Is NCS/NGC in the business of ATing coins?

[gmarguli]

I should have kept that . Stunningly beautiful. Have you been following its appearances at auction? It keeps getting sold for more and more money. At last I saw, it's up about 50% over the price you bought it at over a very short period of time. Damn lucky clients of yours!

 

 

The original purchaser lost money.

 

The original buyer must be a total to lose money on that coin. They should switch to Beanie Babies instead of coins.

 

Besides, I thought Mark told me he sold the coin to Pinnacle?

 

 

Ah, the power of information. Sucks when you dont have it, eh?

 

Not really. Mark's check cleared and that's all I really cared about. He could have spent the coin for all I care.

[gmarguli]

I should have kept that . Stunningly beautiful. Have you been following its appearances at auction? It keeps getting sold for more and more money. At last I saw, it's up about 50% over the price you bought it at over a very short period of time. Damn lucky clients of yours!

 

 

The original purchaser lost money.

 

The original buyer must be a total to lose money on that coin. They should switch to Beanie Babies instead of coins.

 

Besides, I thought Mark told me he sold the coin to Pinnacle?

 

 

Ah, the power of information. Sucks when you dont have it, eh?

I think the only ones without ALL the info is us...

 

I personally would love to know the whole story ,, (thumbs u

 

Pretty boring story.

 

I purchased a grungy in a PF65 slab. I cleaned it. It regraded PF67*.

 

At a Long Beach Show lunch I passed it around the table and told the story of the coin. I had a hard time pricing it and I stated I was considering putting it in an auction. TruthTeller implored me not to do that and to move it directly thru a dealer and I listened to him.

 

I gave it to Mark to see what he could do. He came back with a fair offer and I accepted it.

 

Since then the coin has changed hands several times and all the sales I know about have been significantly higher than what the original buyer paid. Apparently the original buyer is a bad businessman since they lost money.

 

That's the story. Pretty boring.

[IGWT]

At a Long Beach Show lunch I passed it around the table and told the story of the coin.

 

How long ago?

 

 

[gmarguli]

At a Long Beach Show lunch I passed it around the table and told the story of the coin.

 

How long ago?

 

It's been a few years, but I don't recall the exact date. Perhaps Mark remembers? Or maybe Chinook is blessed with the power of information on this topic?

[MarkFeld]

At a Long Beach Show lunch I passed it around the table and told the story of the coin.

 

How long ago?

 

It's been a few years, but I don't recall the exact date. Perhaps Mark remembers? Or maybe Chinook is blessed with the power of information on this topic?

Without looking up my records, I am guessing it was some time in 2005.

[MAULEMALL]

I should have kept that . Stunningly beautiful. Have you been following its appearances at auction? It keeps getting sold for more and more money. At last I saw, it's up about 50% over the price you bought it at over a very short period of time. Damn lucky clients of yours!

 

 

The original purchaser lost money.

 

The original buyer must be a total to lose money on that coin. They should switch to Beanie Babies instead of coins.

 

Besides, I thought Mark told me he sold the coin to Pinnacle?

 

 

Ah, the power of information. Sucks when you dont have it, eh?

I think the only ones without ALL the info is us...

 

I personally would love to know the whole story ,, (thumbs u

 

Pretty boring story.

 

I purchased a grungy in a PF65 slab. I cleaned it. It regraded PF67*.

 

At a Long Beach Show lunch I passed it around the table and told the story of the coin. I had a hard time pricing it and I stated I was considering putting it in an auction. TruthTeller implored me not to do that and to move it directly thru a dealer and I listened to him.

 

I gave it to Mark to see what he could do. He came back with a fair offer and I accepted it.

 

Since then the coin has changed hands several times and all the sales I know about have been significantly higher than what the original buyer paid. Apparently the original buyer is a bad businessman since they lost money.

 

That's the story. Pretty boring.

Sounds to me you did more conserving than cleaning..

 

What amaizes me though is that you took truths advice..

[MarkFeld]

I should have kept that . Stunningly beautiful. Have you been following its appearances at auction? It keeps getting sold for more and more money. At last I saw, it's up about 50% over the price you bought it at over a very short period of time. Damn lucky clients of yours!

