The Shocking Truth: You're Clueless. Period. (Not For The Faint of Heart)

[zrlevin]

Sounds good, Arch!

[IGWT]

I think that giving super and CT a sense of some editorial control over what is and isn't moved into that folder seems appropriate? Does anyone disagree?

 

I thought it already worked that way.

[HaydenTubbs]

no complaints...

[Architecht]

I think that giving super and CT a sense of some editorial control over what is and isn't moved into that folder seems appropriate? Does anyone disagree?

 

I thought it already worked that way.

 

Only informally. So far, WYNK posts have all been "part of the program", and I just move WYNK posts. Here we have super and CT upset about their "brand" being borrowed. My point is that just because a post has the WYNK title doesn't mean it will be included in the catalog, and that super and CT ought to feel, again, that they have some control (along with the community as a whole) on that process.

[Stanley]

Your talking administrative control? That will ensure there absolute control.

 

I Vote YES!

[James_OldeTowne]

((( I think that giving super and CT a sense of some editorial control over what is and isn't moved into that folder seems appropriate? Does anyone disagree? )))

 

Works for me!

 

Looks like the title of this thread has been changed - thanks to whomever did so.

 

James

[gmarguli]

Looks like the title of this thread has been changed - thanks to whomever did so.

 

James

 

That would be me. I would have appreciated if supertooth had sent me a PM requesting the change rather than his post, but so be it. I didn't use the title to step on his toes.

[James_OldeTowne]

Greg,

 

THANKS for making the change, on behalf of myself and others who have contributed WYNTK threads.

 

James

[CTcollector]

Looks like the title of this thread has been changed - thanks to whomever did so.

 

James

 

That would be me. I would have appreciated if supertooth had sent me a PM requesting the change rather than his post, but so be it. I didn't use the title to step on his toes.

 

Thanks....

[JamminJ]

That's too bad, this was far more useful than any of the other WYNTK posts.

[MunkyMan95]

 

Although, I agree.

[Stanley]

:signfuny:

 

Although, I agree.

 

[supertooth]

I would like now to respond to this thread. Becoming an expert Numismatist takes years to accomplish. A kid of 10 or an adult new to the hobby at age 40 cannot possibly know what to look for on the bourse floor---or in a coin shop---or even on Ebay. That is unless he or she has help. Even if he asks questions, he may indeed be lied to. Course he will not know this as he will take the dealer's word---or the seller's word as gospel. So, although I agree and have said numerous times on these boards to educate yourselves---to buy books and read them etc.----there is no way that I know of to impart 5 or 10 years worth of Numismatic knowledge into a person----before he or she buys his first grouping of coins. It is human nature to want to buy if you become interested in the hobby. We all must go thru a learning process. We all are at different levels of our education at any given time. But, wherever we are along this process of our educational level, we need to be able to expect 'fair play'. Alas, in today's world, most of the time only profit motivates the seller and there is 'NO level playing field'. The more knowledgable rip off those who do not know or understand that they are being taken for a ride. And, then, if found out, the sellers go to their fallback position----because you were sooooo dumb in buying the coin or coins---- it is your fault. These sellers are soooo numb in their souls that they fail to place any semblance of blame on themselves.

 

Yes, there is artificial toning. If you, the collector or seller or dealer, fool with a coin to create or alter toning, then that toning is AT. Whether it can be proven or not----you know that you did it---the coin is AT. If the person so doctoring a coin then fools a TPGS into holdering it, then they have won. It's all part of "THE GIANT GAME" that they all are playing to make money.

 

Yes, there is such a thing as an 'original' coin. It is a shame that they are being altered each and every day and, because of that, there are fewer to be seen by the general collector. But, they do exist. Anyone who would care to see some nice Walkers----you would be welcome to visit with me to view them. I also have many others that are not Walkers but which are equally 'original'.

 

And finally, if the grading services have sold out and consider certain AT coins as 'market acceptable'----then I say they ought to make that information public in their writings describing their grading etc. It should be available for the collecting public to view and to understand. Otherwise, they become part of the AT problem themselves. This does seem to be what has happened. What a SHAME. Bob [supertooth]

[WinstonWare]

Bob, this is another great post. I couldn’t agree more that NGC needs to take a position on this. I asked them about this yesterday in the, “Ask NGC” section. I guess it is still under review by the moderator.

