• 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.

NT or AT?

Started by Afterword,

39 posts in this topic

coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted

So as I understand, you are asking us what we think the TPG said and not our personal opinions.

 

Coin #1) MA and in this context, that is what matters.

Coin #2) I have seen coins like this in slabs, but it could go either way. Regardless, I don't care for it, and it looks like a liquid was pooled on the obverse to me. Personally, I don't think it is original.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Afterword

Afterword

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The TPGs have had their say. Now I am asking for other opinions - AT or NT, or MA or not MA, whatever works for the individual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted
not market acceptable

 

I agree with those questioning the first piece, but I "voted" market acceptable since I have seen several pieces like it in NGC holders, and was defining market acceptable as "accepted by the TPGs."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
e1cnr

e1cnr

Posted
Posted

I have seen similar to the first from old PCI slabs (frequently saying 95% or 100% white - but being in that slab 15-20 years)

 

so I will go NT first

AT 2nd

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted

I am not at all surprised by the first one because, as I said, I have seen NGC holder several like it in the past with straight grades. I am, however, very surprised that PCGS holdered the second coin, which has issues that I think are even more problematic. It looks as if fluid had pooled on the obverse of the piece. Even though it is is not perfect, these two coins illustrate one of the reasons that CAC was created.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Afterword

Afterword

Posted
  • Author
Posted

So, regarding the second coin, you are convinced that you are right and NGC and PCGS are wrong? Interesting.

 

If the coin failed to sticker, would you assume it was because of pooled fluid?

 

I am trying to understand your apparent confidence in your ability to make these determinations.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BillJones

BillJones

Posted
Posted
So, regarding the second coin, you are convinced that you are right and NGC and PCGS are wrong? Interesting.

 

If the coin failed to sticker, would you assume it was because of pooled fluid?

 

I am trying to understand your apparent confidence in your ability to make these determinations.

 

 

Factor that some of you guys fail to appreciate is that the grading services and CAC are not perfect; they are not gods. They can get it wrong, and there is a concept known as "market acceptable" that allows some things to run the gauntlet and come out on the other side with a straight grade under certain circumstances, but not others.

 

"Market acceptable" is a shadowy concept. Some coins that are graded at one period of time, might get a "details" grade now if one were to crack them out and re-submit them.

 

A lot of people think that PCGS "rattle holders" and those holders with green labels are all conservatively graded or even under graded. While there are instances were that is true, you can't take it as a fact in all cases. I've seen "rattle holder" coins that there over graded, and I've seen green label pieces that would get a "details" grade if you tried to re-submit them.

 

I don't care for the look of either of these Peace Dollars, but there is a contingent of collectors who are so obsessed with finding attractively toned Peace Dollars that they were grasp at straws. To me these coins are "straws." Yes, they are toned, but no, I don't find them attractive. You must take into account that I don't pay big premiums for toned coins. I do pay premiums for coins that appear to have original surfaces, although what I am willing to pay is far from multiples of the "normal" prices, the way that some people who are into toned coins pay.

 

You best defense in avoiding getting taken in the coin market is learn how to grade coins and to think for yourself. Yes, CAC, NGC and PCGS provide indicators of good coins and "market acceptable" coins, but they are not foolproof.

 

When the grading services came into existence, some people thought they would be like a brand name on a can of peas. If it said "Del Monte" on the label that contents had to be good. The trouble is when you are dealing with antiques that can be centuries old, there are variations in expert perceptions, and those variations can sometimes make all the difference.

 

rantrant

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
So, regarding the second coin, you are convinced that you are right and NGC and PCGS are wrong? Interesting.

 

If the coin failed to sticker, would you assume it was because of pooled fluid?

 

I am trying to understand your apparent confidence in your ability to make these determinations.

 

 

I don't see where he indicated he was "right" or that anyone else was "wrong". Can't someone have a different opinion, without it implying those conclusions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Afterword

Afterword

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I have no doubt that TPGs can be wrong. Just as you and I can be wrong.

 

There are very few things in life that I believe with confidence that I am right about. Determining whether or not a coin is AT or NT certainly is not one of them. Any display of confidence regarding AT or NT I find intriguing.

 

I happen to find this kind of toning attractive. Fortunately, I do not have to pay large premiums for them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Afterword

Afterword

Posted
  • Author
Posted
So, regarding the second coin, you are convinced that you are right and NGC and PCGS are wrong? Interesting.

 

If the coin failed to sticker, would you assume it was because of pooled fluid?

 

I am trying to understand your apparent confidence in your ability to make these determinations.

 

 

I don't see where he indicated he was "right" or that anyone else was "wrong". Can't someone have a different opinion, without it implying those conclusions?

 

 

 

 

I suppose it is possible. I suppose it is also possible that I misinterpreted his reference to CAC, but I would never know without asking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted
So, regarding the second coin, you are convinced that you are right and NGC and PCGS are wrong? Interesting.

 

If the coin failed to sticker, would you assume it was because of pooled fluid?

 

I am trying to understand your apparent confidence in your ability to make these determinations.

 

 

No, my opinion would be the same even if CAC elected to sticker the coin. To me it looks very suspicious and nothing that a TPG or CAC says would change my mind. And I think the larger market would agree and this will be reflected ultimately in the price and liquidity of the piece.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr.Mcknowitall

Mr.Mcknowitall

Posted
Posted
So, regarding the second coin, you are convinced that you are right and NGC and PCGS are wrong? Interesting.

 

If the coin failed to sticker, would you assume it was because of pooled fluid?

 

I am trying to understand your apparent confidence in your ability to make these determinations.

