Jewel Luster is no more. It is now called eZest and it is a pretty strong dip, often diluted and rarely used more than once. It will remove even real toning. (Never heard of using it hot.) I don't think that's what was done. I think the coin had organic toning applied to conceal the scratches, and a normally-benign acetone dip stripped it. This happened to me once with an old ANACS MS60 20c piece. Heavily toned, PCGS wouldn't cross it due to questionable surfaces. I did a quick acetone dip...maybe a minute or two, and everything came off, revealing stains underneath. Grr. I haven't used NCS because I don't think they can do much better than I can. But my guess is you take your chances when you ask for a coin to be conserved, and NCS is free to use their best judgment. Is this correct? Lance.
They should email or call submitters to let them know what their 1% assessment has revealed, with options, percentages of success, downside risk, etc.. I a sure they have the most advanced technology and could provide high tech evaluations before work is done. Customers are being treated as non-participants in the process.
And if they took the time to do all that, and as a result their charge for doing it went up 10 fold, how many people would pay it ? This is not a workable business model. But even more importantly, it wouldn't really matter if they did. That's because all they could do would be to guess what the end result might be. Any time you submit a coin for conservation, or any time you attempt to conserve one yourself - you take a chance. There are only three possible outcomes. 1 - your effort will result in a coin with an improved appearance. 2 - your effort will result in a coin with a worse appearance. And 3 - there will be no net change. Nobody, not the most experienced collector, not NCS, and nobody else, can ever know what the outcome will be. They can only guess. As a customer of NCS it is your responsibility to know that before you ever send them the coin. So having them call you and talking to you about it isn't going to change anything. You'd still have to guess what the outcome would be. I guess my point is, you made that guess when you sent the coin to them. And by doing so you accepted the risk.
10X more??? Hyperbole? I can understand that with non-valuable coins they do not need to get back to you before doing work, but certainly over $1000 coins, it is no biggie to shoot you an email after they did their assessment of the coin before conservation. The fast technology and competant customer service systems certainly exist so that a company such as NGC/NCS would not have a huge amount of increased man hours to do their job--in fact on the form it says that the customer will be contacted in some cases, yet I never have been after dozens of submissions. With all the people out of work with degrees and intelligence to help every American company come up to speed on any given issue, this should not be that hard. STANDARD CONSERVATION FEES: 1. Evaluation Fee: 1% of declared value per coin, minimum $5. Service Description: Item examined by a conservation expert to determine what conservation work, if any, should be performed. All graded coins, excluding details and genuine holders, will be returned as is if conservation is not performed, and only the Evaluation Fee will be charged by NCS. Coin(s) holdered by any service other than NGC or PCGS will be treated as raw coin(s) and removed from their holders. In order to submit coins that are in holders other than NGC or PCGS, you must initial section 5, Conservation Services, on the front of this form confirming you have read the terms and conditions regarding the Consent to Remove Coin(s) from Holder(s) information below, prior to any work being performed by NCS. Coins that are in either NGC or PCGS holders and cannot benefit from conservation will be returned and the customer will only be charged the 1% evaluation fee. 2. Conservation Fee: 4% of declared value up to $150,000 per coin, and 2% of declared value over $150,000 per coin, minimum $15. Service Description: Appropriate conservation is performed. NO GRADE PROTECTION. Please be advised that NCS DOES NOT PROVIDE GRADE PROTECTION OR ANY TYPE OF GRADE GUARANTEE FOR COINS SUBMITTED TO NCS. The submitter acknowledges that the conservation services provided by NCS with respect to a submitted coin may result in a lower grade or no grade subsequently being assigned to such coin by a coin grading company. By submitting a coin to NCS, the submitter waives any right to assert any form of legal claim against NCS (and any affiliates, divisions, subsidiaries or other corporately related entities of NCS and its and their respective officers, directors, employees, agents and assigns) with respect to a lower grade or no grade subsequently being assigned to such coin by a coin grading company, unless caused solely by the gross negligence or willful misconduct of NCS. And then there is a lot of other fine legal print written by lawyers to prevent any legal action going anywhere
10X might be an exaggeration, but I could see, if you miss their call, or don't respond to the email in just a few minutes your coin goes back to the end of the line again. They have to keep moving and they can't have your coin holding things up while they wait to hear back from you.
??? They do an evaluation and it is usually many days before they work on the coin unless you have paid the $50 expedite fee. So to say it would be a challenge to have the customer notified and able to have a say is untrue IMO.
No, not at all. I could easily the minimum increasing to $50 (10x5) if they had to take the time to contact the submitter and then go back forth with communications before a decision was made to proceed or not. I don't think it would be a challenge at all. But it most definitely would take time, and time is money. So if they spend that time to contact the customer and communicate with him, that's the reason for the 10x increase in evaluation fees.
The question is at what price or value level should the submitter be contacted? Certainly when you are talking about coins in the thousands of dollars, to give NCS complete discretion over whether or not to communicate with the customer about possible problems arising from "conserving" would be unpresidented in terms of professional conduct. It is like giving power of attorney to an accountant where you are cut out of decision making. Every profession consults with their customers as work is being done; mechanics with your vehicles, doctors with personal issues, and so forth. When they charge 5% for a process that takes just minutes and they can easily charge you hundreds of dollars for that service, it is just arrogant to not speak with the customer. Possibly they could give the customer various plans, Plan "B" you pay an extra $20 to get more personalized treatment and input in the decision making on $300 and above coins. It makes no sense to give a customer economy treatment for extremely valuable coins.
