If a white coin tones due to the slab (old ANACS, no-line NGC), is it AT or NT?

[James_OldeTowne]

Inspired by another thread.

 

I suspect most if not all of us believe the anecdotal evidence that the old NGC no-line holders, and the old ANACS ANA holders, can tone coins. The label or insert in the top part of the slab could cause a sliver of rainbow toning at the closest edge of the coin, or in some cases, tone the whole coin.

 

Is that natural toning, though?

 

I would contend it is definitely not "traditional" toning. And, it would be easy to guess that some of the white coins so encapsulated were dipped prior to certification and acquisition of color.

 

Your thoughts?

 

[bsshog40]

This is definately my own opinion, but I think that AT would be a coin that someone specially alters the color using chemicals, heat, etc... I've seen very nicely toned coins in slabs, other holders, folders, albums etc.. and to me these are natually toned over time. Unless you disect specific materials used for storage and are able to determine the exact ingredients and chemical reactions to certain metals, to me, this is not AT, they would be NT.

[MarkFeld]

NT, due to the coin's being encapsulated/stored via means intended for coins.

[coinman_23885]

Inspired by another thread.

 

I suspect most if not all of us believe the anecdotal evidence that the old NGC no-line holders, and the old ANACS ANA holders, can tone coins. The label or insert in the top part of the slab could cause a sliver of rainbow toning at the closest edge of the coin, or in some cases, tone the whole coin.

 

Is that natural toning, though?

 

I would contend it is definitely not "traditional" toning. And, it would be easy to guess that some of the white coins so encapsulated were dipped prior to certification and acquisition of color.

 

Your thoughts?

 

Conceptually, I'm not sure how this would differ from storing coins in an album; toning is the end result.

[jom]

Bah! Now it comes down to "intent"? This AT vs. NT is so blown out of proportion it's unbelievable.

 

Natural? Who knows given the definition is in question. Most people can't seem to agree on a definition of AT to begin with.

 

jom

 

[PerryHall]

NT, due to the coin's being encapsulated/stored via means intended for coins.

 

Agree. No different from a coin toning after being stored in a coin album or in kraft paper coin envelope.

[Walkerfan]

I don't care if its AT or NT, as long as it's in a slab and it looks perdy.

[michael]

great thread question james (thumbs u

 

for me i need to see what the coin currently looks like in its holder

 

some will be considered by me to be NT/market acceptable

 

some AT/not market acceptable

 

it is on a case by case basis in hand sight seen evaulation

[physics-fan3.14]

I personally am a huge fan of the toning that the small white ANACS holders would impart. Through the years, I have owned several of them.

[kryptonitecomics]

NT, due to the coin's being encapsulated/stored via means intended for coins.

 

+1

[Dcoin]

If your intention is to tone them by placing them in that slab, then it's AT.

 

If your intention is to have them encapsulated and they tone as a byproduct of the process, then its NT.

[MarkFeld]

If your intention is to tone them by placing them in that slab, then it's AT.

 

If your intention is to have them encapsulated and they tone as a byproduct of the process, then its NT.

Sorry, I don't buy that.

 

The result is the same, regardless of the intent. And whether or not you want the coins to tone, submitting them to a grading company, having them graded and slabbed and keeping them that way, does not amount to artificially toning the coins. In some instances, the toning might look odd enough such that it is not considered "market acceptable", but even that doesn't make it "artificial".

[messydesk]

Toned because of use of an accepted storage product -- be it slab, flip, envelope, or album -- according to its intended use is NT (or environmental damage in bad cases).

[Dcoin]

If your intention is to tone them by placing them in that slab, then it's AT.

 

If your intention is to have them encapsulated and they tone as a byproduct of the process, then its NT.

Sorry, I don't buy that.

 

The result is the same, regardless of the intent. And whether or not you want the coins to tone, submitting them to a grading company, having them graded and slabbed and keeping them that way, does not amount to artificially toning the coins. In some instances, the toning might look odd enough such that it is not considered "market acceptable", but even that doesn't make it "artificial".

 

Mark, my point is to highlight that AT and NT is the same process.

 

What is the difference if I put a silver $ in a sulfur-rich bank bag, or wrap the same dollar in a sulfur-rich Taco Bell napkin? The same thing is happening to the coin, however one is a happy accident and the other is meant to deceive.

 

It's all about intent.

[MarkFeld]

If your intention is to tone them by placing them in that slab, then it's AT.

 

If your intention is to have them encapsulated and they tone as a byproduct of the process, then its NT.

Sorry, I don't buy that.

