I have important information that I don't feel I can safely release

[WinstonWare]

The coins did not have the value to justify certification and I listed them as AT and I felt then as I do know that I did what was required under the circumstances.....it's is far easier to critique the situation now that the coins are in PCGS plastic but I guess I opened myself up for all sort of critisism here and ATS just posting the details but to leave stuff out to protect myself doesn't seem like the way to go.

 

I appreciate your candor - thanks. You posted this ATS? That AT coins were in PCGS holders? You didn't get banned? I'm more surprised by that than anything else...

[AnkurJ]

Another reason why 90% of my collection is CACd.

[lehigh96]

Shane,

 

I am a little surprised. Not that 5 AT coins made it into PCGS holders, rather that you really thought that the TPG's were that good at detecting AT from NT. I am positive that there are a great many AT coins residing in both PCGS and NGC holders. To that end, there are certainly some in my own collection. I don't think this development would have any great impact on the hobby as most of us already understood what you are claiming to be true.

 

The stability of the toned coin market does not depend on the ability of the TPG's to catch every AT coin submitted, rather it depends upon the perception of the collecting community that most of the blatant AT examples are weeded out. When the quality of AT becomes so good as to be indiscernable from NT, it doesn't much matter. And while I am saying that AT coins do reside in TPG holders, I am not agreeing with the gentleman in this thread who thinks that bag toning is a fallacy and that all toned Morgans are AT creations. That is pure lunacy as is the logic, because I didn't see them, they didn't exist.

 

I wouldn't worry too much about this development. In fact, I think your secrecy about the subject has probably stirred fears about AT more than if you had just come out with the real story in a factual way.

[Keigwin]

I know this is a very cryptic post from someone who is usually very up front about stuff but the whole more harm then good aspect is what I am weighing at this point.

 

I don't want to put to much emphasis on my findings as the sample size is small but it did open my eyes and force me to reevaluate stuff that has been said for years that I disagreed with .... now I found there is some truth to the statements about AT coins being graded

Now I understand, Shane. Thanks for clearing that up.

Lance.

[MarkFeld]

Shane, I'm curious - if you had seen the coins in question, but knew nothing of their history/the source/cause of their toning, how confident would you be that they were AT?

 

Thanks.

[e1cnr]

I don't understand -

 

 

did you sell some coins that had accelerated toning, only to be bought and submitted

 

 

and now you see those coins again in slabs?

 

and you are totally shocked?

 

 

full disclosure and the truth is interesting

 

 

but in the coin industry, it seems it is what it is

and my ideas of what is ethical may be different than many sellers

[kryptonitecomics]

Shane, I'm curious - if you had seen the coins in question, but knew nothing of their history/the source/cause of their toning, how confident would you be that they were AT?

 

Thanks.

 

I wouldn't buy them as NT.....

 

1st they aren't attractive....second they have the pink and gold coloration with some blue mixed in that I have seen countless times on AT coins. One of the reason I know what to look for today is becuase of these experiments years ago.

 

 

I will post some pictures once I take them as my original images of these coins from around 2005 or 2006 were lost when my hard drive crashed last year. In addition I have already contacted the consignor and let him know that I won't be selling the AT coins but even though I clearly listed the coins as AT in the auction, I will reimburse him for his grading fees so he will be made whole.

 

As for the coins, they are his as he paid for them so I will be shipping them back to him.

[kryptonitecomics]

I don't understand -

 

 

did you sell some coins that had accelerated toning, only to be bought and submitted

 

 

and now you see those coins again in slabs?

 

and you are totally shocked?

 

 

full disclosure and the truth is interesting

 

 

but in the coin industry, it seems it is what it is

and my ideas of what is ethical may be different than many sellers

 

 

Full disclosure is ethical...that's what my consignor got...nothing more and nothing less.....I am not going to hang myself in the corner becuase someone choose to ignore that fact that I listed them as AT. All I can do now is refuse to sell them and make the consignor whole on his grading fees which I am doing.

