• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Cleaned?

36 posts in this topic

http://www.teletrade.com/coins/lot.asp?auction=3360&lot=1574

 

I bought this coin through a Teletrade auction then sent it in to try to get into an NGC holder; greater market acceptability. I was looking for feedback on why it no graded at NGC? BTW it was sent in, in the ICG holder.

 

Here is the certification number for image look-up: 2590193-001.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks dipped to me also.

 

It's AU but all of the recessed areas are clean and have a flat greyish color to them, especially in the hair. The edges of the coin look to be a different color as well.......as if something was removed.

 

I'm thinking somebody didn't appreciate this coin in it's natural state and it makes me wonder what the coin looked like before the "necessary" cleaning took place.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then how do you get ICG to give the coin AU58 which also has a series of graders who have to give a thumbs up to such coins? I ran the image by a Bust half collector and he thought it was a good coin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you realize they would crack it out? ->

 

Coins graded by services other than PCGS are not eligible for the CrossOver service. They must be removed from their holder prior to being graded. NGC can remove coins from these holders when submissions are accompanied by a coin removal consent form [pdf]. A form must accompany each applicable submission invoice.

 

 

Grading services give their professional opinion and do not always agree.

 

 

The color seems odd to me, and is that a swipe across the obverse field/face or toning?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then how do you get ICG to give the coin AU58 which also has a series of graders who have to give a thumbs up to such coins? I ran the image by a Bust half collector and he thought it was a good coin.

 

TPG grading is useless if the collector himself cannot grade a coin.

 

You should've been able to tell from the Teletrade listing that, as mentioned before, the coin is lackluster, literally and figuratively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best you could say for this piece is "over dipped." It may have had something worse done to it like too much baking soda. Baking soda can be used as an abrasive cleaner on old silver. Old time dealers used to remove tarnish. Unfortunately it also removes mint surface. This coin looks that way to me. It's got "meat" (detail), but the surfaces are pasty white with no luster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then how do you get ICG to give the coin AU58 which also has a series of graders who have to give a thumbs up to such coins?

 

Not to be sarcastic but.....They're ICG. You said it yourself " try to get it into an NGC holder; greater market acceptability"

 

I'm not sure who the collector was that advised you on this coin but, from the images I've seen, this coin has issues and I would agree with NGC on the grade.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on the images, I would have thought the coin had a decent chance to get into a problem-free holder.

 

However, 1) grading is subjective and inconsistent and 2) I might have a very different opinion of the coin, were I to view it in hand.

 

I think a number of respondents might have been biased, by knowing, in advance, that the coin had failed to grade at NGC. It would have been interesting to see the comments, in the absence of such information.

 

You sure seem to have a lot of problems with coins and grading. You might consider buying the coins only if/when they are already in the holder of your choice. It can save a lot of aggravation, stress, time and money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Mark Feld – absent on the information provided and based only on the image I would have though the coin would have made it into a problem free holder. Teletrade images are often washed out and do not properly reflect what the coin would look like in hand.

 

Here is a coin with a similar look I had many years ago .

131456.jpg.fefca91621976c88c9fd46cd334bbbc4.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Mark Feld – absent on the information provided and based only on the image I would have though the coin would have made it into a problem free holder. Teletrade images are often washed out and do not properly reflect what the coin would look like in hand.

 

Here is a coin with a similar look I had many years ago .

 

 

Mark, I can at least see some luster in your coin. The coin in question looks completely flat to me, white/gray and ashey in appearance.

It looks like the cleaning may have been done long ago as some toning is starting to come back. It just doesn't look right to me. (Teletrade & NGC images)

 

I'm going to agree with NGC on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Mark Feld – absent on the information provided and based only on the image I would have though the coin would have made it into a problem free holder. Teletrade images are often washed out and do not properly reflect what the coin would look like in hand.

 

Here is a coin with a similar look I had many years ago .

 

 

Mark, I can at least see some luster in your coin. The coin in question looks completely flat to me, white/gray and ashey in appearance.

It looks like the cleaning may have been done long ago as some toning is starting to come back. It just doesn't look right to me. (Teletrade & NGC images)

 

I'm going to agree with NGC on this one.

 

 

My coin was dipped and yes it had luster but it was muted. It was one of my many sight unseen Heritage purchases that I subsequently sold on Ebay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dipped several times (or for too long); also it's not AU -- it's a nice EF coin. (Neither of the pictured coins should be called "AU-58.")

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Mark Feld – absent on the information provided and based only on the image I would have though the coin would have made it into a problem free holder. Teletrade images are often washed out and do not properly reflect what the coin would look like in hand.

 

Here is a coin with a similar look I had many years ago .

 

 

Mark, I can at least see some luster in your coin. The coin in question looks completely flat to me, white/gray and ashey in appearance.

It looks like the cleaning may have been done long ago as some toning is starting to come back. It just doesn't look right to me. (Teletrade & NGC images)

 

I'm going to agree with NGC on this one.

 

 

My coin was dipped and yes it had luster but it was muted. It was one of my many sight unseen Heritage purchases that I subsequently sold on Ebay.

 

Another thing that I like about your coin is the presence of material on the surface of the coin. Throughout the stars and in the recessed areas. I would expect an EF/AU coin showing the amount of wear that the original coin has to at least have something on the surface.

Not only is there nothing on it, the areas where the material used to be is a different color.

Funny how grading can be so subjective. I look at this coin and it speaks to me, it says "run........faster"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dipped several times (or for too long); also it's not AU -- it's a nice EF coin. (Neither of the pictured coins should be called "AU-58.")

 

Both coin have at least Au 55 details. I am not going to split hairs on the grade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Mark Feld – absent on the information provided and based only on the image I would have though the coin would have made it into a problem free holder. Teletrade images are often washed out and do not properly reflect what the coin would look like in hand.

 

Here is a coin with a similar look I had many years ago .

 

 

Mark, I can at least see some luster in your coin. The coin in question looks completely flat to me, white/gray and ashey in appearance.

It looks like the cleaning may have been done long ago as some toning is starting to come back. It just doesn't look right to me. (Teletrade & NGC images)

 

I'm going to agree with NGC on this one.

 

 

My coin was dipped and yes it had luster but it was muted. It was one of my many sight unseen Heritage purchases that I subsequently sold on Ebay.

 

Another thing that I like about your coin is the presence of material on the surface of the coin. Throughout the stars and in the recessed areas. I would expect an EF/AU coin showing the amount of wear that the original coin has to at least have something on the surface.

Not only is there nothing on it, the areas where the material used to be is a different color.

Funny how grading can be so subjective. I look at this coin and it speaks to me, it says "run........faster"

 

If that coin says "run...faster" to you, then a great many others graded AU by both NGC and PCGS would say the same to you. And ditto for some that have received MS grades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no "hair to split." There is only one About Uncirculated "grade" and that is AU-58 - a trace of wear. The other designations are simply deceptive ways of describing coins in Extremely Fine condition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no "hair to split." There is only one About Uncirculated "grade" and that is AU-58 - a trace of wear. The other designations are simply deceptive ways of describing coins in Extremely Fine condition.

 

Hogwash. How do you propose that "about" and "trace of wear" be defined, so as to be objective and objectively applied?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no "hair to split." There is only one About Uncirculated "grade" and that is AU-58 - a trace of wear. The other designations are simply deceptive ways of describing coins in Extremely Fine condition.

 

Hogwash. How do you propose that "about" and "trace of wear" be defined, so as to be objective and objectively applied?

 

+ ! !!!!

 

RWB - your comment really makes no sense. I have a lot of Bust Half dollars , there is a big difference between Au 58 and XF 45 .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Mark Feld – absent on the information provided and based only on the image I would have though the coin would have made it into a problem free holder. Teletrade images are often washed out and do not properly reflect what the coin would look like in hand.

 

Here is a coin with a similar look I had many years ago .

 

 

Mark, I can at least see some luster in your coin. The coin in question looks completely flat to me, white/gray and ashey in appearance.

It looks like the cleaning may have been done long ago as some toning is starting to come back. It just doesn't look right to me. (Teletrade & NGC images)

 

I'm going to agree with NGC on this one.

 

 

My coin was dipped and yes it had luster but it was muted. It was one of my many sight unseen Heritage purchases that I subsequently sold on Ebay.

 

Another thing that I like about your coin is the presence of material on the surface of the coin. Throughout the stars and in the recessed areas. I would expect an EF/AU coin showing the amount of wear that the original coin has to at least have something on the surface.

Not only is there nothing on it, the areas where the material used to be is a different color.

Funny how grading can be so subjective. I look at this coin and it speaks to me, it says "run........faster"

 

If that coin says "run...faster" to you, then a great many others graded AU by both NGC and PCGS would say the same to you. And ditto for some that have received MS grades.

 

I'm sure you're correct.

I don't like the look and it looks suspect enough, to me, to pass and look for something better.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel over 99.9% of larger coins near 200 years old have been cleaned at some level at some time in their existence - so what do the TPGs do with them...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel over 99.9% of larger coins near 200 years old have been cleaned at some level at some time in their existence - so what do the TPGs do with them...

 

More than 999 out of every 1000? Really?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not "hog wash" - just standard grading without the hype; and no grading - as you fully know - has ever been objective. Read the definition of "AU" by some standard authoritative sources - then do some thinking for yourself. Of course, being a dealer, you must follow the $$$.

 

As to Mark T's comment - you are right on target...and there is a huge difference between AU-58 and anything with more wear. The halves in the photos above are not AU - the wear is far beyond what any reasonable person would call "a trace." Of course, if one is selling, then calling stuff "AU" when it is not is a great way to make extra money. However, they seem to be mostly the same people who buy only by deprecating the AU-55 into "really a low end EF," or other such twisted logic.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not "hog wash" - just standard grading without the hype; and no grading - as you fully know - has ever been objective. Read the definition of "AU" by some standard authoritative sources - then do some thinking for yourself. Of course, being a dealer, you must follow the $$$.

 

As to Mark T's comment - you are right on target...and there is a huge difference between AU-58 and anything with more wear. The halves in the photos above are not AU - the wear is far beyond what any reasonable person would call "a trace." Of course, if one is selling, then calling stuff "AU" when it is not is a great way to make extra money. However, they seem to be mostly the same people who buy only by deprecating the AU-55 into "really a low end EF," or other such twisted logic.

I don’t want to start a war here but you are dead wrong. There is minimal wear on both coins posted here, they are not even close to XF.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on the images, I would have thought the coin had a decent chance to get into a problem-free holder.

 

However, 1) grading is subjective and inconsistent and 2) I might have a very different opinion of the coin, were I to view it in hand.

 

I think a number of respondents might have been biased, by knowing, in advance, that the coin had failed to grade at NGC. It would have been interesting to see the comments, in the absence of such information.

 

You sure seem to have a lot of problems with coins and grading. You might consider buying the coins only if/when they are already in the holder of your choice. It can save a lot of aggravation, stress, time and money.

 

(thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites