Toned coin thread ATS

[Zoins]

There is a toned coin thread ATS that I thought people might be interested in. I'm also interested in hearing what people here think. The seller has many similar looking PCGS-slabbed coins in his eBay store. ATS, there are a number of people who think this seller's coins are NT with enhanced photos while another group of people think the coins are AT.

[IGWT]

Remember the list of folks who "took a shot" at Greg in that other thread? Hmmmmmm.

[123cents]

When a coin that is toned is graded by a major grading company it seems to become "Market Acceptable" whether or not it has been AT toned or NT toned. Maybe in this age of plastic, "Market Acceptable" and "Market Unacceptable" are better terms to use. I am sure there are coins that have been intentionally toned that are slabbed. I also know that there are coins that have unintentionally toned over the years that have body bagged.

[gmarguli]

Remember the list of folks who "took a shot" at Greg in that other thread? Hmmmmmm.

 

You mean that list of people who took shots at me, but I mentioned that two do AT and one of them gets it slabbed by PCGS and sells them to other PCGS Forum Members? Um, yeah I remember that list and that comment. Hmmmmmm as you say.

[MarkFeld]

Remember the list of folks who "took a shot" at Greg in that other thread? Hmmmmmm.

 

You mean that list of people who took shots at me, but I mentioned that two do AT and one of them gets it slabbed by PCGS and sells them to other PCGS Forum Members? Um, yeah I remember that list and that comment. Hmmmmmm as you say.

Greg, please don't be coy - that doesn't become you Is that seller AT'ing his coins and getting them by PCGS (and if so, how do you know) or, are we seeing somewhat odd looking color on some of the coins due to lighting and other imaging effects?

[IGWT]

Remember the list of folks who "took a shot" at Greg in that other thread? Hmmmmmm.

 

You mean that list of people who took shots at me, but I mentioned that two do AT and one of them gets it slabbed by PCGS and sells them to other PCGS Forum Members? Um, yeah I remember that list and that comment. Hmmmmmm as you say.

 

Sometimes, the pieces fall into place.

[gmarguli]

Remember the list of folks who "took a shot" at Greg in that other thread? Hmmmmmm.

 

You mean that list of people who took shots at me, but I mentioned that two do AT and one of them gets it slabbed by PCGS and sells them to other PCGS Forum Members? Um, yeah I remember that list and that comment. Hmmmmmm as you say.

Greg, please don't be coy - that doesn't become you Is that seller AT'ing his coins and getting them by PCGS (and if so, how do you know) or, are we seeing somewhat odd looking color on some of the coins due to lighting and other imaging effects?

 

Mark, my Hmmmmmm was just in response to an interesting turn of events. I say something and a bunch of people ignore it and attack me because I'm a so-called coin doctor. Now something similar is being stated by someone else. Regardless of the outcome, I'm sure everyone will be having a laugh soon enough as they're all circle of trust members and they can do no wrong.

 

As for this seller, I have no comment. I also have no comment on who the two people I was referring to before are or whether this person was one of those two people. The info I based my original statement on is clearly out there. People just need to put 2 & 2 together. At this time I am not planning on doing that for them. Besides, it'd do no good (see: circle of trust rules regarding no fault for members).

 

For this particular seller, I do not know his picture taking techniques or whether the coins match the pictures, so I can't comment on that. However, based on the pictures alone, I highly question the originality of many of the coins he is currently selling on eBay. Edited to add: That does not mean anything toward the seller being involved in the ATing should those coins actually be AT.

 

BTW Mark, nice blue toned proof Indians you are currently selling!

[MarkFeld]

 

...BTW Mark, nice blue toned proof Indians you are currently selling!

Thanks Greg. Most of them aren't blue, but I was waiting for you to comment about them. I hope you read my description of the one that I strongly suspected as having been treated with MS70.

 

Edited to add:

I say something and a bunch of people ignore it and attack me because I'm a so-called coin doctor.

Greg, I disagree. I and others I know listen to you, because we understand that we can learn from you., Don't sell yourself short in that regard.

[physics-fan3.14]

I didn't read the thread, but the pcitures look juiced to me. It looks like he has the red balance cranked all the way up, and it would probably be a nice coin if seen in hand. Notice how the slab around it appears to be pink - when was the last time you saw a pink PCGS holder?

[SkyMan]

Pink is a rare color for a Frankie. I have seen it a couple of times on 1958-D's, but the two I've seen I'd be willing to bet (heck I did on one, as I own it) that the toning is NT.

