I heard the coin doctor posse is...............

[MAULEMALL]

I guess Im more of a realist and quite possibly, very jaded. I only put trust in those who have proven they are trustworthy (I have a short list). Buying a coin is not much different than buying a used car. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. I am mature enough to accept this without placing all the blame on the seller, his mechanic, the dealership that sold it or the company that produced it.

[RobertB]

I do my investing with mutual funds, not PR70Dcams with rainbow toning.

 

[LAWMAN-migration]

Incredibly thoughtful posts, especially from Newmismatist-- great hypothetical questions to which I don't have answers. Didn't mean vigilant justice; not a big fan of where that gets you. I'll bet we can agree on what "doctoring" means within certain limits. Would anybody argue that adding or removing a mintmark or altering a date or re-engraving anything on a coin is a form of "doctoring?" I know artificial toning is endlessly debated here and on the PCGS forum, so I will stay away from that. Bet we'd all agree on an outright phoney coin being sold as authentic by somebody who should know better. How about the really really well whizzed coins that go from AU to BU-- I mean the ones that are done so expertly that even the experts can't agree -- not really "whizzed" these days, just chemically bathed in somebody's home formula (I'm not talking about dipping or conservation, I'm talking about making an AU fool an expert into believing it was a BU.).

 

The unfair competition law in California covers false advertising and bait and switch, among a whole host of other things. RICO stretches further than gmarguli thinks it does-- it wasn't intended for lots of the things it is used for, but, that's how the law develops and evolves. Don't hold your breath waiting for the FTC or local law enforcement; coin doctoring is not on their list that I know of.

 

C'mon, some more opinions here -- what IS coin doctoring? I agree, no lynchings until we agree on what it is. But, I stand by my offer as amended-- you raise the money and use an agreed upon definition of doctoring, I'll prosecute the lawsuit. I'm not an industry insider, but, I do care about where numismatics is going. If the public has not faith in it, that's not a good thing!

[truthteller]

I've been around a bit. The old coin doctoring is nothing compared to the 'new' coin doctoring. Old doctoring was a haphazzard method or methods or altering a coin to deceive a potential buyer. Today, new coin doctoring has been developed to deceive the grading services. In pre 1986 coin hobby, the methods of doctoring were home developed, and if you were a knowlegeable collector, you could detect such doctoring. In addition, those who were altering the date or mintmark were really in hot water when caught and, many times, shunned in the coin industry. Today, coin doctoring is so sophisticated. The collector relies on the holder and fails to educate himself/herself on the diagnostics, thus depending on grading services for authentication. A mistake? Probably, since there is no guarantee that the services will be around, nor that the services will honor the description on the label. In addition, coin doctoring is being enabled by so many dealers who buy the coin with knowlege or suspicion that the coin is altered only to sell it to an end user with the proclaimed innocence that they didn't grade the coin.

 

Bottom line: A doctored coin is any coin that has been intentially doctored to deceive a buyer or a grader, ie. reengraving, altering surfaces, whizzing, applying foreign matter(fake mintmarks). Artificial toning is not technically coin doctoring, unless the application eats into the surface of the coin, and is a subjective opinion.

 

 

TRUTH

[Beijim]

You know what's depressing about all this? What's depressing is what it says about humanity. In short, no matter how low you set the limbo bar, some piece of humanity will slither under at the expense of everyone else.

 

It's disgusting, it isn't confined to numismatics (far from it), and it doesn't bode well in the big picture.

 

Beijim

 

[Newmismatist]

Incredibly thoughtful posts, especially from Newmismatist-- great hypothetical questions to which I don't have answers. Didn't mean vigilant justice; not a big fan of where that gets you. I'll bet we can agree on what "doctoring" means within certain limits.

 

I think we could: I've been collecting since 1950, Coin doctoring is at least that old (no, I didn't start it I was way too young). BUT some SOB dealer sold me a whizzed Lincoln penny when I was about 7 years old, - I still have it somewhere, though I haven't seen it in about 20 years, kept it to remind me that there some SOB's who'll cheat small children. Found out it was whizzed much later when I was showing off my LHC collection at our local coin club. By that time I couldn't find the receipt for the purchase of the coin, so even though I saw that dealer at other coin shows, there was nothing I could do to return the coin & get my money back when he denied he sold me that coin. But he was the looser, I never bought another coin from him and I told EVERYBODY that he sold whizzed coins - he quit coming to our local coin shows - no loss.

