Opinion's on this unique toned morgan from teletrade.

[Mark T]

I don't care how it got the color that is one cool looking coin.

If it was raw I admit I would have said it was AT .

[newprepper]

I don't think I would have said AT, I admit I know nothing about the color progression on NT coins, but the blatant examples of AT are usually prettier across the coin, there are no spots left, like the tan stripe down the middle, that seems to me to be ALMOST proof it's NT. And I absolutely love the blues on this one. Just my cents worth

[lehigh96]

I don't see anybody saying the single colors are AT.

 

Let's test that theory out, shall we!

 

[lehigh96]

If there were actions taken by someone whose intent was to tone a coin, how can one ignore that fact and call it NT? And if you do, why stop there ... why don't we use the term when direct heat or chemical fumes are induced to tone a coin ... after all, these too are just extreme environments just less so than other methodologies. There is no right or wrong answer here, just personal beliefs, but I still feel intent and time are important factors

 

Please explain to me how a professional grader is supposed to determine "intent?"

[newprepper]

I don't see anybody saying the single colors are AT.

 

Let's test that theory out, shall we!

 

 

I have a dime from a roll that is starting to tone green, no where near a vivid as yours, that is sweet.

[coinman_23885]

I don't see anybody saying the single colors are AT.

 

Let's test that theory out, shall we!

 

 

I love the dime. I don't think I have seen such a nicely toned clad coin before.

[grip]

I don't see anybody saying the single colors are AT.

 

Let's test that theory out, shall we!

 

 

I love the dime. I don't think I have seen such a nicely toned clad coin before.

 

1+ (thumbs u

[newprepper]

I don't see anybody saying the single colors are AT.

 

Let's test that theory out, shall we!

 

 

Looks like you failed your test so far!!!haha

[Kurtdog]

I beg to differ. Strictly speaking any human action is by primary definition artificial. Check any dictionary. The placing of a coin in an envelope is an artificial action. The placing of a coin in a slab is an artificial action.

 

So the question becomes can an artificial action give rise to a natural consequence. The answer IMO is no. But I am left with a conundrum. It is my experience that human behavior is part of natural behavior. Ergo, I refute the primary definition. Now we enter the nebulous area of intent. True intent may be inferred but never defined. Albums known for inducing toning, Taco Bell Napkins etal.

 

That my friends is why we have entered into the area of Market Acceptable. MA is a fuzzy definition of what TPG s and collectors think will sell on the open market. MA is not a decision regarding the processes that gave rise to the toning on a coin. Rather it is an affirmation that the TPG s and collectors believe that the toning on a coin will be marketable.

 

Carl

That's all there is to it, Carl. Very good. Put another way, "MA" is but the preferences of the TPGs. They make their market in the way they exercise those preferences. Of course, don't tell them that, ATS. There, with that coin sniffer they've got, they think it's forensic science. Given the way they censor speech, there, one hardly wonders why they never ascend to the level of understanding, it's pretentious nonsense. That's what censorship does, though, to a forum. That's the drawback of it.

[lehigh96]

I don't see anybody saying the single colors are AT.

 

Let's test that theory out, shall we!

 

 

Looks like you failed your test so far!!!haha

 

They said they liked it, I didn't hear any of them say they thought the toning was NT. And if they do say that, I will lose respect for their opinion about the toning topic in the future. It is a pretty coin, but the toning is absolutely questionable and it should not reside in a problem free holder.

[MarkFeld]

I don't see anybody saying the single colors are AT.

 

Let's test that theory out, shall we!

 

 

Looks like you failed your test so far!!!haha

 

They said they liked it, I didn't hear any of them say they thought the toning was NT. And if they do say that, I will lose respect for their opinion about the toning topic in the future. It is a pretty coin, but the toning is absolutely questionable and it should not reside in a problem free holder.

 

I can't imagine losing respect for someone, merely based on their having a different opinion than mine, regarding a coin looking NT or AT.

[Kurtdog]

I don't see anybody saying the single colors are AT.

 

Let's test that theory out, shall we!

 

Looks like you failed your test so far!!!haha

They said they liked it, I didn't hear any of them say they thought the toning was NT. And if they do say that, I will lose respect for their opinion about the toning topic in the future. It is a pretty coin, but the toning is absolutely questionable and it should not reside in a problem free holder.