[Coindude]

I'm wondering Shane.... and you don't have to answer this as it might cross the line. Was the ebay buyer the one who submitted the coins? Knowing full well that they were AT?

[MarkFeld]

I don't understand -

 

 

did you sell some coins that had accelerated toning, only to be bought and submitted

 

 

and now you see those coins again in slabs?

 

and you are totally shocked?

 

 

full disclosure and the truth is interesting

 

 

but in the coin industry, it seems it is what it is

and my ideas of what is ethical may be different than many sellers

 

 

Full disclosure is ethical...that's what my consignor got...nothing more and nothing less.....I am not going to hang myself in the corner becuase someone choose to ignore that fact that I listed them as AT. All I can do now is refuse to sell them and make the consignor whole on his grading fees which I am doing.

 

Why would you reimburse the consignor for the grading fees? If I understand correctly, unless there was another party involved, the buyer chose to have the coins graded, despite your disclosure that they were AT. And they were graded, despite what had been done to them.

 

For what it's worth, I think a number of posters have been overly harsh with you. You sold some junk silver, some of which was AT and disclosed that to the buyer.

 

You had no reasonable expectation that the coins would be sold for any premium for their color and/or submitted for grading. You had no ethical obligation to dip, deface or melt them.

[lcoopie]

they have become market acceptable

[cpm9ball]

I don't understand -

 

 

did you sell some coins that had accelerated toning, only to be bought and submitted

 

 

and now you see those coins again in slabs?

 

and you are totally shocked?

 

 

full disclosure and the truth is interesting

 

 

but in the coin industry, it seems it is what it is

and my ideas of what is ethical may be different than many sellers

 

 

Full disclosure is ethical...that's what my consignor got...nothing more and nothing less.....I am not going to hang myself in the corner becuase someone choose to ignore that fact that I listed them as AT. All I can do now is refuse to sell them and make the consignor whole on his grading fees which I am doing.

 

Why would you reimburse the consignor for the grading fees? If I understand correctly, unless there was another party involved, the buyer chose to have the coins graded, despite your disclosure that they were AT. And they were graded, despite what had been done to them.

 

For what it's worth, I think a number of posters have been overly harsh with you. You sold some junk silver, some of which was AT and disclosed that to the buyer.

 

You had no reasonable expectation that the coins would be sold for any premium for their color and/or submitted for grading. You had no ethical obligation to dip, deface or melt them.

 

Ditto!

[kryptonitecomics]

I'm wondering Shane.... and you don't have to answer this as it might cross the line. Was the ebay buyer the one who submitted the coins? Knowing full well that they were AT?

 

He was the submitter but he said he didn't read the auction description line by line...just bought the lot becuase it was uncirculated silver and he likes to submit coins for grading. He said he didn't see anything that said AT on the holders and he is right...when I put the coins in the 2X2's I didn't right anything on them but then again I never do. Lesson learned for me...while I don't experiment anymore...if I ever sell a coin I believe is AT I will place a notation on the 2X2 as potentially further protection against it getting submitted.

[kryptonitecomics]

I don't understand -

 

 

did you sell some coins that had accelerated toning, only to be bought and submitted

 

 

and now you see those coins again in slabs?

 

and you are totally shocked?

 

 

full disclosure and the truth is interesting

 

 

but in the coin industry, it seems it is what it is

and my ideas of what is ethical may be different than many sellers

 

 

Full disclosure is ethical...that's what my consignor got...nothing more and nothing less.....I am not going to hang myself in the corner becuase someone choose to ignore that fact that I listed them as AT. All I can do now is refuse to sell them and make the consignor whole on his grading fees which I am doing.

 

Why would you reimburse the consignor for the grading fees? If I understand correctly, unless there was another party involved, the buyer chose to have the coins graded, despite your disclosure that they were AT. And they were graded, despite what had been done to them.