As I understand it, anyone who has any concern about what may happen to their coin can call NCS and talk to them about it. And if they then decide they do not wish to go through with the process, NCS will return their coin to them unchanged. But you do need to call them, emails won't cut it. I guess my point is this. Any time you send a coin in to NCS you are supposed to know before you ever send it that there is a risk involved. That the end result may very well turn out to be unfavorable to you. So simply by sending the coin to them you have agreed to be, as you put it, cut out of the decision making process. In my opinion this is another one of those situations where people are wanting to sidestep responsibility for their own actions. They are looking for somebody to blame besides themselves if things do not turn out as they want them to. You obviously disagree with that. But essentially that is the crux of the issue for you are saying - if I had only known, I never would have done it. Well you did know, and that is my point. It is your responsibility to know of the risk involved before you ever send in the coin. And if you claim you didn't know, then you are not stepping up and meeting your own responsibilities for you should know. It's a similar situation to collectors buying a fake coin or an altered coin. And when that happens the buyer inevitably blames the seller, when in reality it's their own fault for buying that fake or altered coin, not the seller's ! YOU as the customer are supposed to know what you are doing before you ever do it. It is your responsibility to know. It is not somebody else's responsibility to step up and protect you from yourself.
Who is the expert? The one who is paid to do their job right. The customer is always right. In the rare case where the customer is wrong, refer back to rule #1. There are coins I have no fear with getting conserved I am 100% sure they will do the right thing. There are coins I am not sure on, and I think they will do the right thing about. You are trying to shift responsibility 100% on to the shoulders of the customer. If we looked at 50 recent examples of conservation jobs performed, we would probably find customer satisfaction high in most of the cases. We would find some botched jobs, as lawyers are fond of saying you can't unring the bell. I went to a dentist recently; his filling had fallen out. He looked at the cavity and said there was a 20% chance of saving the tooth, with likely root canal to the tune of $1500 plus. I got a second opinion. Dentist #2 was conservative and saved the tooth for $300. I was the happy customer. If you check out customer feedback on websites you will find both positives and negatives about customer experiences. That is life. We need to be better educated about options before we make decisions. To brow-beat and intimidate people into accepting their results as without recourse, frankly does a disservice to this business. We need to see more and more practical feedback in terms of experiences with any type of business activity. There should be no fear of negative consequences unless people start using profanity or hurling actionable insults.
I am very sorry Marbury for what happened. Its a shame that the coin ended up being a problem coin. That said, it really is a poster child for why toned coins are not preferable really. I love them, but I really think the dealers and collectors in the 70's had it right, if there is toning on a coin you can never be sure that someone has not doctored the coin. The only way to be sure is to see the underlying metal. This is exactly the reason toned coins were discounted, not a premium paid for. I wish all of the toned collectors who pay toning premiums would read this thread and think about it. Again, sorry for it all Marbury. It was a very attractive coin, or so it appeared. Chris
I'm sorry for what apparently happened, as well. However, I think that your resulting comments about toned coins amount to a large overreaction. For one thing, a number of dealers and collectors preferred toned coins in the 70's, just as we do today. And for another, there are a great many toned coins whose surfaces can be viewed through the patina. Lastly, in many cases, toned coins are far more original than color-free ones (which have been dipped) and often exhibit a beauty, personality and uniqueness, all of their own. As the saying goes, "don't throw the baby out with the bath water".
Fair points sir. I agree. You are right about being able to see the metal on some under the patina, but it takes longer and requires more expertise. Even then, I have seen cleverly toned AT coins where the toning conveniently was darker in a couple of problem areas. Again, it can be seen, but is much harder. Your point about original surface is very true. This is why I liked toned coins, more for their surfaces than the color really. A full original luster silver coin is very pretty. However, my point is more of a warning to 90% of toned coin collectors who I am not sure has the experience to evaluate the surfaces under the toning. Maybe I am just too pessimistic about that, but I see a lot of crummy coins sold at a premium because they have "toning". Like I said, I love toned coins, (or maybe better put original surface coins). They are, however, harder to make sure issues like this one aren't plaguing the coin, no? Chris
A way to know what is beneath the surface toning: A magnifier with a halogen light source. Look carefully, and examine that coin that may be a "terrific deal" while the return privilege is still alive.
Btw sir grat to have you back on the board again! Feel free to correct me anytime. Sometimes you learn best when someone calls you out on an error. Chris
But you are ignoring one, very major, thing here. Conserving a coin is not a case of somebody doing their job right. They can do everything exactly right, and the coin still end up being messed up. But that's because it was messed up before it ever got to them, just like Marbury's coin was. His is a prefect example of this. No matter what, no exceptions, conserving a coin carries a large percentage of risk. And you as the customer absolutely must be willing to accept that risk - or else don't send it in. Sorry, but no. The customer is not always right. In fact I would go so far as to say that the customer is wrong far more often than he is ever right. But, it is the choice of the business to pretend otherwise if they wish to do so.
Yes, I've seen problems under toning many times with a close examination.....and tee-d off a few dealers in pointing out the underlying problem. One of the reasons I like toning, you can often have some confidence that the coin is original.