 

For a 1953-D pink would be pretty much unheard of, although the color in question looks to me to have a strong purplish tinge. Purple, while rare, is not unheard of on a '53-D. Just from the pics that's a coin I'd stay away from buying, but one I'd like to see in hand.

[gmarguli]

 

...BTW Mark, nice blue toned proof Indians you are currently selling!

Thanks Greg. Most of them aren't blue, but I was waiting for you to comment about them. I hope you read my description of the one that I strongly suspected as having been treated with MS70.

 

Yes I did. However, what happens when the buyer sells it to some poor unsuspecting person without disclosing that something was done to it?

 

I've got a few blue ones in PCGS slabs. Interested?

[IGWT]

I've got a few blue ones in PCGS slabs. Interested?

 

Does MS70 (or similar chemical) bring about any color other than blue/violet on copper; and, if so, what colors have you seen?

 

Does MS70 bring about any color on silver, cupronickel, or gold coins; and, if so, what are your observations?

[IGWT]

Greg, please don't be coy - that doesn't become you Is that seller AT'ing his coins and getting them by PCGS (and if so, how do you know) or, are we seeing somewhat odd looking color on some of the coins due to lighting and other imaging effects?

 

Link to relevant thread.

[gmarguli]

Does MS70 (or similar chemical) bring about any color other than blue/violet on copper; and, if so, what colors have you seen?

 

Ruined Pink many times. Reds can happen. So can yellow/green sometimes.

 

 

Does MS70 bring about any color on silver, cupronickel, or gold coins; and, if so, what are your observations?

 

Not often. Sometimes it produces a stain.

[MarkFeld]

 

...BTW Mark, nice blue toned proof Indians you are currently selling!

Thanks Greg. Most of them aren't blue, but I was waiting for you to comment about them. I hope you read my description of the one that I strongly suspected as having been treated with MS70.

 

Yes I did. However, what happens when the buyer sells it to some poor unsuspecting person without disclosing that something was done to it?

 

...

Greg, I know that you know the answer to that. And, that's another good reason why coins shouldn't be messed with in the first place.

[cointagious]

 

Does MS70 bring about any color on silver, cupronickel, or gold coins; and, if so, what are your observations?

 

Not often. Sometimes it produces a stain.

 

 

Clean a coin with MS70. Let the Q-Tip dry and then re-wet it and apply it to another coin. It can produce some interesting effects.

[JamminJ]

Man, this is a fun thread.

[gmarguli]

 

...BTW Mark, nice blue toned proof Indians you are currently selling!

Thanks Greg. Most of them aren't blue, but I was waiting for you to comment about them. I hope you read my description of the one that I strongly suspected as having been treated with MS70.

 

Yes I did. However, what happens when the buyer sells it to some poor unsuspecting person without disclosing that something was done to it?

 

...

Greg, I know that you know the answer to that. And, that's another good reason why coins shouldn't be messed with in the first place.

 

Yes, but aren't you promoting the messing with of coins as you are taking part in their sale and future deception of others. Wouldn't the "right" thing to do to refuse to handle these coins if you strongly suspected that they were messed with?

 

As most people know, I use you as my moral compass in life. I frequently ask myself "What would Mark Feld do in this situation?". Now that you've succumbed to the almighty dollar and promoting the work of coin doctors, my moral bearing is all messed up.

 

Sincerely,

 

Greg, Devils Advocate & Sarcastic SOB

[James_OldeTowne]

To be honest, I do not like the look of that coin. I wouldn't touch it at any premium above sheet. I'm sorry, but it's another instance of: "There's a reason that coin is in a slab".

[IGWT]

Wouldn't the "right" thing to do to refuse to handle these coins if you strongly suspected that they were messed with?

 

I understand your question to be an attempt to show an inconsistency between Mark's words and his deeds, i.e., his condemnation of altering coins and his acceptance of a coin on consignment that he suspects has been altered. Mark fully disclosed his suspicions (which is far more than most sellers would do under the circumstances), and he and the consignor have kept their integrity intact as far as I'm concerned.

 

Take a step back and ask yourself if the "right" thing to do is to refrain from messing with coins in the first place. There's more than a little irony at play when a person who alters coins snipes at a downstream owner (or his consignor) for how he deals with the situation. The person who created the problem should take responsibility for cleaning it up. The person who profited from the misdeed ought to be willing to buy the coin back.