 

C'mon, some more opinions here -- what IS coin doctoring? I agree, no lynchings until we agree on what it is. But, I stand by my offer as amended-- you raise the money and use an agreed upon definition of doctoring, I'll prosecute the lawsuit. I'm not an industry insider, but, I do care about where numismatics is going. If the public has not faith in it, that's not a good thing!

 

Lawman, this may be more tricky than you think - see my comments below:

 

How is the analogy different for a coin doctoring who is disguising flaws and selling it as a higher grade than it actually is?

 

NWCS - Just to put a little wrinkle in all of this, take a look at other collectibles: Antique furniture, rare Renaissance Art, antiquities (ancient objects) virtually all of these collectibles have been restored, repaired and conserved. The Sistine Chapel was restored amist great controversy, so was Rembrandt's "Night Watch", which after they removed the centuries of dirt and grime was no longer the Night Watch but Captain Banning and his Troup. Those works of art are probably worth MORE than ALL US coins that we all have in all of our collections, yet both were restored, altered and IMPROVED by the restorers. Same is happening with Michelangelo's David as I write this, also amist great controversy. All ancient coins are cleaned, both mechanically and chemically and then many are re-toned to give them a "patina", so much so that it's not even a subject of discussion, tooling, (adding "detail to") a coin is a no-no, so is creating an artificial surface on a copper coin (somethin like enameling the coin to fake that jadegreen patina), but cleaning and simply retoning them so they don't look shiney or dipped, that's quite accepted. Removing mounts from gold coins is also accepted and is not regularly "advertised" but is one of the reasons why ancient dealers are adamently opposed to slabbing coins, they MUST be able to see the edge, to check for prior mounting and to see whether the coin is a cast copy.

 

Furniture is routinely repaired and restored, some quite well and some quite crudely, but again an accepted practice - the gist is it improves the object. Antiquites? Virtually all are repaired and restored, an accepted practice. Are flaws disguised? You betcha! So what is an accepted practice in other collectibles, is condemned in the modern (post 18th century) coin collecting fraternity.

 

Now to our issue: Dipping? Doctoring or OK? Putting that dipped silver coin in an old album that has paper and cardboard with a high sulpher content and leaving it for 10 years. AT or NT? 5 years? 1 summer in your 150 degree attic? 2 hours in your oven a XXX degrees? Blowing CUBAN cigar smoke on them? Well we know that's illegal, but for the cigar smokers maybe the most fun.

 

What about this: Removing that spot growing on your UNC 1877 IHC, and then carefully retoning just the spot to match the rest of the coin: Restoration, conservation or Alteration? Crime or no crime? (Wish I knew HOW to do THAT).

 

I would tend to agree with Truthteller's definition as amended with a couple of slight changes (in italics):

Bottom line: A doctored coin is any coin that has been intentionally ALTERED to deceive a buyer or a grader, ie. reengraving, altering surfaces, such as whizzing, applying foreign matter putty, filler or the like, fake mintmarks, or adding or changing dates or mintmarks.

 

I would also tend to agree with Truthteller

 

Artificial toning is not technically coin doctoring, unless the application eats into the surface of the coin, and is a subjective opinion.

 

I think AT v NT might be a little bit over-hyped. I've seen coins that I'm told are absolutely AT (many in holders) that really look wonderfully toned, I've also seen coins BB'd as AT that are IN FACT NT, the best example is a collection that came out of Pennsylvania about 10 years ago that when 1st submitted were BB'd as AT & then later gaded as NT - the graders had never seen the beautiful colors on those coins, so they HAD to be AT - They weren't, they had just been left alone for about 40 years in an environment (probably lots of sulpher air pollutants) & like that sterling silver that you wife makes you "polish" every 5 years or so, the colors were very unusual.

 

My view on the AT/NT debate: If the coin has an eye-appealing look, and the colors appear to be natural and pleasing & you like the coin, then buy it, IF the price is fair. If you're paying 98% of the value for the toning, then you better be careful, no different than the FH SLQs that I've commented on. If it looks like a painted POS, don't buy it - everyone else will think the same also.

 

TO me Coin Doctoring is coin altering, & if you find that miserable SOB who sold me that whizzed coin when I was 7, to paraphrase Geoge C. Scott in Patton "I'll personally shoot that paper-hanging SOB" (Well AFTER we Try him & convict him of course - gotta have the semblence of "justice" in our "vigilantes". We'll be very democratic - just like in a hanging - 99% want to proceed with the hangin, its just the guy who's being hung who objects, and his vote don't count

 

Just a few of random thoughts on the future "Laws" (and the enforcement thereof) on coin doctors and coin doctoring!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[TonerGuy]

Newmismatist -- for the most part I enjoy you rather brief posts, however, I do think you are missing the real doctoring that the industry is worried about and it isn't any that you have listed.

 

The real doctors are moving metal, smoothing services and taking out ticks and blemishes with high powered lasers.

 

Pancake bands are made full again, the surface of proof gold is nicely smoothed and that FH SLQ dicussed in another thread will really have an ear. This is the type of doctoring that is occuring. Those methods you have listed are not the problems facing this industry.

 

And this doctoring is being not only condoned but encouraged by some of the biggest names and dealers in this business.

 

I don't consider working a coin that isn't full bands until it is a full band coin the same as being restored. This is plan and simple altering for increase profits -- in other words FRAUD.

 

Consider this type of doctoring and then rethink your prior post and whether your previous thoughts are still applicable.

 

Michael

 

 

 

 

[Newmismatist]

Newmismatist -- for the most part I enjoy you rather brief posts, however, I do think you are missing the real doctoring that the industry is worried about and it isn't any that you have listed.

 

Well, if that's the case why weren't the real issues raised in the post?

 

The real doctors are moving metal, smoothing services and taking out ticks and blemishes with high powered lasers.

 

Pancake bands are made full again, the surface of proof gold is nicely smoothed and that FH SLQ dicussed in another thread will really have an ear. This is the type of doctoring that is occuring. Those methods you have listed are not the problems facing this industry.

 

I'm unaware of the above, I've heard rumors of lasering coins, to my knowledge haven't seen any & I'm not buying (I don't think) any coins with any of the above. I do not and would not condone what you are describing above - At the next major show that I go to (MSNS in Nov. & FUN in Jan) I'll look for those, but as of yet, not having seen this type of doctoring, I'm not sure I'll know what to look for on the coins, but I'd guess that I'd find it on coins where the up-grade value jumps significantly if the coin goes up 1 grade

 

And this doctoring is being not only condoned but encouraged by some of the biggest names and dealers in this business.

 

PM me who, that'll cut down my search time significantly

 

I don't consider working a coin that isn't full bands until it is a full band coin the same as being restored. This is plan and simple altering for increase profits -- in other words FRAUD.

 

I concur 100%, I don't think you could possibly suggest that my post would consider that restoration, I think it comes under altering, which I think I would define as actionable Fraud. I know its been done with EXacto knives, now lasers?

 

Consider this type of doctoring and then rethink your prior post and whether your previous thoughts are still applicable.

 

What's to re-think Michael? First of all, I can't even comment on "this type of doctoring" as I haven't seen it (not knowingly at least), and I certainly can't equate what I've written with something that I don't know about. Any photos (not that digital photos on the internet would help much) of coins being sold that are "done" that I can go look at? Maybe it's so good that all of my PCGS & NGC coins have been "operated on" and I don't know that they've had breast augmentations. I don't believe that my post suggests that I would condone any of the items which you have listed. Perhaps you're reading things into what I've said and equating the practices that you know are ongoing by our intrepid doctors with my examples as if I'm condoning them. I'm certainly not. Until your post I was unaware that what you've listed is what this post is about. Did I miss a prior post that I should have Psychically devined?

 

BTW is that what this post is about? if so, a little clarity would help us less knowledgeable members.

 

Is this short enough for you?

 

 

[TonerGuy]

Newmismatist -- I was not trying to be insulting with my comment about "brief" replies I just forgot the as I often do. I enjoy your posts and believe you have a wealth of knowledge. However I think you need to rethink the tone of some of your earlier post in regards to this problem.