 

The result is the same, regardless of the intent. And whether or not you want the coins to tone, submitting them to a grading company, having them graded and slabbed and keeping them that way, does not amount to artificially toning the coins. In some instances, the toning might look odd enough such that it is not considered "market acceptable", but even that doesn't make it "artificial".

 

Mark, my point is to highlight that AT and NT is the same process.

 

What is the difference if I put a silver $ in a sulfur-rich bank bag, or wrap the same dollar in a sulfur-rich Taco Bell napkin? The same thing is happening to the coin, however one is a happy accident and the other is meant to deceive.

 

It's all about intent.

Sorry, again, I disagree and don't feel it is about intent. I think it hinges more upon whether the storage method was/is generally intended for coin collecting.

 

That said, I agree that there are many gray lines. But a Taco Bell napkin is not one of them.

 

Edited to add: I have posted this elsewhere, previously.....

 

 

<

 

<

 

Artificial toning is the formation of oxides, sulfides, or other compounds on the surfaces of a coin by any process other than that which causes natural toning.>> >>

 

 

 

[lcoopie]

I can't find a pic of ANACS toning, perhaps someone could put one up.?

[rrantique]

[MarkFeld]

I can't find a pic of ANACS toning, perhaps someone could put one up.?

I don't have an image to post. But I think of the ANACS toning as peripheral color comprised of deep blue mixed with golden/orange or golden/red, similar to album toning.

[physics-fan3.14]

I can't find a pic of ANACS toning, perhaps someone could put one up.?

I don't have an image to post. But I think of the ANACS toning as peripheral color comprised of deep blue mixed with golden/orange or golden/red, similar to album toning.

 

This is definitive and classic ANACS toning:

 

[rrantique]

Another

 

[Conder101]

Nice pictures of ANACS slabbed coins. Now lets see the before pictures from before the slab toned them. In other words prove that the toning was caused by the slab.

 

I would maintain that the difference between NT and AT does come down to intent. The old double mint set holders were known to cause toning of the coin and they would often bring a premium. Dealers would pop out the coins, sell them and replace them with new white coins witht he intent that those coins would tone as well. Now they are storing the coins using a method "traditionally accepted by numismatists.", but the intent was clearly to produce a marketable toned coin.

 

The coins that have toned in the old NGC slabs have no such intent. No one slabs a coin intending for it to turn color in the holder, and I don't believe NGC designed their slab with the intent that it would tone the coins placed in them. In fact after it was realized that it was happening they changed the design to put the "line" in them to isolate the coin away from the label that was causing the toning. So since there was no intent on either side coins that have toned in the slab would all be NT. Even for coins that were dipped and then turned in the slab. One of the primary beliefs among most collectors is that the slabs will protect the coin FROM toning. So I would say the intent of slabbing a dipped coin would be to keep it white. Any color change would be unintentional and therefor NT.

 

[rrantique]

Nice pictures of ANACS slabbed coins. Now lets see the before pictures from before the slab toned them. In other words prove that the toning was caused by the slab.

 

I would maintain that the difference between NT and AT does come down to intent. The old double mint set holders were known to cause toning of the coin and they would often bring a premium. Dealers would pop out the coins, sell them and replace them with new white coins witht he intent that those coins would tone as well. Now they are storing the coins using a method "traditionally accepted by numismatists.", but the intent was clearly to produce a marketable toned coin.

 

The coins that have toned in the old NGC slabs have no such intent. No one slabs a coin intending for it to turn color in the holder, and I don't believe NGC designed their slab with the intent that it would tone the coins placed in them. In fact after it was realized that it was happening they changed the design to put the "line" in them to isolate the coin away from the label that was causing the toning. So since there was no intent on either side coins that have toned in the slab would all be NT. Even for coins that were dipped and then turned in the slab. One of the primary beliefs among most collectors is that the slabs will protect the coin FROM toning. So I would say the intent of slabbing a dipped coin would be to keep it white. Any color change would be unintentional and therefor NT.

 

 

I agree with Conder (thumbs u

 

to the extent at the time of grading the consignor did not know the slabbing of the coins in said holders would produce toning. In that regards any color change would be unintentional on either parties part. Toning at the time of encapsulation, on the most part, was deemed less desirable by a lot of collectors.

 

[Dcoin]

Nice pictures of ANACS slabbed coins. Now lets see the before pictures from before the slab toned them. In other words prove that the toning was caused by the slab.

 

I would maintain that the difference between NT and AT does come down to intent. The old double mint set holders were known to cause toning of the coin and they would often bring a premium. Dealers would pop out the coins, sell them and replace them with new white coins witht he intent that those coins would tone as well. Now they are storing the coins using a method "traditionally accepted by numismatists.", but the intent was clearly to produce a marketable toned coin.