 

In any event, this is a large crux of the problem. If NGC is knowingly holdering AT coins and only a few people know it, the playing field is uneven. This is not an issue of one not doing their homework. NGC says that they will not holder AT coins and yet they seem to be hedging. If it is their intention to start holdering AT coins then they need to make that information publicly available and even the playing field.

[gmarguli]

In any event, this is a large crux of the problem. If NGC is knowingly holdering AT coins and only a few people know it, the playing field is uneven. This is not an issue of one not doing their homework. NGC says that they will not holder AT coins and yet they seem to be hedging. If it is their intention to start holdering AT coins then they need to make that information publicly available and even the playing field.

 

1) NGC (and the other services) grade coins blindly. They don't know the before or history of the coin. They look at the coin today. Is the coin OK today. If yes, they slab it. To say that NGC is "knowingly holdering AT" coins is completely wrong. They grade like the public should buy - blindly. Do you like it "as is"? Nothing more.

 

2) Who defines AT? What you call AT, I may not, the grading service might say MA, and the next guy might be unsure about AT/NT.

[Elcontador]

Supertooth, both PCGS and NGC have slabbed cleaned coins in some series - like Bust $s - for quite awhile. This is not news.

 

I imagine this decision was made long ago because there are very few original specimens left, and both sides of the street decided that if the cleaning was not too hideous (each service has its own standard for this), they would holder the coin.

 

Administrative decisions change over time re what should and should not be holdered, as well color designations (like on copper, RB used to be 5% of original RD, it is now closer to 25%). I too am awaiting NGC's decision re the blue PF IHCs.

[WinstonWare]

According to H. Robert Campbell in the video “How to Tell Artificial Toning on Coins” - “…A coin doctor is someone who is trying to do the same thing consistently again and again while having the same results…If you can predict the timeline (for a coin to tone), then you’ve crossed the line… If you can’t predict it with any kind of reliability then you’re really not a coin doctor”

 

The NGC Definition is "The term ARTIFICIAL TONING refers to the process

whereby patina is imparted to a coin in an accelerated

reaction process using chemicals and/or heat. In many

cases the purpose is to hide a defect that would otherwise

be detected.

 

ARTIFICIAL COLOR refers to bronze, copper nickel

and copper coins that have been chemically dipped or

cleaned. Under natural conditions, most copper coins will

darken over time, but examples that retain their original

“red” color are highly valued. That’s why “Red Brown” (RB)

or “Brown” (BN) copper coins are sometimes treated to

remove this toning. The resulting color usually has an

unnatural and artificial look."

 

and can be found in the No Grade Booklet You won't have to look far....it's on Page 1

 

So I stand by my statement that if NGC is hedging on grading artificially toned coins, they need to make that public information.

[Count_Erfit]

A lot of hubbub over a truthful post. Coins are getting too expensive to be left to mere collectors.

 

Let them eat cake!

 

Don't rock the boat!

[gmarguli]

I imagine this decision was made long ago because there are very few original specimens left, and both sides of the street decided that if the cleaning was not too hideous (each service has its own standard for this), they would holder the coin.

 

Take a look at Territorial gold in PCGS slab (I don't know about NGC slabs). They allow an extreme amount of problems including tooling.

[gmarguli]

According to H. Robert Campbell in the video “How to Tell Artificial Toning on Coins” - “…A coin doctor is someone who is trying to do the same thing consistently again and again while having the same results…If you can predict the timeline (for a coin to tone), then you’ve crossed the line… If you can’t predict it with any kind of reliability then you’re really not a coin doctor”

 

The NGC Definition is "The term ARTIFICIAL TONING refers to the process whereby patina is imparted to a coin in an accelerated reaction process using chemicals and/or heat. In many cases the purpose is to hide a defect that would otherwise

be detected.

 

ARTIFICIAL COLOR refers to bronze, copper nickel and copper coins that have been chemically dipped or cleaned. Under natural conditions, most copper coins will darken over time, but examples that retain their original “red” color are highly valued. That’s why “Red Brown” (RB) or “Brown” (BN) copper coins are sometimes treated to remove this toning. The resulting color usually has an

unnatural and artificial look."

 

and can be found in the No Grade Booklet You won't have to look far....it's on Page 1

 

So I stand by my statement that if NGC is hedging on grading artificially toned coins, they need to make that public information.