 

Just to be clear, I have no idea whether or not your handiwork gave this coin its current blue color. My comments are based on your admission that your work on other proof copper coins with MS70 has brought about results similar in appearance to the coin on consignment with Mark.

[MarkFeld]

 

...BTW Mark, nice blue toned proof Indians you are currently selling!

Thanks Greg. Most of them aren't blue, but I was waiting for you to comment about them. I hope you read my description of the one that I strongly suspected as having been treated with MS70.

 

Yes I did. However, what happens when the buyer sells it to some poor unsuspecting person without disclosing that something was done to it?

 

...

Greg, I know that you know the answer to that. And, that's another good reason why coins shouldn't be messed with in the first place.

 

Yes, but aren't you promoting the messing with of coins as you are taking part in their sale and future deception of others. Wouldn't the "right" thing to do to refuse to handle these coins if you strongly suspected that they were messed with?

 

As most people know, I use you as my moral compass in life. I frequently ask myself "What would Mark Feld do in this situation?". Now that you've succumbed to the almighty dollar and promoting the work of coin doctors, my moral bearing is all messed up.

 

Sincerely,

 

Greg, Devils Advocate & Sarcastic SOB

Greg, I don't mind answering your questions, even though part of your post was sarcastic and in my view, hypocritical. Each of us draws the line in a different place. I wouldn't buy a coin from a person whom I knew or strongly suspected had doctored it. For example, as I'm sure you know, I wouldn't buy coins from you any more.

 

However, if a client has unknowingly bought such a coin and asks me to sell it for him, I will do so, as long as I can disclose my suspicions about it to potential buyers. And, whereas you asked if that weren't "promoting the messing with of coins", I'd say, that on the contrary, that's a good way to get the word out to a decent sized group of collectors and dealers. On the other hand, if I had refused to take the coin on consignment the word might not have gotten out at all regarding that coin or similar coins. In other words, once the doctor has done his work, the best practical alternative is to offer the coin with full disclosure .

 

By the way, it's not about the "almighty dollar" either - I will make 5% or less on the coin if I sell it.

[gmarguli]

Take a step back and ask yourself if the "right" thing to do is to refrain from messing with coins in the first place. There's more than a little irony at play when a person who alters coins snipes at a downstream owner (or his consignee) for how he deals with the situation. The person who created the problem should take responsibility for cleaning it up. The person who profited from the misdeed ought to be willing to buy the coin back.

 

First off, what you may view as a misdeed, I do not. Apparently the TPG do not either since it appears that all of them are still slabbing them. The industry has not rallied against it. The ANA has not taken a stance on it. Local coin shops have not stopped selling MS70. And buyers have not stopped buying them. A tiny, yet vocal minority have spoken against them and largely been ignored.

 

I also disagree on someone who is against them selling them. This has nothing to do with Maker vs. Seller vs. Re-seller. If you take a stand against them, call them AT, make dozens (hundreds?) of posts about them condemning them and their making, then why should you be allowed to profit off them just because you disclose it?

[IGWT]

I also disagree on someone who is against them selling them. This has nothing to do with Maker vs. Seller vs. Re-seller. If you take a stand against them, call them AT, make dozens (hundreds?) of posts about them condemning them and their making, then why should you be allowed to profit off them just because you disclose it?

 

Because the alternative is having the coin sold by someone else without any disclosure. Whoever worked on the coin (if, in fact, that's the case) created a predicament that Mark and his consignor are dealing with instead of avoiding. And I wouldn't call a 5% consignment fee -- which is probably barely enough to cover general overhead -- a case of selling out principles for money. That's an indictment best made against the people who alter coins.

[MarkFeld]

Take a step back and ask yourself if the "right" thing to do is to refrain from messing with coins in the first place. There's more than a little irony at play when a person who alters coins snipes at a downstream owner (or his consignee) for how he deals with the situation. The person who created the problem should take responsibility for cleaning it up. The person who profited from the misdeed ought to be willing to buy the coin back.

 

First off, what you may view as a misdeed, I do not. Apparently the TPG do not either since it appears that all of them are still slabbing them. The industry has not rallied against it. The ANA has not taken a stance on it. Local coin shops have not stopped selling MS70. And buyers have not stopped buying them. A tiny, yet vocal minority have spoken against them and largely been ignored.

