% bonus.

Morgans don't fare as well from old holders to new in my opinion as the standards changed less than for type coins. Bust coin standards changed the most and imo Morgans and Commem standards changed the least.

roadrunner

jonesy · October 1, 2006 9:43AM

At least they look natural.

coindeuce · October 1, 2006 11:49AM

I like the "natural" or "incidental" toning on all of your coins posted here. At the very least though, if you plan to continue storing them in a bank safe deposit box, you should invest in the Intercept Shield anti-corrosion slab storage sleeves and box to isolate your coins from the atmospheric environment of the vault. Bank vaults w/safe deposit boxes typically are storage receptacles for valuable paper documents with paper of high sulfur content. This is the most probable source of the toning on your coins.

ABC123 · October 1, 2006 1:11PM

NCG candidate via NGC !

thebeav · October 1, 2006 2:06PM

That's a fabulous strike on your '21.....
I've never had one that nice !!

Myqqy · October 1, 2006 3:18PM

It's called making money at the grading services. Rejectable coins don't make money as a rule, they don't get sent in as often. The solution was to slack the standards across the board and accept more cleaned/dipped/processed coins.

Sad, but true....

Smoker · October 2, 2006 5:13PM

Smoker · October 2, 2006 11:32PM

Shamika
I would like to add that there appears to be some serious rim damage on the Saint. Is it true?

We'll see when I get it out to take larger pics.

---

Connecticoin
I would not keep the 3CS in the old holder though -- the toning looks fine (nice IMO), but if I kept it in the old holder I would be afraid it would tone further and turn ugly.

The opposite happened to the dime below. It was the darkest/worst coin in the collection way back, very brown and no color. Now it looks better, IMO. I guess it's a coin toss which direction the toning will take? It seems the toning never stops.

---

roadrunner
Bust coin standards changed the most and imo Morgans and Commem standards changed the least.

I don't own any Morgans or Commems. I don't regard them as rare coins because they were/are so readily available. The only bust coin I have is below.

What you have said about the old holdered coins makes sense to me. From what I've read in this forum there are a lot of cleaned and AT coins in holders these days. ANACS sure loosened up. I'm inclined to hold onto them as they are unless there's some that have a better than average chance for an upgrade. Maybe I'll try the 1921 Peace... to NGC?

---

coindeuce
At the very least though, if you plan to continue storing them in a bank safe deposit box, you should invest in the Intercept Shield anti-corrosion slab storage sleeves and box to isolate your coins from the atmospheric environment of the vault. Bank vaults w/safe deposit boxes typically are storage receptacles for valuable paper documents with paper of high sulfur content. This is the most probable source of the toning on your coins.

The key door to the s.d. box seems like it closes airtight, maybe not. I agree with the paper and sulphur theory. I've got carboard and paper in my box including the boxes and tissue paper that Capitol holders come in. None of the coins in those holders changed and there's over 100 MS silver. I've only got about 40 certified coins. I guess I should get sleeves for those. I'd need something like a moth ball to protect everything, although enough can't be said about the Capitol plastic.

---

The 3CS is the worst example of the toning that occured in the holders. The 1932-D quarter below got pretty bad too (PCGS).

The dime was muddy ugly as I recall, all brown, and I think it improved a bit.

Thanks for all the replies.

If you care to guess the grades they follow the pics:

coindeuce · October 2, 2006 11:47PM

The 1835 Capped Bust dime is very attractively toned IMHO.

NGC coin turned dark in holder. Any recourse?

Comments

Leave a Comment