The Monster Toned Coin Game Thread

I've seen cases of coins that continue to tone in the holder, but the two that I recall posted on various forums were both Lincoln Cents (which are completely different from silver toners).

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Well, I see what I see from the pictures. I don't know where this coin has been stored for the past 15 years (and neither do you). So, short of just assuming - I'm basing my opinion off of the facts. If it is true that NGC never slabs coins with a star that are terminally toned - then either 1) the pictures don't show the true toning of the rims, or 2) the toning isn't the same now as it was at the time the coin was slabbed. Those are the only two options.

 

Thanks for clarifying @ddddd .

People (not implying you) always get defensive when I use the term "terminal" to describe toning. Terminal just means it's at the extreme (i.e., the thin film is thick enough) that it will not tone further in bands of color. It appears black to the eye. It's not some insult to a coin - it's simply a chemical/physical process. My point was that as toning approaches this darker set of progressions - it becomes less desirable to the market at large.

I still rated the coin a 4 for goodness-sake - which is Mid-High on the proposed scale, and clearly still attractive. IMO, this coin needs a lot more vibrant tones - like around the "E PLURIBUS UNUM" on the reverse - and less of the dominant orange colors to be higher than a 4.

 

Since you rate every single coin consistently low, I would tend to see you as looking for flaws, not positives.

i have a color corrected monitor, as well. I see dark green. I also see a beautifully toned coin, that NGC has given a star to for color. Toning inside a holder like that just does not happen, and NGC never gives black toning a star. It is darker than the upper border, but not black. Sorry, but I would say the majority will call you out on this one—it is not subjective. The coin is not “fade to black.”

 

I know people see colors differently (and I've seen photos too that look a little different to me compared to what others are seeing-based on their comments in those posts).

Also, I've seen coins that are near-terminal and still attractive (rare but happens with Morgans that are darker but still have great luster). And I know that not everyone will like them. I'm not offended by your comments as they are perfectly reasonable based on what you saw and described to us.

As far as this coin, it is up there for me among Franklins. I've seen a handful of better ones but those were unattainable for me (like the $130k Franklin, the close cousin of the $130k Franklin, and a few owned by Aurora Borealis). That doesn't mean it is a monster (I'm not calling it one), it's simply one that I really like.

 

I wasn't questioning what you see, merely pointing out that option 2 is much less likely than option 1 IMO. And truthfully, a third option is the most likely, what you consider terminal toning that would preclude a star designation is different (stricter) than what NGC considers.

 

We will have to agree to disagree.

Try to sell that coin. It will bring 4 money at best. It is also grade limited. For common coins (like this one) Sunnywood stated that prices were indicative of the level of toning. A 1958-D Franklin toner has to be phenomenal to merit a 5 or 6 ranking. This one is Mid-High IMO which is a 4.

Slabs are not air tight. And sulphur compounds are in all kinds of regular household items from glues to paper. It is not out of the question that 15 years could have darkened this coin a bit.

 

Yes, gosh - always the negatives...

...which is why I originally commented on this coin as being a “Lovely double sided toner.”

Get a grip.

You realize you originally rated it as a 4.5 - and now you’re reading me to filth for rating it a 4.0.

 

I don't want to post the pictures but will post the links to some of the best Franklins I have seen (the first two likely being the best overall):
https://www.pcgs.com/cert/19539159
https://www.pcgs.com/cert/19539160

https://legendauctions.hibid.com/lot/43537837/50c-1958-pcgs-ms67--fbl-cac/?q=&ref=watch-list

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/is-this-the-next-100k-franklin.327834/

https://www.coinraritiesonline.com/product/1958-d-franklin-50¢-4/

 

What would you consider "4" money?
I know it won't bring the crazy premiums from the ones I linked above, but I think it would bring strong money (I'm not selling though - as I mentioned, I haven't found anything better-outside of the true monsters that aren't affordable- in the last ~5 years of searching).

 

Those first two look questionably toned to me. Yes they are pretty and I'm guessing they are supposed to be EOR toners, but you just don't see that type of vibrancy on Franklin Half Dollars.

The 100K Franklin is tremendous and tremendously overpriced.

I used to own a 1958-D MS67* that might be a good candidate for this thread, so add me to the futures list.

 

Maybe $400-$600...I'm not certain. I am not "up" on the Franklin common coin market at the moment.

I bought my toned Franklin type coin in 2012 for far less than that - and IMO it is just a tick less attractively toned, but made up for in the better surfaces and MS66FBL grade.

 

The first two might be questionable, but they were very well done (if someone truly figured out a way to create them). From what I recall reading, AB bought both on Teletrade already graded by PCGS and later received upgrades on both when resubmitting to PCGS.

And I agree that the $130k Franklin was overpriced but is a stunning coin.

 

I have to agree with @Lehigh96 - both of those first two coins look AT to me.

The Legend coin at $130K is just stupid money for a Franklin. Yes, it's pretty, but it's no where near that kind of a multiple in terms of appeal. Likely 2-3 people in the world bid it up to that level and someone is now buried for a good long while in it.

The CRO coin was listed for $3500 in March of 2020 - and IMO is the most attractively toned of all of those you posted. And priced about where I'd expect it to be priced.

 

That's a fair range nowadays. It cost me a little over $300 in 2016. I like your example but prefer the color on mine. I'm not too picky about the grade as long as I like the overall eye appeal and price (I don't like over graded coins but I am ok with a properly graded coin that is a lower grade-even if it is an MS 60).

 

If you take a look at this thread, I believe CBD owned it at some point before CRO (that picture is somewhat different than the one from CRO but the coins match up).

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/is-this-the-next-100k-franklin.327834/page-4

I liked it but not at $3,500 (it might have been a fair price but was well beyond what I spend on any individual coin). I still prefer the other four coins more but that one was nice enough to make my fantasy top 10 Franklins list.

 

The slab numbers match up, so that's it. It's the difference between Phil Arnold's red-shifted cartoonish "TrueView" images versus those by Mark Goodman that John Agre posts on his site. For toners, TrueView images are almost always overblown. I have griped so much to PCGS, I just roll my eyes now. Apparently people like pretty unrealistic pictures of their coins more than they like the actual look of the coins themselves.

 

For the record, 1958-D Franklins come toned nicely very often.

This one Legend sold in 2017 is insane, and only went for $1200. Maybe the most wild reverse toner I've ever seen...guessing the price was held back because it was reverse-toned.

https://www.pcgs.com/cert/27925796

 

CRO tends to be upper end on pricing - but I have never been disappointed with a coin I purchased from him. Agree with you though, $3500 for a Franklin Half Dollar is borderline institutionalization-worthy in my mind.

 

That one is quite unusual (different than many I've seen) and I like it from the images. And it seems to have went for a fair price. You are probably right that being a reverse toner held it back, especially at a venue like Legend.

I have picked up two coins from CRO over the years. One was decent and the other was quite nice (I wasn't disappointed with either). The prices are what often keep me from buying more. Some items are just too high of a premium for me to justify even if I really like the look.