 

The coins that have toned in the old NGC slabs have no such intent. No one slabs a coin intending for it to turn color in the holder, and I don't believe NGC designed their slab with the intent that it would tone the coins placed in them. In fact after it was realized that it was happening they changed the design to put the "line" in them to isolate the coin away from the label that was causing the toning. So since there was no intent on either side coins that have toned in the slab would all be NT. Even for coins that were dipped and then turned in the slab. One of the primary beliefs among most collectors is that the slabs will protect the coin FROM toning. So I would say the intent of slabbing a dipped coin would be to keep it white. Any color change would be unintentional and therefor NT.

 

I'm glad I'm in good company. (thumbs u

[MarkFeld]

Nice pictures of ANACS slabbed coins. Now lets see the before pictures from before the slab toned them. In other words prove that the toning was caused by the slab.

 

I would maintain that the difference between NT and AT does come down to intent. The old double mint set holders were known to cause toning of the coin and they would often bring a premium. Dealers would pop out the coins, sell them and replace them with new white coins witht he intent that those coins would tone as well. Now they are storing the coins using a method "traditionally accepted by numismatists.", but the intent was clearly to produce a marketable toned coin.

 

The coins that have toned in the old NGC slabs have no such intent. No one slabs a coin intending for it to turn color in the holder, and I don't believe NGC designed their slab with the intent that it would tone the coins placed in them. In fact after it was realized that it was happening they changed the design to put the "line" in them to isolate the coin away from the label that was causing the toning. So since there was no intent on either side coins that have toned in the slab would all be NT. Even for coins that were dipped and then turned in the slab. One of the primary beliefs among most collectors is that the slabs will protect the coin FROM toning. So I would say the intent of slabbing a dipped coin would be to keep it white. Any color change would be unintentional and therefor NT.

 

 

I agree with Conder (thumbs u

I don't.

 

Under the above line of reasoning, once it it known by certain people that a given type of grading company's (or other) holder causes desirable toning, and/so they use the holders, they would have "intent". But those who are unaware of the toning produced by the holders would not have "intent".

 

Yet, in each case, the holders used by each group of individuals and the results would be the same. To me, it doesn't make sense to call coins submitted by those with intent, AT, and the coins submitted by those without intent, NT.

 

Ditto for inserting coins into mint set holders from the 50's, in the hopes that the coins will tone. Such coins are no more AT than than they would be if they had been ordered from the Mint at the time of issue and left in the holders.

[ModCrewman-migration]

Reading throught this thread made me wonder as to the status of PCGS's suit against the "Coin Doctors". Is that still going on?

[Lastufka Collection]

Sorry for the n00b question, but am I right in assuming that holders no longer tone coins at all? I can only imagine the "X" pattern toning NGC's pronged holders would cause if not.

[James_OldeTowne]

Reading throught this thread made me wonder as to the status of PCGS's suit against the "Coin Doctors". Is that still going on?

PCGS lost the suit, and in an eventful turnaround, is now being sued by the alleged coin doctors.

[MarkFeld]

Reading throught this thread made me wonder as to the status of PCGS's suit against the "Coin Doctors". Is that still going on?

PCGS lost the suit, and in an eventful turnaround, is now being sued by the alleged coin doctors.

To my knowledge, that is incorrect, as the lawsuit is not yet over.

[Conder101]

Under the above line of reasoning, once it it known by certain people that a given type of grading company's (or other) holder causes desirable toning, and/so they use the holders, they would have "intent". But those who are unaware of the toning produced by the holders would not have "intent".

Even though the slabs toned the coins, it still was not a fast process. Most holder generations lasted no more than a couple years so by the time it was known that they toned the coins, the holders had changed. How do you put coins, with intent, into slabs that were no longer being produced?

[Kurtdog]

Reading throught this thread made me wonder as to the status of PCGS's suit against the "Coin Doctors". Is that still going on?

PCGS lost the suit, and in an eventful turnaround, is now being sued by the alleged coin doctors.

They failed to serve the complaint on any of the named defendants and got kicked out of court for it. I think they filed it simply for publicity purposes.

 

On your question, I've certainly heard of coins changing in the slabs. I suppose that's understandable; after all, the slabs aren't vacuum-sealed. My take on the "NT/AT" controversy, generally, is, when toning doesn’t affect the underlying technical or condition grade of the coin, there’s no good reason some toned coins should go “no-grade” for the toning, or, in effect, be taken off the market for it. FWIW...