 

For what it's worth, I think a number of posters have been overly harsh with you. You sold some junk silver, some of which was AT and disclosed that to the buyer.

 

You had no reasonable expectation that the coins would be sold for any premium for their color and/or submitted for grading. You had no ethical obligation to dip, deface or melt them.

 

 

You summed that up very nicely Mark and that has what I have been trying unsuccefully to convey...given the circumstances up front I don't think many would have done anything differently....only after learning the coins got into a reputable holder are folks now second guessing my actions and telling me what I should have done with the AT coins.

 

I do try to go above and beyond when selling on Ebay as I want happy customers/consignors so while I agree that moraly I am not responsible for his grading fees I thought it would be a nice gesture on my part as he didn't intentionally submit AT coins...he just didn't read the description fully like many Ebayers. I have done a lot of business with this gentleman and I plan to do a lot more so taking a small financial hit now may be my best move long term. I don't even know if the consignor will even allow me to pay him back for the grading fees as he hasn't asked even after I told him I would be returning the coins.

 

This is simply one of these bizzare tales where 99% of collectors would not have considered submitting the coins and probably 95% of that 99% would never think the coins would make it into a holder even if submitted but even with the long odds.....you can never say never.

[MarkFeld]

I don't understand -

 

 

did you sell some coins that had accelerated toning, only to be bought and submitted

 

 

and now you see those coins again in slabs?

 

and you are totally shocked?

 

 

full disclosure and the truth is interesting

 

 

but in the coin industry, it seems it is what it is

and my ideas of what is ethical may be different than many sellers

 

 

Full disclosure is ethical...that's what my consignor got...nothing more and nothing less.....I am not going to hang myself in the corner becuase someone choose to ignore that fact that I listed them as AT. All I can do now is refuse to sell them and make the consignor whole on his grading fees which I am doing.

 

Why would you reimburse the consignor for the grading fees? If I understand correctly, unless there was another party involved, the buyer chose to have the coins graded, despite your disclosure that they were AT. And they were graded, despite what had been done to them.

 

For what it's worth, I think a number of posters have been overly harsh with you. You sold some junk silver, some of which was AT and disclosed that to the buyer.

 

You had no reasonable expectation that the coins would be sold for any premium for their color and/or submitted for grading. You had no ethical obligation to dip, deface or melt them.

 

 

You summed that up very nicely Mark and that has what I have been trying unsuccefully to convey...given the circumstances up front I don't think many would have done anything differently....only after learning the coins got into a reputable holder are folks now second guessing my actions and telling me what I should have done with the AT coins.

 

I do try to go above and beyond when selling on Ebay as I want happy customers/consignors so while I agree that moraly I am not responsible for his grading fees I thought it would be a nice gesture on my part as he didn't intentionally submit AT coins...he just didn't read the description fully like many Ebayers. I have done a lot of business with this gentleman and I plan to do a lot more so taking a small financial hit now may be my best move long term. I don't even know if the consignor will even allow me to pay him back for the grading fees as he hasn't asked even after I told him I would be returning the coins.

 

This is simply one of these bizzare tales where 99% of collectors would not have considered submitting the coins and probably 95% of that 99% would never think the coins would make it into a holder even if submitted but even with the long odds.....you can never say never.

 

It is all too easy to second guess someone after the fact.

[jerseycat10]

...given the circumstances up front I don't think many would have done anything differently....only after learning the coins got into a reputable holder are folks now second guessing my actions and telling me what I should have done with the AT coins.

 

Disagree. If I was a dealer in toned coinage, I could understand experimenting with articifical toning methods out of curiosities sake. But, selling said coins without first dipping them to remove the artificial toning seems like a lack in judgement.

 

Kudos to you, however, for not accepting the consignment. Hopefully the coins in question will not resurface elsewhere.

[MarkFeld]

...given the circumstances up front I don't think many would have done anything differently....only after learning the coins got into a reputable holder are folks now second guessing my actions and telling me what I should have done with the AT coins.