 

 

The original purchaser lost money.

 

The original buyer must be a total to lose money on that coin. They should switch to Beanie Babies instead of coins.

 

Besides, I thought Mark told me he sold the coin to Pinnacle?

 

 

Ah, the power of information. Sucks when you dont have it, eh?

I think the only ones without ALL the info is us...

 

I personally would love to know the whole story ,, (thumbs u

 

Pretty boring story.

 

I purchased a grungy in a PF65 slab. I cleaned it. It regraded PF67*.

 

At a Long Beach Show lunch I passed it around the table and told the story of the coin. I had a hard time pricing it and I stated I was considering putting it in an auction. TruthTeller implored me not to do that and to move it directly thru a dealer and I listened to him.

 

I gave it to Mark to see what he could do. He came back with a fair offer and I accepted it.

 

Since then the coin has changed hands several times and all the sales I know about have been significantly higher than what the original buyer paid. Apparently the original buyer is a bad businessman since they lost money.

 

That's the story. Pretty boring.

Sounds to me you did more conserving than cleaning..

 

What amaizes me though is that you took truths advice..

How would you define "conserving" and "cleaning" and where should we draw the line between "cleaning" vs. "conserving" vs. "doctoring"? This is not meant to flame or inflame - these are serious questions which I hope elicit some good answers.

[ant]

no difference in my opinion!

[MikeInFL]

Intent and misrepresentation are the difference, in my estimation.

[gmarguli]

Intent and misrepresentation are the difference, in my estimation.

 

Utterly ridiculous.

 

You're labeling a chemical reaction based on emotional feelings.

[WinstonWare]

They should switch to Beanie Babies instead of coins.

 

LMAO

[MikeInFL]

Intent and misrepresentation are the difference, in my estimation.

 

Utterly ridiculous.

 

You're labeling a chemical reaction based on emotional feelings.

 

Calling "intent" and "misrepresentation" emotions is ridiculous, not to mention incorrect. You might disagree, probably because it invalidates the argument you like to hide behind to justify your nefarious activities (i.e. there is no difference), but you have to do better than that....

 

Getting past that and assuming they are both "emotional feelings", how does that make the difference between the terms "cleaning", "conserving" and "doctoring" "ridiculous"?

 

Said simply, the difference between "cleaning" and "conserving" and "doctoring", at least the way I see it, is the intent of the person doing the action, and their subsequent actions. Do they intend on changing the color? Do they intend on removing PVC or other damaging substances on the coin? Do they intend on misrepresenting the results of their actions as something other than what naturally occurs? Do they intend on profiting off this misrepresentation?

 

Lastly, if "intent" (or an emotional feeling, as you mistakenly call it) has no bearing on labeling an action, then please explain the difference betwen murder and manslaughter, or the difference between lying and being wrong.

 

Thank you...Mike

[gmarguli]

Intent and misrepresentation are the difference, in my estimation.

 

Utterly ridiculous.

 

You're labeling a chemical reaction based on emotional feelings.

 

Calling "intent" and "misrepresentation" emotions is ridiculous, not to mention incorrect. You might disagree, probably because it invalidates the argument you like to hide behind to justify your nefarious activities (i.e. there is no difference), but you have to do better than that....

 

Getting past that and assuming they are both "emotional feelings", how does that make the difference between the terms "cleaning", "conserving" and "doctoring" "ridiculous"?

 

Said simply, the difference between "cleaning" and "conserving" and "doctoring", at least the way I see it, is the intent of the person doing the action, and their subsequent actions. Do they intend on changing the color? Do they intend on removing PVC or other damaging substances on the coin? Do they intend on misrepresenting the results of their actions as something other than what naturally occurs? Do they intend on profiting off this misrepresentation?

 

Lastly, if "intent" (or an emotional feeling, as you mistakenly call it) has no bearing on labeling an action, then please explain the difference betwen murder and manslaughter, or the difference between lying and being wrong.

 

Thank you...Mike

 

If you can tell intent based on just the results, please PM me the lottery numbers.

[MikeInFL]

Who said anything about "tell[ing] intent based on just the results"? If anything, I'm suggesting the converse -- judging results by intent.

