mkt. acceptable support for a BLUE toned copper doctor....THANKS!! NGC!!

[michael]

 

will YOU put YOUR kids college funds in these ?? will you buy these back..................

 

 

http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=531277

 

 

[WinstonWare]

Hum these must have been submitted recently. That's disappointing. Is there a good way to tell if IHCs have been touched up with MS70 or whatever? I have no knowledge in copper.

[TomB]

As with any other toned coin, it helps if you can detect a patina on it. I doubt these blue coppers have a patina on them and would stay away.

[jom]

How does using MS70 (a cleaner) imply "doctoring"? I have to apologise to everyone but IMO this issue is a waste of internet bandwidth...

 

If people would pull their heads out of their bunglehole and QUIT paying stupid prices for toned coins and stop paying huge premiums for small differences in grades this would be a NON-ISSUE....but...alas...this won't happen anytime anytime soon I imagine.

 

jom

[MikeInFL]

How does using MS70 (a cleaner) imply "doctoring"? I have to apologise to everyone but IMO this issue is a waste of internet bandwidth...

 

If people would pull their heads out of their bunglehole and QUIT paying stupid prices for toned coins and stop paying huge premiums for small differences in grades this would be a NON-ISSUE....but...alas...this won't happen anytime anytime soon I imagine.

 

jom

 

Using MS70 to clean/tone coins is doctoring because it adds a color which was not on the coin originally and, in general, leads to a higher grade and money made for those who engage in this behavior. Some try and spin this as conservation -- but let's call a spade a spade -- it is a way to make money off the unsuspecting, and NGC is party to it by certifying these coins.

 

With all due respect, I disagree that this issue is a waste of bandwidth -- many folks have been fooled into buying these doctored coins and often for very high prices -- and posts which point out the real cause of the toning is doing good for the hobby by informing buyers of these coins unnatural past...Mike

[IGWT]

How does using MS70 (a cleaner) imply "doctoring"? I have to apologise to everyone but IMO this issue is a waste of internet bandwidth... If people would pull their heads out of their bunglehole and QUIT paying stupid prices for toned coins and stop paying huge premiums for small differences in grades this would be a NON-ISSUE....but...alas...this won't happen anytime anytime soon I imagine.

 

It would also be a non-issue if the coins weren't "conserved" into a new color. Why do you want to blame those who prefer toned coins instead of those who manufacture them for monetary gain?

[EZ_E]

Bottom line is that the "conserved" coins have better eye-appeal. As long as someone doesn't pay a premium for the "toning" then I think that these are much better looking coins than the dog-snot colored before pictures.

[MikeInFL]

Bottom line is that the "conserved" coins have better eye-appeal. As long as someone doesn't pay a premium for the "toning" then I think that these are much better looking coins than the dog-snot colored before pictures.

 

Three questions...

 

#1 -- Would you buy these coins knowing they have been "conserved"?

 

#2 -- Would you support "conserving" every original coin out there to improve the eye appeal?

 

#3 -- As the TPGs are giving these coins bumps in grade (although less frequently and less of a bump since all this started), aren't they the ones who are assigning the "toning premium"?

[MikeInFL]

The IHC's in question:

 

[hoard]

No, No, and probably. If the grading company is assigning a premium than there is to many a preceived premium in toned coins. I for one like the original toning over the blues and vibrant colors.

[Narmuriel]

Oh No! Here we go again!

 

Maybe something new will come out of this this time around.

 

Winston, how is your experiment with MS70 and old coppers doing?

[WinstonWare]

Ah I didn't know anyone was still interested. I have all the coins for my second try and the MS70, of course. I'll try to do it tomarrow night. The one thing that isn't clear to me is how long to leave the MS70 on the coin. If it doesn't turn blue after x minutes than I would say that it doesn't work but what is x? Your opinion is more than welcome. Thanks

[jom]

Some try and spin this as conservation -- but let's call a spade a spade -- it is a way to make money off the unsuspecting, and NGC is party to it by certifying these coins.

