Are these toning errors **damage**? Also on the 1995 coin it seems the E in liberty seems to be messed up and on the back there is a gash thru CA in America, is that PMD? Thanks!
Technically speaking, toning is damage. It is not an error. The "E" and "CA" are circulation damage. Chris
Thanks for the responses. Duly noted on the difference between error and damage. I don't know where I got the idea but I was under the impression that toning was caused by some sort of contaminant entering at the mint causing/allowing the toning to occur. With lesson learned, are these are tone damaged?
There are two different kinds of toning, natural toning (NT) and artificial toning (AT). Like I said, TECHNICALLY, it is termed damage, but NT is collectible whereas AT is not. Sure, there are some people who might collect AT coins, but the colors are created with the use of chemicals and/or gases to affect the color. NT coins usually take years, even decades, to change the toning. Normally, AT coins lose value. Chris
I would like to add to what Chris said - even natural toning can reduce the collectability of a coin as it may be toning in an unattractive way lessening the coin's eye appeal. If it doesn't look nice, will anyone want to buy the ugly coin?
Or you wake up to that sick feeling of remembering that you paid just a "wee" bit more than the coin is worth!! LOL!
Agreed! One might also keep in mind that even pretty toning can eventually turn almost black. I have a couple of GSA CC's graded MS64 by NGC that had crescent, rainbow toning. I bought them from DLRC many years ago in the OGP. I was considering putting them up for sale, but when I took a look at them, I was disappointed to find that the toning is very, very dark. Chris
