Third World Slabs and “Dangerous” Artificial Toning

[BillJones]

A few weeks ago I posted a message about some “third world slabs” that I had seen at a show. In that message I commented that all of the coins had major defects, and most of those problems were not noted on the holder. By far the most common FINAL defect was artificial toning. I call it a “final defect” because AT is often used on very scarce coins to hide other problems.

 

This 1873 with arrows half dollar has 100% artificial toning. Its look is typical of what I saw on the coins that were in these off-brand slabs. The color in the picture, at least on my monitor, is an accurate representation of the “look” of this coin.

 

One of the coins that I saw was an 1804 quarter, which is very scare and popular key date coin. The look of that piece was very similar to this half dollar, and it was graded AU-50 with no comments about the AT. The asking price to me as a dealer was $10,500. Gray Sheet “bid” at the time, I believe was about $12,000. A “real” AU-50 1804 quarter in today’s market in a dealer to dealer transaction would sell for $15,000 to $16,000 or more. The Coin Prices listing is $18,000, and as a practical matter a price up to $20,000 would not be beyond reach.

 

What’s artificially toned coin like that really worth? Probably in the $5,000 to $6,000 range, and it would not be an easy sell at that because most people who are really into early pieces would prefer to trade some wear for originality.

 

I just present this as an example to those who get hung up on what looks to be “rich, dark toning” and those who might not be able to spot AT. Missing this can really cost you a lot of money, and that is why I have so little patience with those who manufacture and use “third world slabs” for this type of deception.

 

Why do I own this beast of an 1873 half dollar? I’ll get into that in another topic post.

[Merc]

I love that term, "third world slabs”. I have heard renegade slabbing companies, but not that one.

 

The 1873 half picture is a bit dark so it is hard to see the artificial colors. The reverse looks too colorful for halves of that period.

 

It is interesting to hear that one dealer will try to pass off a bad coin on another. He would have to find a dealer with little experience in coins to find a buyer at that price. Then I would expect that dealers who buy $15,000+ coins should have many years of experience.

[BillJones]

There is nothing unique or new about dealers nailing other dealers. Getting ripped in the coin business is an equal opportunity situation. That's why the people who get into the business who don't have the experience or the talent don't last very long.

[spy88]

Bill, as stated, the picture given to represent AT is at best, vague. I for one, would be interested in seeing side-by-side comparison pics so we can get a decent "feel" for what is and what is not AT.

 

The reason I ask is that I have always considered an AT coin as one with bright rainbow colors and evenly dispersed around the coin and into the focal areas. Of course, I realize there are NT coins that exhibit these characteristics, but there IS a difference for the eye to notice. In the case of the coin you use for your illustration, I would have thought it NT just from the pic, of course.

 

If you could give us some comparison pics and your experience as to what we are looking at or looking for, it would be very helpful!

 

Thanks!

 

David

[BillJones]

Most of the AT on silver coins that see around today is the bright colorful stuff. Most of the time the doctors are taking white or slightly toned Mint State coins and adding the color to them.

 

The stuff I'm showing here is dull because I think it's used to cover polished and badly whizzed coins. The idea here is that there is no Mint Luster with which to work and the "shine" that is there looks very unnatural. Therefore you alter the whole surface with dull toning. Usually I've seen this on coins that bring high prices in the circulated grades, like the 1804 quarter and silver coins from the 1790s.

 

I don't do this kind of stuff, don't know exactly how it's done. I only know had to spot it, know that it's bad news when you see it. As for before an after coins, I don't have any. I guess I could post a picture of a coin that is natually toned and compare it to this one and one other AT coin that I own.

 

As for the picture, it shows up fine on my computer. A couple of years ago I had a monitor that was headed south that gave me pictures that were far too dark. People were accusing me of overexposing my pictures. No offense, but perhaps you might be having monitor problems too.

[BillJones]

Here's a 1797 silver dollar that is "natural" or at least it got this toning naturally after maybe being lightly cleaned many, many years ago. Maybe you can compare this color to the color on the 1873 half dollar. The reverse of the half dollar is especially unconvincing.

[Hoot]

So Bill, When you see rainbow toning on these 19th century coins that is not thick and crunchy, that does not have a deep cobal blue band and that is not tightly concentric, are you immediately suspect? Also, when spotting a whizzed or harshly cleaned coin through any kind of toning, are you still looking for a lack of cartwheel reflection? Any advice is good.

 

Hoot

[BillJones]

It’s hard to teach this concept. You really have to look at coins “in the flesh” to do it, but artificial toning usually seems to “lie on top of the coin” rather than be a part of the piece. The PCGS Grading Guide mentioned this in the color photo section of that book.

 

Since I’m not a coin doctor and have never seen the process done that creates the dull thick artificial toning that is on the 1873 half dollar, I don’t know the full procedure. I don’t know if the chemical agents that are used alter the whizzed or polished surfaces or if that is a first step before the toning chemicals are applied.

 

To answer you question, I have seen polished and whizzed coins that had bright artificial toning applied to them. The altered surfaces were still quite obvious, and the coins were not at all convincing. To make it work, one needs to alter the surfaces again and dull them down. The result can be a dull flat coin with no luster, but lots of detail. If it’s a valuable piece, it can be worth a fair amount of money and APPEAR to some to be worth a lot more.

 

[toyonakataro]

Isn't it the one inb NNC holder? I think I've seen some seated halves with similar toning in NNC holders before..

[BillJones]

No, Toyonakataro, this one is raw, and it's setting in my collection right now. I've not upgraded yet, and given the cost of nice one, that purchase is sort of at the back of the line given my greater interest in other things.

[TomB]

You might want to try carrying it around in your pocket for a while in order to obtain a more natural look. I had gotten an 1896-O Barber quarter in a deal that was EF45 but was also scrubbed clean, it looked awful. I carried it around for about six months and put dollar bills and change in my pocket with it to simulate circulation. Also, each day I would remove the coin so as to get salts from my skin on it. It eventually looked substantially nicer, albeit a lower grade.

[jom]

You might want to try carrying it around in your pocket for a while in order to obtain a more natural look. I had gotten an 1896-O Barber quarter in a deal that was EF45 but was also scrubbed clean, it looked awful. I carried it around for about six months and put dollar bills and change in my pocket with it to simulate circulation. Also, each day I would remove the coin so as to get salts from my skin on it. It eventually looked substantially nicer, albeit a lower grade.

 

Good idea assuming you don't accidently spend it.

 

jom