 

Disagree. If I was a dealer in toned coinage, I could understand experimenting with articifical toning methods out of curiosities sake. But, selling said coins without first dipping them to remove the artificial toning seems like a lack in judgement.

 

Kudos to you, however, for not accepting the consignment. Hopefully the coins in question will not resurface elsewhere.

 

It was junk silver and he disclosed that the coins were AT. Yet you (and a few others) want the seller to go out, buy dip and dip the coins.

 

What if a coin had been repaired, and the seller disclosed that, but the buyer submitted it anyway and it graded. Would you be of the opinion that the seller should have defaced, not ever sold or melted the coin so it couldn't get graded?

[BKW]

...given the circumstances up front I don't think many would have done anything differently....only after learning the coins got into a reputable holder are folks now second guessing my actions and telling me what I should have done with the AT coins.

 

Disagree. If I was a dealer in toned coinage, I could understand experimenting with articifical toning methods out of curiosities sake. But, selling said coins without first dipping them to remove the artificial toning seems like a lack in judgement.

 

Kudos to you, however, for not accepting the consignment. Hopefully the coins in question will not resurface elsewhere.

 

It was junk silver and he disclosed that the coins were AT. Yet you (and a few others) want the seller to go out, buy dip and dip the coins.

 

What if a coin had been repaired, and the seller disclosed that, but the buyer submitted it anyway and it graded. Would you be of the opinion that the seller should have defaced, not ever sold or melted the coin so it couldn't get graded?

 

Exactly Mark!

 

Shane, I think you did all that would be reasonably required of you or any seller under the circumstances. And, I think going above and beyond by offering to refund the grading fees is a very nice gesture since you have a solid, long-term relationship with this person.

[PCcoins]

Fist off, just let me say that Shane is a stand up guy (those of you who don't already know). And when I first came into collecting coins, about 4 years ago or so, I ran into Shane on ebay. At the time he was selling graded toned coins regularly, as I remember. Shane helped me out a lot when I had shown some interest in toned coins and original double mint sets.

 

I remember when Shane sold off a bunch of lots on ebay, mostly they were coins that were left over from double mint sets that didn't get sent in for grading. There were lots of Franklins, Washingtons, and jeffersons. And then there was a junk lot of silver with some AT coins included, I remember the auction clearly but not the color on the coins.

 

It shows true character when Shane had made this post and revealed what he did. And that he planned to return the coins to the consignee, as most would have turned a blind eye and listed the coins.

 

 

[Coindude]

Disagree. If I was a dealer in toned coinage, I could understand experimenting with articifical toning methods out of curiosities sake. But, selling said coins without first dipping them to remove the artificial toning seems like a lack in judgement.

First off, it was "learning" not doctoring that was going on. The difference being that Shane did not try to pass off an AT coin as original.

 

Second, I do believe that Shane realizes he made a mistake and fully admits to that. This again has been a learning opportunity for him and us. If you don't take it that way then we will not get better as a whole.

[lcoopie]

what was the mistake?

[MarkFeld]

what was the mistake?

Not anticipating that 1) the buyer wouldn't read the auction description (which stated that the coins were AT) and 2) that he would submit coins not worth submitting and 3) that PCGS would grade them and 4) not melting the coins.

 

On a serious note, however, I think Shane wrote somewhere that, in hindsight, he should have marked the coin holders/flips "AT".

[kryptonitecomics]

what was the mistake?

 

 

Posting about it

 

 

Sorry couldn't resist

 

Actually I think not writing AT on the 2X2's was a mistake as in this particular case I believe there is a good chance they consignor would not have submitted the coins. He is an honest guy and if he says he didn't realize (the coins weren't wild rainbows) the coins were AT then I believe him.

 

What's funny is there is one coin that I bought off a PCGS forum member a couple of years ago that does have wild colors and I always thought it looked too good to be true and they graded that coin as well but I have no information to say whether it's AT, NT or MA so based on it grading I am going with MA and I will sell that one as I am not throwing the baby out with the bath water.

 

I apologize for not posting images yet....I just need to take some shots of the coin since the original's after the experiments are long gone My daughter is going out of town for two weeks to New York so right now spending time with her is my priority.

 

I appreciate the support I have recieved over this and wish I would have just laid things out a bit more concisely as pointed out by many including Lehigh. One other thing to note is that one of the coins when originally AT'd had bright Blue, Orange, Purple toning etc across the obverse. Over the course of the last 5 years even thought the coin was no longer stored with the match sticks it continued to tone and is much much darker and less colorful in hand today with zero luster showing through the color. So the lesson that can be learned for those not as familair with toning is that the instability of the surfaces of AT coins is one of the main reason I am against them.

 

I was also surprised to see the coin continue to darken even though no chemicals were directly applied to the coins surface but that could be attributed to the fact that the coin wasn't kept in a say a 2X2 etc but was just laying in a plastic push pin box with other coins?

 

The only thing I would like to add Lehigh was that I am not suprised to find out good AT coins get into holders after all the line between AT/NT has always been very gray...I was simply surprised to see bad novice AT jobs from me get in to holders

[MarkFeld]

So the lesson that can be learned for those not as familair with toning is that the instability of the surfaces of AT coins is one of the main reason I am against them.

Supposedly, not all artificial toning is unstable.

 

There is a well known coin doctor from (I think) the Chicago area, with whom the major grading companies and many dealers are very familiar. And he has allegedly artificially toned a lot of nickel coinage. I have been told by more than one person that the coins have remained stable over a long period of time - more than 10 years.

[James_OldeTowne]

So the lesson that can be learned for those not as familair with toning is that the instability of the surfaces of AT coins is one of the main reason I am against them.

Supposedly, not all artificial toning is unstable.

 

There is a well known coin doctor from (I think) the Chicago area, with whom the major grading companies and many dealers are very familiar. And he has allegedly artificially toned a lot of nickel coinage. I have been told by more than one person that the coins have remained stable over a long period of time - more than 10 years.

I've posted the following comment before, and hold it to be true. Actually, most AT is indeed stable, and for that matter, some NT is not stable.

[MBA101]

Damn. This thread is crazy. I hate to be a dealer who buys some great old time original material from someone who has had a collection off the market and stored the old time envelope way for decades.

 

The reason I am posting this is that this is just what happened to Sheridan Downey. PCGS bagged half the Bust Halves that an old timer just sold to him that were stored in paper. Many of those were sold through Sheridan back way when and he knew where they came from. His reaction was to contact PCGS and explain where those coins were stored and that they are not AT'd. And yes I snagged one that wasnt bagged. I hope PCGS fixes this problem, and I get a crack at another down the road... He mentioned that PCGS whacked the Overton collection back in the early 90's the same way.

 

What a pain...

[michael]

it was not too forward thinking to AT coins then release them to an unknown party

where they are out in "circulation" and can be trouble for future coin market stability

because of greedy end users

 

[e1cnr]

if the coins are not attractive,

 

 

the ugliness may have lowered the grade

and surely did not increase the value of the coins

 

 

so I feel the toned coin market is safe

[KeyLargoRareCoins-migratio]

What a thread !!

 

First off I would like to state that this is no way had any thing to do with key Largo Rare Coins and Shane/Kryptonite comics doing buisness, our buisness descision was simply based on the current market environment.

 

Second,

 

I can tell you all with 100% certainty shane is by far the most honest and stand up friend as well as buisness partner I have ever had. Shane would not steal a penny from anyone let alone try to decieve someone in any way to make money.

[braddick]

Shane, interesting thread- thanks for bring it up.

Quick question. Why not instead of paying back your consigner for his grading fees simply purchase the coins outright? That way they're back in your hands. No muss, no fuss.