 

Since you chose not to answer the question which would show you the flaw in your logic, please excuse me for repeating it:

 

If "intent" (or an emotional feeling, as you mistakenly call it) has no bearing on labeling an action, then please explain the difference betwen murder and manslaughter, or the difference between lying and being wrong?

 

Thank you in advance for answering this question, and/or pointing out the flaw in my logic and how it may not apply to this situation.....Mike

[braddick]

"Sounds to me you did more conserving than cleaning..

 

What amaizes me though is that you took truths advice.. "

 

Say what you will about his politics, but TRUTH knows more about coins than just about anyone, bar none.

 

I was at that lunch when the coin was passed around and even with the full disclosure wish then and even more so now, I had stepped up and purchased it.

 

The prettiest copper I've seen coupled with the difficulty of the date/grade and eye appeal.

An amazing coin!

[MAULEMALL]

"Sounds to me you did more conserving than cleaning..

 

What amaizes me though is that you took truths advice.. "

 

Say what you will about his politics, but TRUTH knows more about coins than just about anyone, bar none.

 

I was at that lunch when the coin was passed around and even with the full disclosure wish then and even more so now, I had stepped up and purchased it.

 

The prettiest copper I've seen coupled with the difficulty of the date/grade and eye appeal.

An amazing coin!

What I was Thinking was that why would you give it to a dealer when you could have sent it to Any of the Major auction houses. If the coin is as nice as everyone who handled it says it was I would think it would have done much better with the Publicity that a Major auction would have given it. To be honest the way it is being spoken of I would have figured it to have been on the cover of a catalog for Stacks or Heritage.

 

What was the gain in giving it to a dealer?

 

I am sure Mark did his best to get the best price but doesn't it figure that a bigger audience comes from an auction at a major show?

 

 

If I am incorrect in my thinking please feel free to explain where..

 

[braddick]

"What I was Thinking was that why would you give it to a dealer when you could have sent it to Any of the Major auction houses. If the coin is as nice as everyone who handled it says it was I would think it would have done much better with the Publicity that a Major auction would have given it."

 

The theory of fast moving dimes vs slow moving dollars is my guess.

[gmarguli]

Who said anything about "tell[ing] intent based on just the results"? If anything, I'm suggesting the converse -- judging results by intent.

 

Since you chose not to answer the question which would show you the flaw in your logic, please excuse me for repeating it:

 

If "intent" (or an emotional feeling, as you mistakenly call it) has no bearing on labeling an action, then please explain the difference betwen murder and manslaughter, or the difference between lying and being wrong?

 

Thank you in advance for answering this question, and/or pointing out the flaw in my logic and how it may not apply to this situation.....Mike

 

You want to look at a coin and say X played with it to get it the way that it is. Therefore, it's doctored. Yet if you don't know X played with it or don't know if it got that way 'naturally' thru years of storage, but the coin looks the same, then why even bother with intent? Just look at the now. The coin is what it is and intent is meaningless.

 

I flame a coin over an open fire to hide hairlines. Is it doctored? I accidentally drop a coin in an open fire and it hides the hairlines. Is it doctored? Same coin, same results, but different intent. How does that affect anything? Regardless of my intent, the result is the same. Therefore, it only makes sense to look at the now and not try to guess the intent of some prior owner that may have been a long time ago.

 

And to answer your question, I'm not saying there is not a difference in things in life based on intent, but rather with coins all you can see is the "now" and can't judge intent because you don't know the history or true intent.

[gmarguli]

"What I was Thinking was that why would you give it to a dealer when you could have sent it to Any of the Major auction houses. If the coin is as nice as everyone who handled it says it was I would think it would have done much better with the Publicity that a Major auction would have given it."

 

The theory of fast moving dimes vs slow moving dollars is my guess.

 

It wasn't for the fast payment. I was leaning toward sticking it in a Heritage auction in the Santa Clara show that was coming up. However, Truth stated that he thought this unique of a coin could result in collusion among bidders and I might not get the best result. After talking to Mark, he felt the same way. Therefore, I gave the coin to Mark to sell.

[IGWT]

Mike, if you want to make intent the touchstone of artificial toning, then you'd have to say that coins placed in an album for the purpose of toning are AT, but those placed in an album with intent only to store them are AT.

