Encapsulating a coin with active corrosion

Encapsulating a coin with active corrosion

May I ask how exactly you define active - when you say active corrosion ?

 

You gotta remember there's always more than 1 grader. There's always at least 3 and sometimes 4 - and none of them missed it.

There are literally millions of coins with verdigris on them given clean grades, some of them as high as 67 or 68.

 

And that's kind of my point. Verdigris is not active corrosion. Verdigris is the result of active corrosion. In other words, verdigris only becomes visible after the corrosion has already occurred and is over done with. Once verdigris forms, the harm has already been done.

Verdigris itself does not harm the coin. It can sit there on the coin for decades and never get any worse or cause any additional harm.

Now yes, of course it is possible that a coin with verdigris on it could still be corroding. But the corrosion would be being caused by excessive moisture. Corrosion is not caused by verdigris. It is also equally possible that on a coin with verdigris on it, the corrosion has completely stopped and is no longer occurring at all.

Splitting hairs ? Perhaps, but it's a very important hair that needs to be split.

To my knowledge, your product Thad is the only product in existence that will "safely" remove verdigris. But the TPGs won't use it, or so they claim, because of the protective coating it leaves behind on the coin.

That said, it would not surprise me in the least that they would use it, and then simply rinse the coin again to remove the coating. Of course if they did do that, then the harm already done may well become visible, and if it does, they may be forced to lower the grade. So maybe, just maybe, they wouldn't want to do that.

 

Seems there's more than 1 hair that needed to be split.

 

In this manner -

Ya see Charley, there's apparently more than a few things that you're not aware of. For example, Thad and I have known each other for many years, since long before he invented Verdi-Care. And Thad is very well aware that I have a great deal of respect of respect for him and his knowledge as a scientist.

As a result of my respect for Thad I am way more than willing to defer to him and his knowledge of verdigris. But at the same time I have more than a little bit of experience with it myself. Which is precisely why I asked my question in my first post in this thread. That was the purpose of having the discussion.

My experience has been that verdigris can be left on a coin for decades, and as long as moisture is minimized and dealt with, that verdigris does not grow or increase in amount. (Which is, in a way, what Thad is saying in his quote above.) Because verdigris itself is not the cause of corrosion but rather the result of it. In other words, the corrosion caused by moisture comes first, occurs first. Then and only then does verdigris form.

What I was not aware of is this -

What this discussion has revealed to me, and hopefully everybody else, is that verdigris is kind of like toning in one regard. Namely that it never stops, cannot be stopped. But it can be slowed down to the point that it's virtually unnoticeable over the course of a collector's lifetime.

As for the TPGs, they have stated since their inception that they will not slab and give a clean grade to any coin that has active corrosion on it. But yet they have slabbed and given clean grades to millions of coins with verdigris on them. In other words the TPGs were of the same opinion I was when it comes to verdigris, that it is not active corrosion. So rather obviously I was not alone in my opinion.

Thad has shown me that I was wrong in my opinion about verdigris being inactive, but somehow I rather doubt that the TPGs will listen to him as I did.