I find this Coin Forum great for all kinds of info! I was wondering about coins that have been in cardboard albums for some time, they usually have a brown ring around them, I thought it may have been a reaction to/with the acid in the cardboard holders. I thought that detracted from the appearance & value. Is this wrong?
My opinion is that if the toning detracts from the eye appeal, it will usually have a negative effect on price and if it adds to the eye appeal, it will usually drive the price up. Unfortunately I don't have many unattractively toned coins to illustrate my point. Hopefully this will do the trick. Here is a 1950-S Roosevelt Dime NGC MS67 that I purchased well below the Numismedia Wholesale price of $65. The reason should be clear. The toning on the reverse is acceptable and probably had no impact on price, but the obverse toning is absolutely hideous and very distracting. Think of it this way, who would want an MS67 1950-S Rosie that looked like this in their collection. The answer is somewhere close to nobody which is why the price drops down to the MS66 grade price. The second coin is a rather generic graded 1946 Roosevelt NGC MS65 which carries a wholesale value of $13. However, there is nothing generic about this coin which has phenomenally attractive toning. The rainbow colors along with vibrant luster drive the price of this coin to a level of 5X Numismedia Wholesale @ $80. While many of the collectors in the world think this is crazy to pay these premiums, collectors who specialize in these rainbow toned coins will pay huge premiums for the right look. I hoped this helped answer your question.
A Junior member, and other's alike, probably need a link rather than a vague comment like this... I'm curious what had been discussed so far in the older thread myself, so do you remember the other thread title, the coins discussed in the topic, date range of the thread... etc.?
Thanks for the replies! Hobo, how do I find your answer posted on another thread? What title is the thread, where is it located exactly? Thanks in advance for your help! Believe me, I need all the help I can get!
He posted the exact same question in two different threads which prompted the vague comment. Here is the link to the same question in the other thread. http://www.cointalk.com/forum/t62713-2/#post647646
Beautiful, I think I have seen a coin like that recently. Oh wait, I remember. Doubt it is the same coin, but very close. http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1221222&fpart=310
Toning is caused by sulfur, specifically, sulfide. The color is completely dependent on the thickness of the layer on the coin surface. Weimar White has probably studied this more than anyone else and his book Coin Chemistry is an excellent read.
Depending on the taste of the buyer of course. I find both of those quite ugly and would not buy either, even at face. Chocolate and vanilla.
I have to agree with this since I'm a not toned coin person. I like coins that look original and to me toned, tarnished, corroded coins are just damaged. This is sort of like a old car that has either been kept original or modified. To each his own. If your into toning, there are actually web sites for just toned coins. Not sure but I think it's the TonedCoinForum or Tonedcoin.org something like that.
I think each coin has it own type of DNA if going to tone it will no matter how it is stored. that is my 2cents
"Taste of the buyer?" I knew if I hung around here long enough the odds were in our favor we'd find something we agreed upon.