 

First of all why do you care whether someone makes money on a deal? You either like the coin (at that price) or you don't. No one has a gun to your head telling you to buy it. If you think it is too much offer a lower price. If they refuse go find something else. NEXT!

 

Secondly, this issue of coloring or "conservation" is way overblown. People pay these stupid premiums for what they perceive as “originality” but yet I’ve never heard a concrete definition of what “originality” really is. Is it a coin stored in a holder for 10 years? How about 5 years in a somewhat heated environment? How about 2 years in a window seal? How about 3 months in a heated basement with extra sulfur around. How about 3 minutes in microwave? Where to you draw the line? Apparently the TPG’s don’t really know because they are slabbing this AT (based on a non-defined definition) material. Like this is some new amazing revelation….

 

For that matter who the hell cares what the definition is? It boils down (no pun intended) to what you LIKE or don’t like. Pay the price accordingly.

 

Another problem is that there are too many who are "unsuspecting". IMO, you shouldn't be paying premiums for ANYTHING if you don't know what you are doing....ie someone who is "unsuspecting" I've assumed is not an expert. Then they'll go to the message boards whining they got burned. Boo [embarrassing lack of self control] who. Maybe these dolts ought to take some time and LEARN what they are doing first? Nah...never mind. That's takes too much time and effort. They'd rather spending 6 hours a day posting their gripes on a message board.

 

#1 -- Would you buy these coins knowing they have been "conserved"?

 

How many coins have you bought did you think were conserved? If not, how do you KNOW they were not? Did the TPG tell you so? Does the TPG tell you what coins to buy? Do they tell you want food to eat each day or what clothes to wear?

 

#2 -- Would you support "conserving" every original coin out there to improve the eye appeal?

 

People dip coins all of the time to improve the eye appeal. So what? Either you like it or you don't....again….pay accordingly.

 

#3 -- As the TPGs are giving these coins bumps in grade (although less frequently and less of a bump since all this started), aren't they the ones who are assigning the "toning premium"?

 

Hardly. The marketplace dictates what the prices will be. As long as people continue to pay BIG prices for SMALL differences without really knowing the difference or for any concept of VALUE and as long as buyers continue to believe in a regimented price structure for coins then this will be the hot-button whiny-boy subjects seen on most coins message boards. Wait...I've got an idea! How about not paying absurd premiums for color or FB or MS65? Nah....nevermind....I'd rather have the instant gratification.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again: If you wouldn't buy the coin raw you shouldn't buy it slabbed. And if you don't know what you are doing don't buy ANYTHING.

 

And, yes, it's a waste of bandwidth. I don't mean you should never talk about it but the whole subject of AT (and the subject of grading for that matter) are blown WAY out of proportion. All coins have SOME value. Maybe not these retarded prices people are paying but there is some value. If you like the coin buy it. If not, don't. Really...it IS that simple.

 

jom

 

PS: I just wanted to note that none of the above is directed to anyone in particular. It's nothing more than a rant directed to the group as a whole....coming from prior built up frustration over the years on these subjects.

[Stanley]

(((Ah I didn't know anyone was still interested. I have all the coins for my second try and the MS70, of course. I'll try to do it tomarrow night. The one thing that isn't clear to me is how long to leave the MS70 on the coin. If it doesn't turn blue after x minutes than I would say that it doesn't work but what is x? Your opinion is more than welcome. Thanks )))

 

I’m not wanting to add any fuel to this fire, but it was my understanding that the coins in question had been covered in lacquer or shellac. And upon removal of this coating the vivid colors were exposed. So, if I’m correct in my assessment and unless the coins you are to experiment on were covered with this coating some years ago, then you may not get the same results. I could be wrong.

 

One more factor for you to consider, this act of lets call it conservation was done by an experienced and knowledgeable person.

 

Jom you are correct as long is there is a demand there will be a supply.

[IGWT]

PS: I just wanted to note that none of the above is directed to anyone in particular.

 

I know it's not directed to me, jom, because you didn't answer my question.