 

Using that definition, how is any of the grading services supposed to know how long the toning took? What is an "accelerated reaction"? I'm not trying to be a wise guy, but seriously, we all have our opinions and they are all different. Some people would say sticking a coin in a window and having it tone in 3 months would be AT. Others would say it is completely natural. Who is the judge? Isn't it the market place (market acceptable)?

 

And why is 5 seconds to tone any worse than 5 minutes or 5 days or 5 months or 5 years? Who is the arbiter of time?

 

Seriously, I'm not trying to be a wise guy, but people are throwing around terms that there is no real definition for. Artificial this, accelerated that, etc.

[supertooth]

Elcontador----You have hit the nail on the head. Basically, the TPGS decide how they will grade [internally]----but they fail to tell us, the general collectors how they are doing it. I sent my first coins in to NGC on March,27 2003. It had been over 30 years since ANACS had certified some CC 20's for me. Anyway, all 6 coins slabbed. I was thrilled. My relationship with NGC has evolved over these last 3+ years. In that time, I have found out personally that they will slab a scratched coin but downgrade it in the holder---they will slab dipped or curated coins [either from a collector or thru NCS]---they will slab coins with rim hits---they will slab a cleaned coin as market acceptable---but they will not tell you that they are doing this. In effect, they will do all these things [and probably a lot more]----but nowhere in their descriptions as to how they grade----do they tell the general collector that this is being done. It is an internal decision making process. But the collector does not have a 'level playing field'. He is left with thinking that "ALL" the coins haven't been cleaned if they are in the TPGS holders. I, too, years ago used to believe that. No where does it say that their idea of market acceptable means that they can slab a cleaned Bust Dollar as being OK. So, then the knowledgable sellers and dealers come along and use their superior knowledge to get one up over the unknowing collector. Then, you take the coin docs who play with the coins----and as Greg says that he point blank asked two other services about the blue toners and they found them to be market acceptable. So, who besides a select few knows this information?? Even now---who besides the people on these boards and the well to do etc. know these facts? Does the general collecting public? I doubt it sincerely. Gee, Tom B, I am actually writing about what I said that I had reservations about. Bottom line----I do not see 'FAIR PLAY" and I do not see a "LEVEL PLAYING FIELD". IMHO this is not a 'just' thing. And, I do not mean to pick on NGC. I use them because I think that they are the best of the big three. I have my Walker Registry Set with them and plan on sending over 50 more Walkers to them for grading. And I will use NGC always for my slabbing. I personally think that, overall, they care the most. Seven years ago I was a dummy too. Because I chose to "TRUST" rather than not to trust. Now, I tell everyone to only trust themselves. What a shame that the world has come to this. Bob [supertooth]

[Count_Erfit]

And why is 5 seconds to tone any worse than 5 minutes or 5 days or 5 months or 5 years?

 

Simple. Because a coin can not acquire "character" in 5 seconds. 5 minutes, maybe, and 5 months, certainly, but not in 5 seconds unless perchance it managed to use the fumes to overcome the doctor.

 

Now, be it 5 seconds, words like "GORGEOUS" "BEAUTIFUL" and even "L@@K" may still be used to escalate price, but lost are "original" or (as previously mentioned) "character" as viable tools for additional pricing.

 

Now, since "market acceptable" is the defining phrase du jour, it may be rendered moot as certainly even the term "market acceptable" can be jiggered based on the market which is doing the accepting.

 

So, in conclusion I submit that with a substantial increase in the number of collectors concommitant with a general decrease in desire to learn, that even my postulation of 5 seconds as being not long enough to develop "character" may also come into question at some future date.

 

[SignatureSelect]

I like this post. I personally collect comics and original art. But this thread is good. We have certain issues in the comic industry that work kind of like the toneing and cleaning and original/non original issues of the coin world. I am glad somebody on these boards has made a statement like this. I wish someone on the comic side would make a statement this bold.

[gmarguli]

And why is 5 seconds to tone any worse than 5 minutes or 5 days or 5 months or 5 years?

 

Simple. Because a coin can not acquire "character" in 5 seconds. 5 minutes, maybe, and 5 months, certainly, but not in 5 seconds unless perchance it managed to use the fumes to overcome the doctor.

 

Interesting, but suppose you cannot tell the difference between 5 second toning and 5 month toning, then is there really a difference? And if you say yes, then what is that difference. Both or neither should have quantifiable character as they look the same.

[John Martinez]

I. We all are at different levels of our education at any given time. But, wherever we are along this process of our educational level, we need to be able to expect 'fair play'. Alas, in today's world, most of the time only profit motivates the seller and there is 'NO level playing field'. The more knowledgable rip off those who do not know or understand that they are being taken for a ride. And, then, if found out, the sellers go to their fallback position----because you were sooooo dumb in buying the coin or coins---- it is your fault. These sellers are soooo numb in their souls that they fail to place any semblance of blame on themselves.

 

Well said. Like I said, I'm fairly new; however, I subscribe to: "Fool me once, shame on you....fool me twice, shame on me." Both buyer and seller have duties, responsibilities and obligations.

 

There will be unscrupulous sellers. There will also be buyers who think that they have gotten the deal of a lifetime - in essence, thinking they are getting over on a seller - only to be the ones ensnared in the seller's trap.

 

As a buyer, it is my obligation to know what I am buying. It is my obligation to do my homework in order to secure a fair price for a certain item.

 

As as seller, it is my obligation to represent the item I am selling accurately and obtain a fair price for the item.

 

Somewhere in between is the deal...that is the point where buyer and seller both feel that they got a fair price for the item if in fact that item was represented properly.

 

In short, to state that it is totally the buyers fault or totally the sellers fault is disingenuous. Like it is also said. When the finger of accusation is pointed, there are three more fingers pointed back at the real problem.

[michael]

http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=531928&STARTPAGE=1

[Count_Erfit]

suppose you cannot tell the difference between 5 second toning and 5 month toning, then is there really a difference? And if you say yes, then what is that difference.

 

Because your postulation indicated a difference (or lack of). Possibly from either being the cause of the toning or having observed the coin as it dropped from the die. Therefore, assuming the question to be accurate I answered it dependent on the conditions of the question being applicable.

 

My answer was predicated more on "desirability" than on "difference" and which could quite probably be moot.

 

 

And on closer examination of the second question, "suppose you cannot tell the difference between 5 second toning and 5 month toning, then is there really a difference? And if you say yes, then what is that difference." there could be a difference of opinion dependent on your definition of .... "is."

 

[jom]

there could be a difference of opinion dependent on your definition of .... "is."

 

 

 

jom

[Elcontador]

Greg,

 

Let us assume that you have a Seated $ which was toned with chemicals and baked for twenty minutes, and you have another one that has been sitting in a Wayte Raymond album for twenty years. Let's say that if you quickly glance at both coins, they look the same.

 

Tom B is professionally trained as a chemist, so he can explain what I'm about to say much better than I can. I would think the baking & chemicals re the 20 minute coin are more unstable than the Wayte Raymond toning, which took twenty years. In other words, the coin with the album toning is likely to look the way it does now in a year or two. However, the "twenty minute coin" is far more likely to 'turn' more quickly, whether or not either or both coins are slabbed.

 

I've seen this re doctored RD copper. It looks fine when it comes out of the chemistry set, but a few months later, it's not RD any longer. While copper is a more reactive metal than silver, I think the same concept would hold re the aforementioned Seated $.

 

For this reason, although these two coins might look the 'same' at this moment in time, it's reasonable to assume that this will not be the case perhaps even in the not too distant future. Therefore, I will not buy recently slabbed RD copper, and am suspicious of newly slabbed material in general.

 

Whether or not a "twenty minute coin" has been slabbed, I think it is the obligation of someone who knowingly sells such a coin, be it to a dealer or a collector, to fully disclose this fact as a condition of its sale. I don't care if we are talking about the person who 'created' the coin in the first place, or whether it is the tenth or one hundredth person who is selling it. To do otherwise, IMO, may open the seller of such coins to charges of concealment and / or misrepresentation of said coin(s).

[EZ_E]

Elcontador,

 

You've made an excellent point. Toning which occurs gradually over long periods of time will tone deeper into the surface of the coin instead of a mere superficial coating. Plus, once an oxide layer is formed, reactivity is minimized which will lead to a more stable coin.

 

Feel free to make any corrections or additions to my statement, Tom.