When you maintain those arbitrary distinctions (i.e., "NT" and "AT"), that coin is obviously in trouble, whether that tarnish is "blessed" (i.e., considered "market acceptable" to the TPGs), or not. There was a time when all tarnish had been considered by collectors to be tantamount to "environmental damage," and there are collectors, today, who still maintain that to be the case. Lose those illusory terms and judge the coins on their own merits without regard to those fictitious standards. That's what every kid in my kid's coin club has learned to do. It's what every kid in his network of coin clubs all across the country has learned to do. Those arbitrary terms aren't even so much as in those kids' vocabulary. They aren't judging tarnish under any such delusions. They shook those off, years ago.

[lehigh96]

I don't see anybody saying the single colors are AT.

 

Let's test that theory out, shall we!

 

Looks like you failed your test so far!!!haha

They said they liked it, I didn't hear any of them say they thought the toning was NT. And if they do say that, I will lose respect for their opinion about the toning topic in the future. It is a pretty coin, but the toning is absolutely questionable and it should not reside in a problem free holder.

When you maintain those arbitrary distinctions (i.e., "NT" and "AT"), that coin is obviously in trouble, whether that tarnish is "blessed" (i.e., considered "market acceptable" to the TPGs), or not. There was a time when all tarnish had been considered by collectors to be tantamount to "environmental damage," and there are collectors, today, who still maintain that to be the case. Lose those illusory terms and judge the coins on their own merits without regard to those fictitious standards. That's what every kid in my kid's coin club has learned to do. It's what every kid in his network of coin clubs all across the country has learned to do. Those arbitrary terms aren't even so much as in those kids' vocabulary. They aren't judging tarnish under any such delusions. They shook those off, years ago.

 

How does a kid shake something off years ago?

[lehigh96]

I don't see anybody saying the single colors are AT.

 

Let's test that theory out, shall we!

 

 

Looks like you failed your test so far!!!haha

 

They said they liked it, I didn't hear any of them say they thought the toning was NT. And if they do say that, I will lose respect for their opinion about the toning topic in the future. It is a pretty coin, but the toning is absolutely questionable and it should not reside in a problem free holder.

 

I can't imagine losing respect for someone, merely based on their having a different opinion than mine, regarding a coin looking NT or AT.

 

That isn't what I said. I said I would lose respect for their opinion about toning. The way you put it, sounds like I wrote them off as a human being all together.

[Kurtdog]

I don't see anybody saying the single colors are AT.

Let's test that theory out, shall we!

 

Looks like you failed your test so far!!!haha

They said they liked it, I didn't hear any of them say they thought the toning was NT. And if they do say that, I will lose respect for their opinion about the toning topic in the future. It is a pretty coin, but the toning is absolutely questionable and it should not reside in a problem free holder.

When you maintain those arbitrary distinctions (i.e., "NT" and "AT"), that coin is obviously in trouble, whether that tarnish is "blessed" (i.e., considered "market acceptable" to the TPGs), or not. There was a time when all tarnish had been considered by collectors to be tantamount to "environmental damage," and there are collectors, today, who still maintain that to be the case. Lose those illusory terms and judge the coins on their own merits without regard to those fictitious standards. That's what every kid in my kid's coin club has learned to do. It's what every kid in his network of coin clubs all across the country has learned to do. Those arbitrary terms aren't even so much as in those kids' vocabulary. They aren't judging tarnish under any such delusions. They shook those off, years ago.

How does a kid shake something off years ago?

They shook those delusional standards off when they first heard of them. It didn't take long. Don't get me wrong, they'd gladly acknowledge premiums for your tarnished coins. In fact, tarnished coins like yours trade among them at premiums all the time. You'll just never get a premium commensurate with the maintenance of those delusional standards out of them. They're no saps.

[MarkFeld]

I don't see anybody saying the single colors are AT.

 

Let's test that theory out, shall we!

 

 

Looks like you failed your test so far!!!haha

 

They said they liked it, I didn't hear any of them say they thought the toning was NT. And if they do say that, I will lose respect for their opinion about the toning topic in the future. It is a pretty coin, but the toning is absolutely questionable and it should not reside in a problem free holder.

 

I can't imagine losing respect for someone, merely based on their having a different opinion than mine, regarding a coin looking NT or AT.

 

That isn't what I said. I said I would lose respect for their opinion about toning. The way you put it, sounds like I wrote them off as a human being all together.

 

My apologies for having mischaracterized your post. Let me respond to what you actually wrote, then. I can't imagine losing respect for someone's opinion about the toning topic in the future, merely based on their having a different opinion than mine, regarding a coin looking NT or AT.

[coinman_23885]

My apologies for having mischaracterized your post. Let me respond to what you actually wrote, then. I can't imagine losing respect for someone's opinion about the toning topic in the future, merely based on their having a different opinion than mine, regarding a coin looking NT or AT.

 

As an aside, what is your opinion on the toning?

[MarkFeld]

My apologies for having mischaracterized your post. Let me respond to what you actually wrote, then. I can't imagine losing respect for someone's opinion about the toning topic in the future, merely based on their having a different opinion than mine, regarding a coin looking NT or AT.

 

As an aside, what is your opinion on the toning?

 

I rarely view Roosevelt dimes, so I don't have as much confidence in my opinion as I would for a coin/type with which I was better acquainted. But the color looks odd/questionable to me.

[coinman_23885]

I don't see anybody saying the single colors are AT.

 

Let's test that theory out, shall we!

 

Looks like you failed your test so far!!!haha

 

They said they liked it, I didn't hear any of them say they thought the toning was NT. And if they do say that, I will lose respect for their opinion about the toning topic in the future. It is a pretty coin, but the toning is absolutely questionable and it should not reside in a problem free holder.

 

You should have been a lawyer Paul because you certainly parsed every word used. You did pick up on the subtle distinction or omission that was intentionally made. I still like it for whatever it is worth... notwithstanding the fact that it probably would not end up in a problem free holder if resubmitted.

[coinman_23885]

My apologies for having mischaracterized your post. Let me respond to what you actually wrote, then. I can't imagine losing respect for someone's opinion about the toning topic in the future, merely based on their having a different opinion than mine, regarding a coin looking NT or AT.

 

As an aside, what is your opinion on the toning?

 

I rarely view Roosevelt dimes, so I don't have as much confidence in my opinion as I would for a coin/type with which I was better acquainted. But the color looks odd/questionable to me.

 

Thanks for responding. I know that sometimes you will use similar language when you disagree with an opinion posted, and I had wondered if there had been something I had missed (if you opined that it was NT).

[newprepper]

As I stated earlier, I have a roosevelt dime from a bank roll that has a faint green cast to it. Origins? who knows

[coinman_23885]

As I stated earlier, I have a roosevelt dime from a bank roll that has a faint green cast to it. Origins? who knows

 

It doesn't look like Paul's coin though, does it?

[newprepper]

no where near as vibrant, but it is a pretty green

[Kurtdog]

As I stated earlier, I have a roosevelt dime from a bank roll that has a faint green cast to it. Origins? who knows

Do you have a picture of it you can show us? If you don't, that's OK. I'm thinking, though, if there are two of them, that's proof they're NT. Unless they came from the same seller, then they might be AT. Unless he didn't intend they tarnish green, in which case, they'd be back to NT. If we couldn't determine the seller's state of mind, then, I'd suppose, they'd be QT. I'm no "expert," though.

 

It might even be a proof coin.

[kryptonitecomics]

I haven't read through this whole post so I will just respond in reference to the original coin.....It looks completely NT to me but I don't think the coin is worth half of what was paid for it. I don't have a problem with someone overpaying for a coin they want for their collection as I have done it plenty of times but I always look at a coins sale price and determine if I think the sale could be duplicated. In this case...I think 9 out of 10 times this coin doesn't pull $1200 so for me that means the buyer is buried in the coin.

[newprepper]

As I stated earlier, I have a roosevelt dime from a bank roll that has a faint green cast to it. Origins? who knows

Do you have a picture of it you can show us? If you don't, that's OK. I'm thinking, though, if there are two of them, that's proof they're NT. Unless they came from the same seller, then they might be AT. Unless he didn't intend they tarnish green, in which case, they'd be back to NT. If we couldn't determine the seller's state of mind, then, I'd suppose, they'd be QT. I'm no "expert," though.

 

It might even be a proof coin.

 

I can try, but I only have a P&S and not very lucky getting stuff to image well.