[MikeInFL]

Jom,

 

Thank you for not answering my first two questions. Is it safe to assume that your answer is "no" in both cases?

 

As for your answer to the third, I would suggest that NGC, by "market grading" coins, is actually pricing (or ranking) them. While the marketplace is certainly the ultimate arbiter of value, my point was that NGC, by grading them, is putting a "value" on this color -- which was Michael's intent in his original post.

 

Since you mentioned at the end of your post that it was not directed at anyone in particular, I will not answer your questions, but would be more than happy to should you request me to.

 

Take care...Mike

 

p.s. "I've said it before and I'll say it again: If you wouldn't buy the coin raw you shouldn't buy it slabbed. And if you don't know what you are doing don't buy ANYTHING." Superb advice.

[chinook]

Spider,

 

The only coins that were supposedly covered in lacquer were those that were purchased by Rick Snow from the Stacks auction. The coins in this discussion were not covered or coated with lacquer or shellac.

[Stanley]

I stand corrected on the lacquer or shellac issue.

Thanks for pointing that out

[MarkFeld]

I’m not wanting to add any fuel to this fire, but it was my understanding that the coins in question had been covered in lacquer or shellac. And upon removal of this coating the vivid colors were exposed. So, if I’m correct in my assessment and unless the coins you are to experiment on were covered with this coating some years ago, then you may not get the same results. I could be wrong.

 

That was Rick Snow's explanation for the change in appearance/color of a very small group of proof Indian Cents he used acetone on. However, that was NOT the case with many other proof copper coins (a number of which have been pictured in threads here) that have changed in appearance/color, apparently due to the application of MS70.

[Stanley]

I originally was offering my opinion on Winston’s delayed experiment. I must have missed part of the information and thought these all were a part of the same actions, coins and people. Sorry for any confusion I may have caused.

 

Eddited to add : I just reread TomB’s thread again. 3rd paragraph quote: “In my opinion, we have two cases here that are independent of one another”

Tomb thread

Ok, I got it now . flame away

 

 

[Narmuriel]

Ok, I got it now . flame away

 

[jom]

It would also be a non-issue if the coins weren't "conserved" into a new color. Why do you want to blame those who prefer toned coins instead of those who manufacture them for monetary gain?

 

Because they failed to take the time to understand the value of certain coins and didn’t take the time to understand what is “manufactured” and what isn’t. They also put all of their trust in the TPG without understanding the market or coins in general. Then they go blame everyone but themselves when they end up falling on their face. It’s the TPG’s fault! It’s the “doctors’ fault! It’s Michael Jackson’s fault! Maybe these buyers ought to look in the mirror to find the real problem. Stop paying dumb money for color and your “doctor” problem will go away overnight.

 

Look. What are we doing here anyway? We are paying essentially HUGE premiums for pieces of metal that have minimal extrinsic value. Paying $600 for a US Cent is absurd enough let alone $3000 for a “manufactured” blue one. The concept of collecting in the first place is “manufactured”, so why is it such a big deal if someone creates these things?

 

Thank you for not answering my first two questions. Is it safe to assume that your answer is "no" in both cases?

 

Actually my answer IS hidden there but my writing skills are rather lame. My answer to #1 would be a yes and no. I certainly wouldn’t pay $3000 or whatever but I see no reason not to buy it if I liked it. However, since I really have zero interest in IHC I would not pay any money for any of those. A better question might be if I saw a Buffalo nickel (a coin I do collect) that I knew was AT and I like it I might buy it. Why not? As long as I knew the value was within the market price for such a piece…which might be harder than it sounds.

 

#2 was answered as an implied YES. I’ve probably bought dipped coins (improved conservation to original coins for increased eye appeal). If you don’t like the idea of people taking original ugly pieces of crapp (many IHCs fall into this category, IMO) and making them “better” then I suggest you buy all the ones you can find to keep that from happening. There’s certainly nothing wrong with that. However, since there is a glut of garbage coins out there on the market not many people are "fighing the good fight" it seems.