 

I also disagree on someone who is against them selling them. This has nothing to do with Maker vs. Seller vs. Re-seller. If you take a stand against them, call them AT, make dozens (hundreds?) of posts about them condemning them and their making, then why should you be allowed to profit off them just because you disclose it?

Greg, just to be clear, are you equating a person's altering/changing/doctoring a coin in the name of profit (and not disclosing those activities to potential buyers of the coin) with a person whom later ends up with the coin and offers it for sale, disclosing his suspicions or knowledge regarding what might have been done to it? Also, would it make a difference whether the seller were profiting financially from the sale or not?

[gmarguli]

I also disagree on someone who is against them selling them. This has nothing to do with Maker vs. Seller vs. Re-seller. If you take a stand against them, call them AT, make dozens (hundreds?) of posts about them condemning them and their making, then why should you be allowed to profit off them just because you disclose it?

Greg, just to be clear, are you equating a person's altering/changing/doctoring a coin in the name of profit (and not disclosing those activities to potential buyers of the coin) with a person whom later ends up with the coin and offers it for sale, disclosing his suspicions or knowledge regarding what might have been done to it? Also, would it make a difference whether the seller were profiting financially from the sale or not?

 

Mark, both actions are done in the name of profit. As I understand it, this is not a coin that you were duped into buying and are forced to sell to recover your investment to feed your family. You received coins on consignment and decided to accept this coin with the anticipation of making some money (5% or 500% is meaningless) with the caveat of you being able to disclose your suspicions. No matter how you look at it, you are promoting the market of these coins that you cried out against. Your words of warning about this coin will likely not be passed on to the next buyer and it will have done no good. Same with someone selling a superb counterfeit as counterfeit.

 

I personally do not mind you selling these coins. I won't say it is hypocritical of you to attack them while making money off them (I do the same with ultra-modern proofs). I'll just say that you're a businessperson.

[MarkFeld]

Greg, while I disagree with you, I still appreciate your answering my questions. I'll repeat one question that I didn't see an answer to

...would it make a difference whether the seller were profiting financially from the sale or not?

In other words, would you still consider it hypocritical of me to try to sell such a coin for my client if I weren't making any commission on it? Thanks.

[gmarguli]

Greg, while I disagree with you, I still appreciate your answering my questions. I'll repeat one question that I didn't see an answer to

...would it make a difference whether the seller were profiting financially from the sale or not?

In other words, would you still consider it hypocritical of me to try to sell such a coin for my client if I weren't making any commission on it? Thanks.

 

Yes. You either are willing to be part of the equation or not.

[MarkFeld]

Greg, while I disagree with you, I still appreciate your answering my questions. I'll repeat one question that I didn't see an answer to

...would it make a difference whether the seller were profiting financially from the sale or not?

In other words, would you still consider it hypocritical of me to try to sell such a coin for my client if I weren't making any commission on it? Thanks.

 

Yes. You either are willing to be part of the equation or not.

And as far as you're concerned, the person that does something to the coin in the name of profit is no larger or different a part of the equation than a subsequent seller of the coin (whether for profit or not) that discloses what he thinks was done to it. Our ways of looking at equations are very different, as apparently to you, there is no difference between disclosing something or not and/or doing something for the $ or not.

[gmarguli]

And as far as you're concerned, the person that does something to the coin in the name of profit is no larger or different a part of the equation than a subsequent seller of the coin (whether for profit or not) that discloses what he thinks was done to it.

 

No, there are different levels. However, they are all part of the same equation.

 

And there are also different levels of ethics. For some it would involve informing the masses about these coins and refusing to push them on the market. For others it would be informing the masses about these coins and selling them at the same time. And for some it's just be selling them as MA.

[MarkFeld]

And as far as you're concerned, the person that does something to the coin in the name of profit is no larger or different a part of the equation than a subsequent seller of the coin (whether for profit or not) that discloses what he thinks was done to it.

 

No, there are different levels. However, they are all part of the same equation.

 

And there are also different levels of ethics. For some it would involve informing the masses about these coins and refusing to push them on the market. For others it would be informing the masses about these coins and selling them at the same time. And for some it's just be selling them as MA.

Greg, that sounds reasonable. I knew you had it in you.

 

Ok, then on a practical basis, what should an owner of such a coin do when it comes time to sell? He shouldn't melt it or mess with it or efface it. What can or should he do to sell it, but at the same time avoid promoting the doctoring of coins?