 

I can't even comment on "this type of doctoring" as I haven't seen it (not knowingly at least), and I certainly can't equate what I've written with something that I don't know about.

 

You probably wouldn't even know it if you did see it, it is that good and that's why it's getting into slabs. I'm sure you aren't saying that just because you haven't seen it, it doesn't exist, so assuming for the moment it does exist, what are you thoughts?

 

Would you use all available resources to stop these types of practices? What resources -- science, litigation, federal agencies, state agencies ect?

 

It has just seemed to me that tone of your prior post was that of indifference and that based upon the inability to accurately defining what "doctoring" is, you would have a difficult time prosecuting anyone for this type of behavior. And therefore we, collectively, should take little or no action.

 

Before we start lynching "coin doctors", lets define the "crime".

 

So I am merely presenting you with the real doctoring practices that the "Coin Posse" is most concerned about, from what I understand. This type of doctoring can make a SLQ a FH SLQ and worth an extreme amount of money for a simple designation, and can take a $5000 and make it a $250,000 coin.

 

Now that I've tried to define it differently for you, what would be you thoughts as to removing these practices and stopping this type of activity in our hobby and industry? You were rather flippant in your first post to this thread----

 

Should we hang ‘em first and then have the trial or is it the other way around?

 

Now that you know the crime, those guilty are the dealers, the doctors and the grading services, at least in my mind. I am sure you wouldn't argue that a dealer who conspires with a doctor to alter a coin with the intent to defruad would be "guilty" in this matter, however I would rather refer to it as liable since this is a civil context, not a criminal one. But I also believe that you could implicate the TPGs if you can show that they were or should have been aware that a dealer that submits to them works closely with doctors to alter or improve his coins that he submits. Further I also believe that you might be able to place some blame with the TPGs for not being utilizing current equipment and principles -- "standards of care" to prevent lasered coins from getting into slabs. They are the "deep pockets" here and much easier to go after. If you could be successful in that regard, that would force the TPGs to try to bring this type of activity to an end and police the industry better.

 

Now what would be your punishment or at least your thoughts as to putting an end to this?

 

Michael

 

 

 

[jom]

This was a good thread. I just want to comment quickly on what Fratt has said here:

 

This type of doctoring can make a SLQ a FH SLQ and worth an extreme amount of money for a simple designation, and can take a $5000 and make it a $250,000 coin.

 

But who really is at fault here? The Laser-doctors or the people who rely on the grading services before they pay a 1000X premium just because the holder says "FH" or "67"? If people wouldn't by the hype of these types of coins (this applies to other series and grades, of course) then maybe the market for this kind of thing would drop. At that point the idea of using an expensive laser may not be all that good of an idea worth bothering with.

 

NWCS asked DRY ealier about his view. He said by DRY taking that position DRY himself admit to being partly responsible for his purchase. Of course he is responsible! It was DRY's money. Who else should be? The grading service? C'mon. At some point you are going to have to learn to grade and evaluate coins yourself. If you can't do that then you should not be buying coins worth any substantial money.

 

The bottom line here is that you buy the coins you like at the price you like. If it's toned and later turns out to be AT then at least you LIKED the coin? And if you were happy with the price it shouldn't really matter.

 

jom

[TonerGuy]

But who really is at fault here? The Laser-doctors or the people who rely on the grading services before they pay a 1000X premium just because the holder says "FH" or "67"? If people wouldn't by the hype of these types of coins (this applies to other series and grades, of course) then maybe the market for this kind of thing would drop. At that point the idea of using an expensive laser may not be all that good of an idea worth bothering with.

 

I couldn't agree more, but we all know that the market for these types of designations isn't about to dry up. And remember, who created this market? For the most part PCGS with the Registry Sets and the competition it inspires. So in essence, TPGs do benefit from designations such as FH, FBL & FB. Its what allows them to regrade coin after coin.

 

So until then shouldn't the TPGs police the market that they created, basically for their own good -- a/k/a increased profits through resubmissions?

 

Michael

[nwcs]

Well, some of the designations predate the slabbers -- as well as some of the premiums for those designations. The slabbers and the registry just turned out to be a good marketing strategy that increased the demand pressure on the market and drove the prices up.