 

Since you mentioned at the end of your post that it was not directed at anyone in particular, I will not answer your questions, but would be more than happy to should you request me to.

 

Well, I didn’t mean it like that. I just meant not to offend anyone for my boisterous grandstanding and loud-mouth ranting. Feel free to answer whatever questions you like....

 

jom

[MikeInFL]

Thanks for taking the time to respond to my questions.

 

If I'm following you...

 

o It's ultimately the collector's fault for paying a premium for artifically toned NGC certified copper.

 

o It's not a big deal that people are "manufacturing" such coins.

 

o You would buy known AT coins if offered at "market price".

 

o You would like to see all coins conserved in order to maximize eye appeal.

 

Interesting perspective. Allow me to retort...

 

While I don't think anybody would call the buyer blameless in this scenario, to infer that they are more culpable than the "manufacturer" or the TPG is to deny that the first is making an overt action to decieve/profit, and the second stamping their seal of approval on it (yet state in no uncertain terms they do not), whereas ignorance and being taken advantage of is perhaps the only shortcoming of the buyer.

 

Assume for a second that a significant portion of your Buffalos were found to be AT. How would you feel? Say it could never happen to you because you're so experienced -- think again -- coins similar to those pictured above have fooled even the very experienced, ones with far more experience than you or I in all likelihood. Alternatively, assume for a second that you had a beautifully toned Buffalo that was an obvious NT coin. Not long afterwards look-alike coins came into the market having been "manufactured", it was subsequently found out, and the bottom fell out of the grades and values of these coins, including your "guilty by association" NT coin, or even worse your five other coins that look the same. How would you feel?

 

To take your laissez-faire numismatic dogma to its extreme, all coins would be conserved to maximize their eye appeal, essentially removing original coins from the market over time. Do you honestly prefer this as the future of numismatics? Or would rather help educate the masses into making more informed decisions and take the wind out of the sails of the manufacturers?

 

Lest you think threads like this have no effect... It is worth noting that the grades being given by NGC subsequent to the last time this came up are signficantly lower than those previously given, yet the look and quality of these coins is unchanged. Do you suppose this is a coincidence?

 

The bottom line, for me, is that information like this thread enhances the hobby in that collectors who read it can make more "informed" purchasing decisions going forward. Given that you subscribe to the buyer being ultimately responsible for making an informed purchasing decision, I find it odd that you consider this thread a "waste of internet bandwidth", but you are certainly entitled to your opinion. Myself, I will value these threads -- where I actually learn something and could quite possibly affect the hobby in a positive way -- as far more valuable than most.

 

Take care...Mike

[WinstonWare]

Easy Spider. My experiment wasn't delayed. The initial experiment used red cents and yielded no results. It was later pointed out to me that my experiment might yield results using brown MS pennies. This is the second experiment – not a delay of the initial experiment.

[IGWT]

Given that you subscribe to the buyer being ultimately responsible for making an informed purchasing decision, I find it odd that you consider this thread a "waste of internet bandwidth" . . .

 

!!!!

[James_OldeTowne]

Some people might think I'm nuts, but BOTH of the "before" images seem to me to depict coins that NEED to be conserved. The 1894 appears to have PVC spots, and the second coin looks like it has slime smeared on it.

 

IF these were conserved for legitimate reasons, and as a byproduct of the curating process, the coins acquired blue color - but are no longer endangered by pollutants, then I think these coins are better off now than they were earlier.

 

If somebody wants to pay big bucks for blue coloration, so be it. I'm not going to sit here and tell them what they can collect.

 

Frankly, I think there's too much hubbub being raised about the whole issue. Collect what you like, right?

 

James

[James_OldeTowne]

((( Three questions...

 

#1 -- Would you buy these coins knowing they have been "conserved"?

 

#2 -- Would you support "conserving" every original coin out there to improve the eye appeal?