 

Do you really want to base a distinction on intent when there would be no difference in either the manner of toning or the toning itself?

 

 

[MikeInFL]

Thanks Greg for both answering the question and explaining your logic. I appreciate it.

 

The coin isn't always what it is. For instance, a naturally toned coin is generally much more stable than its artificially toned bretheren. That's part of why intent is important...

 

Another part of the reason for looking to intent is because of the very points you bring up -- telling the difference through simple observation is challenging at best.

 

However, I'm not ready to give up trying to make the distinction.... and the most important reason is that I want "the real thing".

 

Just like I wouldn't want a counterfeit coin sold as real, or a reproduction of a rare piece of art sold as original, or even a surgeon without any credentials operating on my child, neither do I want a coin aritifically/intentionally improved or doctored portrayed as natural. Just like I wouldn't want to harm the value other's collections through my own actions, neither would I doctor coins with the intent of making money.

 

Deception should have no place in profit, the ends don't justify the means, and being taken advantage of shouldn't be the largest concern of all collectors. Intending to deceive does matter. It is truly unfortunate for us all that you don't agree....Mike

[MikeInFL]

Mike, if you want to make intent the touchstone of artificial toning, then you'd have to say that coins placed in an album for the purpose of toning are AT, but those placed in an album with intent only to store them are AT.

 

Do you really want to base a distinction on intent when there would be no difference in either the manner of toning or the toning itself?

 

 

I did not intend to infer that intent was the only reason. However, I think it should be part of the definition, or at the very least can be used to identify the majority of doctored coins, and makes the distinction between "cleaning" and "conserving" and "doctoring" pretty straight-forward -- at least to me...Mike

 

p.s. I saw your distinction ATS, IIRC, and I thought it made sense. Would you please add it here? Thanks.

[gmarguli]

Just like I wouldn't want a counterfeit coin sold as real, or a reproduction of a rare piece of art sold as original, or even a surgeon without any credentials operating on my child, neither do I want a coin aritifically/intentionally improved or doctored portrayed as natural.

 

The flaw that I see here is how do you define "natural"?

 

I've given these examples in the past:

 

I have my coin collection in a Dansco album. I don't want my little brother to steal them so I put them in the hot attic. The coins tone monster colors. I had no intention to AT the coins and did not know this would occur. I send the coins to a TPG and they all slab! Are the coins AT or NT?

 

TruthTeller tells me to stick my coins in a Dansco album store them in a hot attic and they'll tone monster colors. I do this and the coins do tone monster colors. I had full intent to AT the coins and did know this would occur. I send the coins to a TPG and they all slab! Are the coins AT or NT?

 

Same coins. Same conditions. Same results. Different intent. Are some AT and some NT?

[MikeInFL]

In my eyes, yes, some are AT and some NT.

 

Cleaning implies improving the coin with the intent of improving the coin (and genernally without regard to its future value).

Conserving implies improving the coin with the intent of preserving a coin or removing damaging contaminates.

Doctoring implies improving a coin with the intent to deceive and misrepresent for profit.

 

Artifically toned coins are done with the intent of them being improved/toned.

Naturally toned coins are done without intent of improving the coin.

 

Clearly there is grey area in the above definitions, and clearly there is a concern on how to objectively determine the difference given a coin is presented without its history, but that's just how I see it....Mike

[djdilliodon]

In my eyes, yes, some are AT and some NT.

 

Cleaning implies improving the coin with the intent of improving the coin (and genernally without regard to its future value).

Conserving implies improving the coin with the intent of preserving a coin or removing damaging contaminates.

Doctoring implies improving a coin with the intent to deceive and misrepresent for profit.

 

Artifically toned coins are done with the intent of them being improved/toned.

Naturally toned coins are done without intent of improving the coin.

 

Clearly there is grey area in the above definitions, and clearly there is a concern on how to objectively determine the difference given a coin is presented without its history, but that's just how I see it....Mike

 

In the end what it comes down to is both coins toned the same way and since that is the case, you cant point a finger as to which is AT or NT. No one is gonna say they did it just for the simple fact they wanted the coin to change colors. If you ask me once you get to a certain point with toned coins there is just no telling what is AT and what is NT. Personally i think it is a waste of money to spend a premium just cause of the colors on a coin. After all your just paying for tarnish. In the future the doctors will get so good that it will literally make toned coins worthless. Heck some are good now!

[just-john]

I always thought AT coins used some type of cleaner or chemical to make them turn color's

NT coins can change from age and storage conditions but nothing put on the coin to make it change rapidly as in a reaction to something.

Stored in the a album in the attic takes some time and you never can control the outcome/colors

Maybe there should be something called unintentional natural toning for coins that change over yrs and yrs= UNT

and then one called INT for intentional toning /put in the attic or car trunk

[IGWT]

p.s. I saw your distinction ATS, IIRC, and I thought it made sense. Would you please add it here? Thanks.

 

I've posted it a couple times before when the subject comes up, but few folks (if any) seem to agree:

 

Natural toning forms on the surfaces of a coin as the result of gaseous compounds that are present in the ambient atmosphere where coins are placed (1) for purposes consistent with their intended use in commerce, or (2) for storage in a manner traditionally accepted by numismatists. Artificial toning forms on the surfaces of a coin by any process other than that which causes natural toning.

 

[cpm9ball]

p.s. I saw your distinction ATS, IIRC, and I thought it made sense. Would you please add it here? Thanks.

 

I've posted it a couple times before when the subject comes up, but few folks (if any) seem to agree:

 

Natural toning forms on the surfaces of a coin as the result of gaseous compounds that are present in the ambient atmosphere where coins are placed (1) for purposes consistent with their intended use in commerce, or (2) for storage in a manner traditionally accepted by numismatists. Artificial toning forms on the surfaces of a coin by any process other than that which causes natural toning.

 

Lou, I've always intended to ask this, but I never got around to it. Many years ago, Kraft envelopes were commonly used as one of the traditional methods of storage. But, when James posted photos of nine Morgans and one Peace dollar which he acquired a year ot two ago, the general consensus was that they were AT. All of them had been stored in Kraft envelopes. Given that this was one of the traditional methods, do you think these should have been considered AT or NT?

 

Chris

[IGWT]

Lou, I've always intended to ask this, but I never got around to it. Many years ago, Kraft envelopes were commonly used as one of the traditional methods of storage. But, when James posted photos of nine Morgans and one Peace dollar which he acquired a year ot two ago, the general consensus was that they were AT. All of them had been stored in Kraft envelopes. Given that this was one of the traditional methods, do you think these should have been considered AT or NT?

 

NT in my book. That doesn't mean that I'd like the coins (and I can't remember what James's coins looked like, so I don't mean to imply anything with respect to those coins).

[MarkFeld]

"What I was Thinking was that why would you give it to a dealer when you could have sent it to Any of the Major auction houses. If the coin is as nice as everyone who handled it says it was I would think it would have done much better with the Publicity that a Major auction would have given it."

 

The theory of fast moving dimes vs slow moving dollars is my guess.

 

It wasn't for the fast payment. I was leaning toward sticking it in a Heritage auction in the Santa Clara show that was coming up. However, Truth stated that he thought this unique of a coin could result in collusion among bidders and I might not get the best result. After talking to Mark, he felt the same way. Therefore, I gave the coin to Mark to sell.

I don't remember that convsrsation but I do think Greg's memory is probably better than mine.

 

Lou, I've always intended to ask this, but I never got around to it. Many years ago, Kraft envelopes were commonly used as one of the traditional methods of storage. But, when James posted photos of nine Morgans and one Peace dollar which he acquired a year ot two ago, the general consensus was that they were AT. All of them had been stored in Kraft envelopes. Given that this was one of the traditional methods, do you think these should have been considered AT or NT?

 

NT in my book. That doesn't mean that I'd like the coins (and I can't remember what James's coins looked like, so I don't mean to imply anything with respect to those coins).

I have no doubt that many coins, if their history were known, would be considered NT, but they look AT. Likewise, many others, if their history were known, would be considered AT, but they look NT.

 

Even if we can agree upon definitions for NT and AT, unless we have been in possession of a coin from the time it was issued, we can only guess about its status as one or the other. Granted, some guesses are far more informed than others.