Another pesky question about "turned" coins... think I know the answer, though.

[James_OldeTowne]

I have found several Lincolns in older holders certified as "RD" that would no way, no how get the designation today. I suspect they have turned in the holder.

 

Should this be mentioned, or at least hinted at? Or let sleeping dogs lie?

 

(My inclination is to think that dogs like their rest....)

[FILTHYHOARD]

Well, I think this pretty much sums up my stance on the subject :

 

[PerryHall]

An honest dealer wouldn't have to ask this question.

[Bugmann1974]

I don't think he is asking as a dealer, but as a cataloger. So he has to take into consideration the consigner as well the auction houses reputation.

 

I say that the pictures should speak for themselves on this one.

[FILTHYHOARD]

 

I say that the pictures should speak for themselves on this one.

 

Agreed

[WoodenJefferson]

When the cent was originally holdered, the RD stood for RED, now that it has oxidized, the RD stands for Redox (shorthand for reduction-oxidation reaction)

 

There's your out.

[michael]

mention it using political correctness

 

for example

 

mellowing to the surfaces makes this coin "red challenged"

 

 

[James_OldeTowne]

"red challenged"

!!!!!!

 

How about: "red inhibited" ?

[coinman1794]

 

I say that the pictures should speak for themselves on this one.

 

Agreed

 

Telling RD from RB, from BN in a picture is often impossible. Again, you should describe what the coin itself looks like, regardless of the slab label. You dont have to say outright that you think the designation is wrong, but say the coin is brown.

[PerryHall]

An honest cataloger would give an honest description of the coin without omitting pertinent information.

[gbsten]

An honest cataloger would give an honest description of the coin without omitting pertinent information.

 

Really then, wouldn't he be offering his "opinion" of the coin? Shouldn't the grader's take on the coin be the defining point? I'm sure if I consigned a coin, and the cataloger added a negative opinion (which could affect my sale price) I wouldn't be happy! Also, most sales are not always "final". I feel that if the images are a fair represention of the coin, it should be described in the best possible way without being dishonest or misleading.

[MarkFeld]

I have found several Lincolns in older holders certified as "RD" that would no way, no how get the designation today. I suspect they have turned in the holder.

 

Should this be mentioned, or at least hinted at? Or let sleeping dogs lie?

 

(My inclination is to think that dogs like their rest....)

You need not comment regarding how you think the coins would be designated by a TPG today.

 

BUT, if in your eyes, they clearly aren't RD, you should make note of that as part of your description. I believe that cataloguers/auction houses look very bad when they catalog/sell obviously badly over-graded and/or mis designated coins without comment.

[DirtyGoldMan]

An honest cataloger would give an honest description of the coin without omitting pertinent information.

 

Perhaps he should describe it in braille as a collector with eyesight should be able to see that the red color is no longer all there.

[coinman1794]

An honest cataloger would give an honest description of the coin without omitting pertinent information.

 

Perhaps he should describe it in braille as a collector with eyesight should be able to see that the red color is no longer all there.

 

The way most people blindly follow the grading services opnions, I would suggest cracking a few of them over the head with a rubber mallet, as a starting point.

[MarkFeld]

An honest cataloger would give an honest description of the coin without omitting pertinent information.

 

Perhaps he should describe it in braille as a collector with eyesight should be able to see that the red color is no longer all there.

But Robert, images are often misleading (in either direction) in that regard, so it doesn't matter what someone "should be able to see".

[DirtyGoldMan]

An honest cataloger would give an honest description of the coin without omitting pertinent information.

 

Perhaps he should describe it in braille as a collector with eyesight should be able to see that the red color is no longer all there.

But Robert, images are often misleading (in either direction) in that regard, so it doesn't matter what someone "should be able to see".

 

I am jaded, and no offense to James, who I believe is as honest a cataloger as anyone, but I believe that the cataloger's role is provide a plain vanilla, neutral to mildly encouraging description of the coin. Until I see catalogers mention puttied, overdipped, turned, overgraded, or ugly coins as such, I will rely on the in-hand inspection of the coin by me or a representative.

[prudden]

"red challenged"

!!!!!!

 

How about: "red inhibited" ?

 

I like the one Stacks used on a RB Proof Indian I was looking at.They called the color "slightly faded".

 

By the way,how do you keep a raw red Indian cent from turning?

[Tradedollarnut]

"red challenged"

!!!!!!

 

How about: "red inhibited" ?

 

I like the one Stacks used on a RB Proof Indian I was looking at.They called the color "slightly faded".

 

By the way,how do you keep a raw red Indian cent from turning?

 

Take away its steering wheel?

[michael]

"red challenged"

!!!!!!

 

How about: "red inhibited" ?

 

(thumbs u

 

in all seriousiness (thumbs u

[thebeav]

I have found several Lincolns in older holders certified as "RD" that would no way, no how get the designation today. I suspect they have turned in the holder.

 

Should this be mentioned, or at least hinted at? Or let sleeping dogs lie?

 

(My inclination is to think that dogs like their rest....)

You need not comment regarding how you think the coins would be designated by a TPG today.

 

BUT, if in your eyes, they clearly aren't RD, you should make note of that as part of your description. I believe that cataloguers/auction houses look very bad when they catalog/sell obviously badly over-graded and/or mis designated coins without comment.

 

I have to agree.....At least if the change is 'blatant'...

I've always felt there is some culpability with the 'house'....

 

Paul