 

#3 -- As the TPGs are giving these coins bumps in grade (although less frequently and less of a bump since all this started), aren't they the ones who are assigning the "toning premium"? )))

 

#1 - No, I wouldn't buy them - because I personally don't prefer "blue" Indian head cents. But if I really did want a "blue" IHC, then sure, I'd buy one within my financial ability.

 

#2 - There's something wrong with this question. You can't "conserve" a coin that doesn't have a problem, so most coins can't be conserved (in other words, most coins don't have problems). Not sure what you're asking?

 

#3 - This is what "market grading" is all about, isn't it?

 

James

[Pushkin-migration]

I believe there is more involved than a simple MS 70 dip with the pictured adulterations. The blue obtained from dipping in MS 70 doesn't, IMO, look original. Some Deller's or other sulphur containing compound, mixed with something like Blue Ribbon, then add some heat, dip, work on the copper a little more and you can get some very impressive BLUE AT proofs (don't forget to add some "original mint luster"). I have no doubt that each Dr. Coin has his/her own variation. Some "processes" are not detected, in many cases, by either NGC or PCGS, although PCGS seems to do a better job.

 

It's research like that done in the PCGS thread that is proof that the pictured coins are AT. If anyone wants to end this doctoring they need to follow the coin docs sales and OUT them. Looks like some of the docs are gettting greedy and not covering their tracks.

 

Don't assume the stuff getting slabbed is a simple MS 70 dip, I suspect MS 70 is only part of their black magic equation.

[EZ_E]

Bottom line is that the "conserved" coins have better eye-appeal. As long as someone doesn't pay a premium for the "toning" then I think that these are much better looking coins than the dog-snot colored before pictures.

 

Three questions...

 

#1 -- Would you buy these coins knowing they have been "conserved"?

 

 

Probably not.

 

 

#2 -- Would you support "conserving" every original coin out there to improve the eye appeal?

 

 

Of course not! Most original coins would suffer if everyone took this approach. I much prefer an original coin as long as its eye-appeal is intact. I recently bought a PR 1913 Barber Quarter that was conserved (and the dealer made no mention of this fact and had poor quality photos to boot). It is a great coin except for the fact that it was conserved blast white. It seems to be so out of place. I'm sure that it was conserved to try to get a bump in grade. This is how many dealers make money. It is a gamble which pays off sometimes for them. But yet, as James pointed out, some coins need to be conserved for various reasons.

 

 

#3 -- As the TPGs are giving these coins bumps in grade (although less frequently and less of a bump since all this started), aren't they the ones who are assigning the "toning premium"?

 

 

Sure, you can make an argument for it. But eye-appeal is part of the grade. So why shouldn't the coin get a bump in grade? I don't necessarily like the blue IHC's since the toning lies on the surface of the coin and doesn't come from within it. I have one of these questionable IHC's that came from a "knowledgeable" individual who raved how great and original it was. My instinct at the time told me that it was nothing great despite the speel but it is still a nice type coin for my collection and I didn't pay an unreasonable price for it so I'm cool with the purchase. But I still stand behind my original statement: that is I would much prefer the conserved coin than one in its previous state.

 

[braddick]

NGC has spoken. After the broo-ha-ha a couple of months ago regarding these "MS70'ed" Indians NGC has decided to still holder and grade them. NGC was made aware by more than one participant what is the cause and effect of using MS70 on proof cents. I know because one of those participants told me, on the phone, his conversation with NGC officals.

 

The coins I'm offering were encapsulated after NGC was informed and educated. NGC has deemed these coins to be worthy of their holders, even now, today, after the multiple threads and discussions on both forums as to the validity and value of these coins.

 

I had no opinion, either way, when these were first discussed. In fact, I don't think I contributed to any thread regarding these a couple of months ago. I did read Greg's reply on the NGC forums and it rang true to me.

 

I know many will disagree, but in my opinion, if these are good enough with NGC, and the experts there have decided to continue to grade and holder these Indian cents after all the discussion that has taken place, then it's good enough with me.

If it's not with you, simply don't support the market. Don't purchase them.