 

 

I don't see where he indicated he was "right" or that anyone else was "wrong". Can't someone have a different opinion, without it implying those conclusions?

 

I don't know, I can't possibly know the intent of the writer of the words. However, I interpreted the words and the phrasing and the coupling of a 4PG Entity reason for existence as collectively creating a finite opinion of fact. Words mean something, and when taken as a whole, convey intent of the wording. It is the duty of the writer to clarify, not the reader. It is reasonable to interpret an adamant righteousness of the wording, in this case, I think. That is just my opinion, of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr.Mcknowitall

Mr.Mcknowitall

Posted
Posted
So, regarding the second coin, you are convinced that you are right and NGC and PCGS are wrong? Interesting.

 

If the coin failed to sticker, would you assume it was because of pooled fluid?

 

I am trying to understand your apparent confidence in your ability to make these determinations.

 

 

No, my opinion would be the same even if CAC elected to sticker the coin. To me it looks very suspicious and nothing that a TPG or CAC says would change my mind. And I think the larger market would agree and this will be reflected ultimately in the price and liquidity of the piece.

 

Now, that may be stretching opinion, just a little. After all, it is a picture, and you have not seen the coin in hand, have you?

 

If, in one post, one of the reasons posited for the existence of the 4PG is to referee coins such as this, then stating in another Post that the referee won't change a negative opinion of fact, even if they bless the coin, renders your position a little difficult to decipher, and subjects the reader to emotional distress of intent of the opinion offered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted
So, regarding the second coin, you are convinced that you are right and NGC and PCGS are wrong? Interesting.

 

If the coin failed to sticker, would you assume it was because of pooled fluid?

 

I am trying to understand your apparent confidence in your ability to make these determinations.

 

 

No, my opinion would be the same even if CAC elected to sticker the coin. To me it looks very suspicious and nothing that a TPG or CAC says would change my mind. And I think the larger market would agree and this will be reflected ultimately in the price and liquidity of the piece.

 

Now, that may be stretching opinion, just a little. After all, it is a picture, and you have not seen the coin in hand, have you?

 

If, in one post, one of the reasons posited for the existence of the 4PG is to referee coins such as this, then stating in another Post that the referee won't change a negative opinion of fact, even if they bless the coin, renders your position a little difficult to decipher, and subjects the reader to emotional distress of intent of the opinion offered.

 

Of course my opinions are based on the images, and I might feel differently if the coin looked drastically different in hand. Nevertheless, I have seen several coins like the first one, including some in hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Afterword

Afterword

Posted
  • Author
Posted
So, regarding the second coin, you are convinced that you are right and NGC and PCGS are wrong? Interesting.

 

If the coin failed to sticker, would you assume it was because of pooled fluid?

 

I am trying to understand your apparent confidence in your ability to make these determinations.

 

 

No, my opinion would be the same even if CAC elected to sticker the coin. To me it looks very suspicious and nothing that a TPG or CAC says would change my mind. And I think the larger market would agree and this will be reflected ultimately in the price and liquidity of the piece.

 

 

 

 

It is possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr.Mcknowitall

Mr.Mcknowitall

Posted
Posted
So, regarding the second coin, you are convinced that you are right and NGC and PCGS are wrong? Interesting.

 

If the coin failed to sticker, would you assume it was because of pooled fluid?

 

I am trying to understand your apparent confidence in your ability to make these determinations.

 

 

No, my opinion would be the same even if CAC elected to sticker the coin. To me it looks very suspicious and nothing that a TPG or CAC says would change my mind. And I think the larger market would agree and this will be reflected ultimately in the price and liquidity of the piece.

 

Now, that may be stretching opinion, just a little. After all, it is a picture, and you have not seen the coin in hand, have you?

 

If, in one post, one of the reasons posited for the existence of the 4PG is to referee coins such as this, then stating in another Post that the referee won't change a negative opinion of fact, even if they bless the coin, renders your position a little difficult to decipher, and subjects the reader to emotional distress of intent of the opinion offered.

 

Of course my opinions are based on the images, and I might feel differently if the coin looked drastically different in hand. Nevertheless, I have seen several coins like the first one, including some in hand.

 

Reasonable position. Others will see something a little different in a picture than you or I might, based on color spectrum, depth perception, etc., of the person viewing the picture....or the coin in hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jom

jom

Posted
Posted

The question whether or not the TPGs were right or wrong on whether the coins were AT or NT isn't the issue. It is a case of market acceptability. In both cases the TPGs felt these were MA and have given the appropriate guarantee by grading it. It is the TPGs responsibility now if anything happens (such as the coin turning in the holder or whatever).

 

If the TPG is willing to do the guarantee then they have the right to call it MA.

 

Whether these coins were "cooked" is another matter entirely. Personally, I wouldn't purchase either one but I'm not a PD fan anyway...

 

jom

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catbert

Catbert

Posted
Posted

I like Peace Dollars, but not those for my collection. If they bring you joy, then bravo!

 

I would have guessed they would have gotten a details grade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
The question whether or not the TPGs were right or wrong on whether the coins were AT or NT isn't the issue. It is a case of market acceptability. In both cases the TPGs felt these were MA and have given the appropriate guarantee by grading it. It is the TPGs responsibility now if anything happens (such as the coin turning in the holder or whatever).

 

If the TPG is willing to do the guarantee then they have the right to call it MA.

 

Whether these coins were "cooked" is another matter entirely. Personally, I wouldn't purchase either one but I'm not a PD fan anyway...

 

jom

 

I'm not aware that the TPGs guarantee coins won't turn in the holder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing