I was just thinking....

[Bruceswar]

People say there is a premium for those "Blast White" coins... I never really see any coins that are blast white getting extra on them.... Mabye I am just not looking hard enough.. unless that the Blast White premium is over... Just a thought

[EVillageProwler]

The premium, in principle, is for the extra umphh that outstanding eye appeal offers. If the blast white nature of the coin contributes significantly to the eye appeal, then I can see cause for the premium.

 

But, if the "blast white" aspect is caused by excessive dipping on a coin in a series whose collectors primarily value original patina, then there should be a subtraction of value.

 

EVP

 

[jom]

If the blast white nature of the coin contributes significantly to the eye appeal, then I can see cause for the premium.

 

It's not even the "whiteness" that causes this premium. It is the LUSTER which is outstanding. I've noticed this is a common misconception among collectors. It's not the color (white or toned) that really makes a coin worth a premium it is the underlying LUSTER which makes the coin worth any premium....

 

jom

[gmarguli]

Maybe not a $ premium, but blast white coins are easier to sell. Try selling a PQ Morgan with LIGHT tone dusting. Try selling a low end blast white one. The low end coin will sell faster. It's the same for many series.

[Wihlborg]

Bruceswar,

 

Generally, I have found that there is no premium for blast white coins at this time. The one exception that I can think of is if the coin happens to be an issue that is usually found with ‘dirty’ unappealing toning, and even than the premium is not very much.

 

There seems to be a prejudice against blast white coins, and a lot of collectors today view blast white coins as not as desirable as a toned coin, any toned coin. What do I mean by this, I will explain. IMO when newer collectors first start off, I would bet that most like and want blast white coins, but as they progress and start going to shows, checking out eBay, or even logging onto these boards what do they find? They see beautifully toned coins. They read that toned coins are the ‘in’ thing, and that any blast white coin must have been ‘dipped’ five minutes before going into a slab. So they decide that they want those beautifully toned coins also, begin to believe that blast white coins are somehow less worthy of their interest.

 

Now there are coins that are naturally toned in wonderful colors with ample luster shining through the tone. These are the true ‘monster’ toned coins, but there are very few TRUE monster coins and as a result they command hefty premiums over any other coin. Then one big step down are the other naturally toned coins. The ones that are pretty, have some nice color, but are not in the monster category. And finally there are the naturally toned coins that have ugly, blotchy, dirty looking tone.

 

Now here is the rub. Most collectors cannot afford the true monsters, especially when they can buy another of the same type of coin in the same grade for far less, but they now want a toned coin, so the pressure is put on the naturally toned coins in the second category, the ‘pretty’ ones. This drives the premium up on these coins as well, but never the less they soon become hard to find.

 

Meanwhile none of this has escaped the attention of some unscrupulous dealers who begin to call any coin with a speck of dirty tone on it a ‘monster’. It has also not escaped the attention of the coin ‘doctors’ who are as we speak turning out toned coins faster than a baker making a batch of cookies!

 

So, be truthful with yourself and ask yourself this question, what type of toned coin do you really see for sale 90% of the time. Is it a true ‘monster’ or something that is much less? How many toned coins are in collections that are not even naturally toned?

 

Now, I like beautiful naturally toned coins as much as anyone, and I have a few myself, but I am now going to say something that some may think radical. I like nice blast white coins and find nothing wrong with them. Let me qualify what it is I mean when ‘I’ use the term ‘blast white’. I am talking about a coin with no tone or haze and ample unblemished luster. I am NOT talking about an average dull dipped out white coin, there is a big difference between the two.

 

Personally, I would rather have a blast white coin as I describe above over one with ANY tone UNLESS it is a true naturally toned monster or one of the truly pretty naturally toned coins. I do not want an ugly, dirty, blotchy, or hazy toned coin just to have a toned coin. Also as for the perception that ALL blast white coins have recently been dipped, I cannot agree. While it is probably true that most older white coins have been dipped at some point since they left the mint, I own several blast white coins that either are or were in early NGC and PCGS holders when I bought them. This means that if they were dipped at some time in the past it was 15 years or more ago. If these blast white coins still have outstanding luster and eye appeal why should they be considered less desirable than a coin with much less eye appeal due to ugly, dirty, blotchy, or hazy tone? Is it because the toned coin is perceived as more original? If that is so can anyone really know for sure that that toned coin had not been dipped at some point over the last 50 years and had not retoned badly?

