Artificial Toning Tag by NGC!!!

[bsandersen-migration]

What is going on at NGC? I just received the results from my recent submission and four coins I pulled directly from mint sets were tagged as "artificial toning'!!! This is becoming a waste of time and MONEY to submit coins to these folks that call themselves experts. Time to move on to another grader soon unless something changes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[WinstonWare]

[MBA101]

[Coindude]

I had the same sort of thing happen. Even sent the coins in OGP. One that was absolutely gorgeous was marked as PVC damage! What the heck, that coin had a wonderful rainbow. And again I state, the coins were in the original cellophane.

[WoodenJefferson]

Welcome BSanderson...an unsubstantiated rant is not always a believable one.

[Didz]

Be nice to see the coins...

[MarkFeld]

And again I state, the coins were in the original cellophane.

The graders likely don't see them that way and don't know the history of the coins. They must evaluate them based on what they see, not what the submitter knows.

[physics-fan3.14]

[bsshog40]

I have seen some toning go on in OGP. As a matter of fact, I have a 2007p Lincoln sitting in OGP that has some wierd toning goin on, on one side of the coin. If this were a coin worth submitting, I would submit in OGP to eleviate any questions a TPG might have. The OGP has caused some wierd enough toning to coins that if submitted raw, they may make a grader have questions as to it's originality. JMO

[michael]

you wanted an opinion on a coin the grader knows nothing about and only see's the coin for a few seconds out of a new clear plastic 2x2 under a strong lamp

 

so be it

 

keep em raw

 

they are still the same coins weather the pricing service puts them in their plastic with a gift grade, stars, full strike details designation, papal blessing or not

[coinman1794]

 

I slightly disagree. We dont need to see this particular example to know there is a systemic problem at NGC (and other services), in that they tend to BB a coin for the slightest annomily one day, and the next day grade it. The business of coin grading is fundamentally inconsistent. One problem is that graders dont spend enough time on each coin to get an accurate picture. Another is that not every grader is on the same page when it comes to company policy for what should be done with certain coins that have certain issues, or qualities. Scott Schechter told me that some graders dont even bother to use the STAR designation. It doesnt matter how many consensus opinions you get, if everyone has their own standard. The final problem I know of is that, as others have said, the graders dont know the history of the coins in front of them, they have only their gut feeling to go on. This is the receipe for the mess of misgraded slabs we have on todays market.

[RareSov]

How do we know contaminant didn't come from the mint packaging ?

[RareSov]

they are still the same coins weather the pricing service puts them in their plastic with a gift grade, stars, full strike details designation, papal blessing or not

 

good post

[Old Pueblo]

Just kickin back and enjoying the show

[jgrinz]

Just kickin back and enjoying the show

 

I don't see no show - If the OP did some research on who he was sending the coins to it would have told him NGC does not charge anything extra to remove coins from OGP even cellophane. IF the original posters purpose was to have the coins graded - why not send them as is, why remove them ??

Maybe to dip them? AT them? and still say yes they and they all came from the OGP...

I really do not give new posters credence just to vent - NGC was probably right hence thier vental attitude shown. JMHO

 

 

 

[WinstonWare]

 

I slightly disagree. We dont need to see this particular example to know there is a systemic problem at NGC (and other services), in that they tend to BB a coin for the slightest annomily one day, and the next day grade it. The business of coin grading is fundamentally inconsistent. One problem is that graders dont spend enough time on each coin to get an accurate picture. Another is that not every grader is on the same page when it comes to company policy for what should be done with certain coins that have certain issues, or qualities. Scott Schechter told me that some graders dont even bother to use the STAR designation. It doesnt matter how many consensus opinions you get, if everyone has their own standard. The final problem I know of is that, as others have said, the graders dont know the history of the coins in front of them, they have only their gut feeling to go on. This is the receipe for the mess of misgraded slabs we have on todays market.

Your points are well taken and it seems that many people agree that the coins are in fact NT. Still, I’d like to the coins. Did these come from the old cardboard mint sets? Did the OP place different coins in the cardboard holders to tone them? Did someone else replace coins in the cardboard holders and sell them to the OP as the original mint set coins? In my mind, mint set toned coins look like mint set toned coins. Without any pictures I’m only left to wonder why the graders must have had some suspicion about these coins. Your right that the thread isn’t worthless without pictures but I still think it would be a more enlightening thread with pictures.

[James_OldeTowne]

I slightly disagree. We dont need to see this particular example to know there is a systemic problem at NGC (and other services), in that they tend to BB a coin for the slightest annomily one day, and the next day grade it. The business of coin grading is fundamentally inconsistent.

What this tells me is that collectors, such as our good O.P.-er, perhaps should not be submitting such coins for certification. It seems to me that he would be better off purchasing an coin that is already certified, rather than risk money and heartache submitting such coins.

[Scott_Schechter]

Scott Schechter told me that some graders dont even bother to use the STAR designation. It doesnt matter how many consensus opinions you get, if everyone has their own standard.

 

I was asked about this quotation. I can't remember saying this, or what this could possibly refer to....

 

The star must be applied unanimously, so if any grader disagrees it isn't awarded. It's also not used for foreign coins, just US. Since I don't recall our conversation is incorrect, let me know.

