Is “Market Acceptable” really the best way to describe well doctored coins?

[WinstonWare]

Isn’t market acceptable just another way of saying “people won’t notice the difference so they’ll buy it?” Aren’t market acceptable coins purchased at a premium because the buyer believes they aren’t “market acceptable” but “naturally toned?”

 

I don’t know that “market acceptable” is the proper verbiage. I’m not sure what we should call coins that are well doctored but I’m also not sure that I’m comfortable saying or writing “market acceptable” when my head is rattling, “good enough doctor job to sell at premium prices.”

 

[MarkFeld]

I think of "market acceptable" as more often appliying to coins that the graders have a question about/aren't sure if they are original or not.

[gmarguli]

Dipped coins are not original (they are doctored), but they are market acceptable. In fact, excluding mint products, I believe it is by far the biggest section of the coin business. Not the biggest MA section of the coin business, but the biggest section overall.

[WinstonWare]

Thanks for your thoughts guys. I see your points.

[WoodenJefferson]

To me, “well doctored” still implies intent to deceived a potential customer into thinking the toned coin arrived this way over decades. Coins that are enhanced to appear aged, should never be considered “market acceptable” Coins that have been professionally stabilized, be it copper, nickel, silver or gold, are market acceptable.

[michael]

well doctored coins

 

i like to think of the coin in a pcgs genuine holder with the number listed as 91 or 94 possibly 97

[James_OldeTowne]

For better or for worse, "market acceptable" is the only thing that really matters.

[Oldtrader3]

I feel tht the final grade given most "Market Acceptable" coins forces determination of pricing level and in fairness, gives a partial value, to the coin itself that it is genuine and belonging somewhere in the overall grading scale. This may be the only practical way to assign problem coins to any place in collecting attendant with some tangible value that, by definition, gains market acceptablity.

 

The NCS approach, while not perfect, was an attempt to partially solve this problem. NCS coins never established a strong, healthy second market and were in that respect a partial failure. As an example, probably most of us have had to sell a NCS coin at a greater loss than we felt was justified. This condition of limited marketability often created a deeper discount than was warrented for the actual coin's merits. This is market unacceptablitity.

 

I am just happy that I at least, hung onto a couple coins that maybe now can have some collector disirability, acceptance and some reasonable value in respect to their less disrespected peer coins..

[PerryHall]

For better or for worse, "market acceptable" is the only thing that really matters.

 

Agree. A market acceptable coin looks naturally toned whether it is or not. Many times it's because some coin doctors are that good.

[michael]

Re: Is “Market Acceptable” really the best way to describe well doctored coins?

 

ABSOLUTELY NOT

[PerryHall]

Re: Is Market Acceptable really the best way to describe well doctored coins?

 

ABSOLUTELY NOT

 

O.K. Michael---What is the best way to describe well doctored coins?

[michael]

 

 

depending on the specific coin

 

oh a case by case basis

[Oldtrader3]

IMHO, 90% of BB'ed coins are those with some spot or degree of "light cleaning" or a rub surface treatment. If the marketplace can better deal with the "Market Acceptability" of just this large outlying population, I would be very pleased.

 

I bet that a large percentage of the boardmembers here who are collectors, have a coin or coins that "just quite don't meet grading standards" in their collection. Other than a slight cleaning or a spot, there is nothing wrong with texture, color and comportment of these coins.

 

I have a couple of these nicely toned, "almost will grade" coins that I am going to send in for grading with the new system and see what happens.

[IGWT]

You can't have TPGs unless you accept the principle of "market acceptability." The concept is reflected in the decision of a TPG to slab or not to slab a toned coin; but, of course, it's much broader than that one example. It encompasses all attributes of a coin that might preclude certification, e.g., rim dings, scratches, tooling. When is an old cleaning acceptable and when is it not? Why is an overdipped coin slabbed and a repaired coin rejected? "Market acceptability" also sets parameters for grading so-called no-problem coins.

 

All these decisions define what is "market acceptable" for the purpose of providing stability, creating confidence, and enhancing trade. In other words, it's grease on the skids of the numismatic economy. The term "market acceptable" is nothing more or less than a reflection of TPGs doing the work that we've given them to do. .

[James_OldeTowne]

We have to remember that "market acceptable" does not only apply to coins that have been manipulated. It applies to coins that have seen the effects of normal circulation as well. For example, a seated dollar could have picked up a sizable rim ding during circulation. This is not the work of coin doctoring, or something like that, yet the TPG must decide whether or not the size of the ding is "market acceptable".

 

That's why I stated earlier, ultimately, the only thing that matters is whether a coin is market acceptable or not. It doesn't really matter how a coin came to look the way it looks, or what means brought it there. An intentionally altered coin can easily be market acceptable, just as a perfectly normal and un-altered coin can be unacceptable.

[WoodenJefferson]

So, if I understand some of the concepts as stated here, the TPG’s are following trends in stead of setting them?

 

This is a likely marketing scenario used in just about any business model for today’s successful company.

 

It is just hard for some of us to swallow these concepts of “market acceptable” when original was pounded into us for years and years.

 

Time will always prevail, it marches on with out us and soon there will be another facet of this hobby that comes to light and the hobbyists will be discussing that one to death like this one.

 

The future is not with old age collectors, it’s with what’s happening now, even if I don’t accept it, it’s inevitable.

[michael]

at baltimore a year ago i asked one of the higher ups at pcgs what consituted market acceptable

 

of course this is my conversation from an unnamed source at pcgs someone really higher up in the company but not directly involved with grading but after he told me this i agreed and finally understood what was going on in general with the way the services are currently grading and this was before the current stricter standards due to i think the CAC

 

my example was a coin that i thought was undergraded and in a green tag holder a pre 1995 green tag and i see coins currently graded in the same or slightly higher graded holders that have extensive hairlines and not as much meat on the current coins as the one on the older green tag holder

 

and he told me that market acceptability had to do with what their pcgs standard was when they looked at what the market currently accepts as acceptable as to specific grades

 

now he told me that pcgs standards really never change..., but; BUT PCGS GRADES TO THEIR STANDARD *****based on the current acceptance in the market for coins of a particular grade******

 

from the above statement my conclusion was

 

market acceptance DOES change