 

My point is this, toned or blast white it should be about the eye appeal of the coin. There are both toned and blast white coins with outstanding eye appeal. There are also both toned and blast white coins with no eye appeal. We should be buying the coins with the best eye appeal regardless of whether they are toned or not.

 

John

 

 

[Wihlborg]

It's not even the "whiteness" that causes this premium. It is the LUSTER which is outstanding. I've noticed this is a common misconception among collectors. It's not the color (white or toned) that really makes a coin worth a premium it is the underlying LUSTER which makes the coin worth any premium....

 

Jom,

 

I couldn’t agree more. That is my point, it is not about being just a white coin, it is about that blinding blast LUSTER. Far too many collectors misuse the term ‘blast white’ IMO.

 

John

 

 

 

[Hoot]

This beauty (attached) is "blast white." The scan does not depict the lustre well, but it's dripping!

 

Hoot

[Hoot]

Reverse (attached).

 

Hoot

[jom]

You are right Hoot. That coins looks washed out.

 

Get a camera and an OTT light, dude.

 

jom

[Hoot]

I have both - pain in the butt to use compared to my scanner. Besides, I'm not going to go back and photograph all of my coins for the likes of you! Don't tell me after all these years you can't see the good qualities of a coin through the limits of a scan.

 

Hoot

[Wihlborg]

I have both - pain in the butt to use compared to my scanner

 

Ditto!

 

Very nice looking Stone Mt. Hoot, I would love to someday be able to show you mine in person, but until than this scan will have to do.

 

Like yours, it has luster that is outstanding.

 

John

[Hoot]

GREAT looking coin John! Better scan than my own.

 

Hoot

[jom]

Don't tell me after all these years you can't see the good qualities of a coin through the limits of a scan.

 

Bah!!

 

jom

[braddick]

I know that some Franklins with blast white lusterous GEM surfaces fetch a premium over thier Mint Toned counterparts.

[TomB]

You have received some excellent responses. Blast white coins that have a strong premium attached to them are indeed rare, as the premium suggests, and similar to monster toned coins who have significant premiums. Both are the exception rather than the rule. It is likely that you have not seen too many of the coins in this niche.

[EZ_E]

If the blast white nature of the coin contributes significantly to the eye appeal, then I can see cause for the premium.

 

It's not even the "whiteness" that causes this premium. It is the LUSTER which is outstanding. I've noticed this is a common misconception among collectors. It's not the color (white or toned) that really makes a coin worth a premium it is the underlying LUSTER which makes the coin worth any premium....

 

jom

 

Now, I like beautiful naturally toned coins as much as anyone, and I have a few myself, but I am now going to say something that some may think radical. I like nice blast white coins and find nothing wrong with them. Let me qualify what it is I mean when ‘I’ use the term ‘blast white’. I am talking about a coin with no tone or haze and ample unblemished luster. I am NOT talking about an average dull dipped out white coin, there is a big difference between the two.

 

Personally, I would rather have a blast white coin as I describe above over one with ANY tone UNLESS it is a true naturally toned monster or one of the truly pretty naturally toned coins. I do not want an ugly, dirty, blotchy, or hazy toned coin just to have a toned coin.

 

Excellent thread, excellent posts!

[Bruceswar]

It would be interesting to see how white coins vs toned coins have progressed

[Oldtrader3]

I think that toned versus blast white is in the eye of the beholder. It appears to me that the toned coins get the bigger money. For illustration puposes is a toned 1905-0, MS65, NGC Morgan. To each his own.

 

[James_OldeTowne]

There are some examples where blast-white is worth more. I understand that certain Franklins in high grade are more expensive if untoned because their typical storage medium resulted in most of their issue being heavily toned. But I don't know the specific dates offhand.

 

James

[cointagious]

The premium, in principle, is for the extra umphh that outstanding eye appeal offers. If the blast white nature of the coin contributes significantly to the eye appeal, then I can see cause for the premium.

 

But, if the "blast white" aspect is caused by excessive dipping on a coin in a series whose collectors primarily value original patina, then there should be a subtraction of value.

 

EVP

 

Yup

[Oldtrader3]

All of the mint sets that were packaged before 1966 in Cellophane have a high incidence of mint set toning which can be gray and pretty lifeless looking. Many of these issues would command a premium in brilliant uncirculated.

[Bruceswar]

but lets say a toned coin coin X. just regular.. was Worth $400.00 in late 2003 and a Blast White coin was worth $400.00 in late 2003 as well.... I wonder where they would both be now... both are not key dates.... It would be interesting to see how the market is going....