 

 

[Scott_Schechter]

Some things to keep in mind about Artificial Toning. We know, of course, that it's very frustrating to have coins returned ungraded by NGC, and we only do this when it's absolutely necessary based on the surface condition of the coin being graded.

 

Most often what NGC refers to as Artificial Toning is the result of a deliberate chemical process, by which I mean the result exposure of coins to heat or a combination of the two. When our graders examine a coin, however, they do not have exact information about what may have been done to it. Rather, they must rely on telltale visual cues such as unusual colors or color patterns that do not often appear naturally. Most frequently these do indicate that a coin has been artificially toned, but of course they can also result from improper or unconventional storage.

 

For example, imagine that an individual stored a coin in his attic in a leather pouch where temperature fluctuation and material degradation imparted seldom seen colors on its surface. While not deliberately recolored, NGC would likely call this coin artificially toned. This is done for one of three reasons,

 

1) the colors appear similar to those added in a deliberate artificial toning process,

 

2) the toning is likely to be unstable and will continue to rapidly darken,

 

or 3) the toning will not be accepted as original patina in the marketplace.

 

While we have not choice to rely 100% on the examination by NGC graders, remember that this represents the sum of extensive experience examining coins and studying their preservation history.

[coinman1794]

Scott Schechter told me that some graders dont even bother to use the STAR designation. It doesnt matter how many consensus opinions you get, if everyone has their own standard.

 

I was asked about this quotation. I can't remember saying this, or what this could possibly refer to....

 

The star must be applied unanimously, so if any grader disagrees it isn't awarded. It's also not used for foreign coins, just US. Since I don't recall our conversation is incorrect, let me know.

 

 

I had a 1964-D PL-obverse 25C grade MS66, and it came back with fingerprints on the reverse, along with 4 or 5 other coins on the invoice. You called me about the coins, and I mentioned that this coin was previously an MS66* and that I was surprised that the Star was not re-acquired. You said that "some graders will give it a Star, but some graders will look at the prooflike obverse, turn the coin over and see that the reverse is plain and that the coin is not Prooflike, and move on without assigning any designation."

 

I'm not a bulk submitter, and you might not have committed all the details of my ordeal to long-term memory. But, you can be sure it was an ordeal for me, and not something I would forget. However, my interactions with you, Mr. Schechter, have always been cordial and have always lead to a positive outcome. Here is the coin.

 

 

[gmarguli]

The star must be applied unanimously, so if any grader disagrees it isn't awarded. It's also not used for foreign coins, just US.

 

May want to change this web page as it implies that NGC uses the Star for world coins.

 

Star Designation

Coins of exceptional appeal are eligible for a Star (*) designation, a feature introduced in 2001 by NGC that has since become a valued aspect of NGC-encapsulated US and World coins.

[kryptonitecomics]

Toned coins are on a slippery slope with NGC and PCGS these days.....in their quest to protect themselves from financial liability (a fair mission) they are bagging a lot of legitimate coins. I am sure they are catching a lot of the garbage as well but the holes in the grading net are so small that plenty of original coins are getting snarred in the process and body bagged.

 

I have had plenty of Mint set and proof set coins BB'd over the years and while I didn't agree with the opinion.....I can't fault them for their opinion either. I have also had coins came back with PVC BB's that were straight out of proof sets so I know this is more common than some folks realize.....when the coins were dipped...all of the toning came off as well so it would appear that the toning which was green and blue was likely composed mostly of PVC

[MikeInFL]

And again I state, the coins were in the original cellophane.

The graders likely don't see them that way and don't know the history of the coins. They must evaluate them based on what they see, not what the submitter knows.

 

In addition, just because the coins were in original cellophane doesn't mean they couldn't have been artificially toned in it.

[World Colonial]

I agree with your assessment. Most of these coins are so cheap (in an absolute but not necessarily relative sense) it would seem to be easier and more cost effective just to buy them already graded. Many already sell for LESS than the cost of the grading fee. I can see someone doing this as an educational exercise, but aside from attempting to win the conditional rarity loterry, I see no financial benefit.

[Coindude]

And again I state, the coins were in the original cellophane.

The graders likely don't see them that way and don't know the history of the coins. They must evaluate them based on what they see, not what the submitter knows.

In addition, just because the coins were in original cellophane doesn't mean they couldn't have been artificially toned in it.

This is true. I'm sure that they were not stored in the greatest of environment. That's how I've noticed most coins have turned. Nickels due to heat, silver coins because the seals weren't complete between the coins and they came in contact. But by me nothing was done... and for them to call PVC... I think that was a stretch.

[bsshog40]

I don't want to justify either side here but there is also another side that should be thought about. Even tho' the original submitter may know the entire history of one of these coins, if NGC were to go ahead and grade a coin that was toned/damaged due to poor storage or environment, even in OGP, and if this were slabbed, NGC would have to warranty this coin down the road if it were to worsen. There would be a probable garantee also that this coin would be on the market at some point and then the new buyer/owner would have to contend with the original damage. I think that people just really need to be aware of the way they store thier coins. I usually inspect mine periodically to make sure that my coins are not being damaged in thier present storage environment. Avoind PVC containers, replace dry packets frequently if you live in a high humidity area, and also keep coins in a fairly cool place and away from high heated areas. If you like the toning on coins that may be affected by OGP, then you may need to gain more knowledge about Market Acceptable toning.JMO