Why did NGC bag the coin as AT?

MA=Market Acceptability

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Not sure if someone already posted this, but why don't you call and ask exactly why it was bagged for AT? You deserve to know dang it! along with the rest of us LOL!!!

 

If you are wanting to get it slabbed because of its toning, I say don't waste your money because of the scraches/streaks on it as GDJMSP pointed out. I also don't think it will grade higher than AU-55 at best if it wasn't toned. Sorry this is just my outspoken humble opinion. Otherwise it is a nice coin. Now if it was an 1884-S, well yes I'd submit it in a flash. zeke

 

I'd tend to agree with this observation.

 

So let me get this straight; If I put my coins in an old Wayte Raymond album without being aware of the fact that they could tone it's NT, but if I put my coins in a Wayte Raymond album trying to deliberately tone them then it's AT? This should be a Monte Python skit.

 

So for those who do collect toners(I personally don't actively seek them) are you finding that TPG's are increasingly becoming more reluctant to slab them, or has nothing changed? This is an honest question with no ulterior motives toward AT vs NT. I'm curious and simply do not know the answer to this.

 

I really can't answer that question because I don't submit raw coins for grading. However, I believe based on what I have read from others that do submit, that the TPG's have become much more conservative when grading toned coins. The coins that Shane showed earlier reminded the TPG's what a skilled coin doctor is capable of creating. David Hall's comments about rainbow toned Peace Dollars had an effect whether people admit it or not. But the single most important reason for this conservative tack is the decision by PCGS to encapsulate problem coins in GENUINE holders. Now that the AT coins reside in holders along with those they deem market acceptable, they had no choice but to shrink what is considered market acceptable. Unfortunately, that leaves a slew of toned coins in PCGS holders that if they were cracked out and resubmitted would end up in GENUINE holders.

For example:



I just don't know how this coin ever got in a problem free holder. Personally, I am very grateful that the TPG's have decided to become stricter with their application MA toning. It protects the value of my collection, even if some of my coins would not pass muster under the current rules.

 

Lehigh,

Thank you for the detailed answer and for taking the time to post a photo. It's interesting to me. Like I said, I don't actively collect toners, but I do save them when I find them. Usually I find them as end-roll toners buried inside "unsearched" OBW rolls of Lincoln Cents that I purchase.

Jody

 

You've made that case convincingly. So, what impact should the "intent" of the toning have on the coin's value?

For bonus points, if I buy one roll of dimes with the "intent" of putting them into albums for my grandchildren, and another identical roll with the "intent" of selling them to a refiner, which roll should I be charged more for?

 

Doug,

There is one key difference between your sealed box and coin albums. The use of a coin album is a standard and accepted method for storing coins. I don't know anyone who would consider a temperature & humidity controlled sealed box with known reactive gasses as an accepted method for coin storage. In your sealed box example, it would absolutely be AT.

You are claiming that placing coins in an accepted storage method (coin albums) is AT because the owner placed them there with the intent of developing toning. What if the owner placed the coins in the album with sole intent of storing his coins and they eventually toned despite his efforts to prevent toning? How is one different from the other? The answer is that they are not different at all. In your sealed box example, you had to dismiss the time issue in order to claim that both methods are AT. It doesn't matter if the coins are in a Wayte Raymond holder or a Dansco album, it will take years to develop toning and there is no way to predict exactly what the toning will look like on the coins. If you don't like the toning, you don't have the opportunity to start over like you would with your sealed box scenario. The time issue is an important and relevant factor with relation to toning and can never be ignored.

In order to address the AT vs. NT debate, we need to recognize what an AT coin really is. In the eyes of both the professional graders and the collecting community, an AT coin is a problem coin. Just as a cleaned coin has been improperly treated by it's past owners, AT coins can be the result of improper storage or intentional work of a coin doctor. The professional graders can only evaluate the coin as it appears to them at that time. They don't have access to historical information about coin and therefore can't possibly be expected to determine the intent of the coin's owner. What they can do is evaluate what toning patterns and color schemes are the result of proper long term storage and which are the result of a coin doctor's work or improper storage.

Here is an example. Dansco albums have always been an acceptable method of coin storage even though almost everybody recognizes that over time, this method of storage will not protect the coins from toning. While the toning that results from storage in a coin album over years can vary somewhat, there are known patterns and colors that are currently accepted by the TPG's as the result of proper coin album storage. However, if you take a coin album and subject it to increased temperatures and humidity levels, similar, but distinctively different patterns will emerge and appear on the coins in a much shorter period of time. These patterns are deemed unacceptable by the TPG's and are considered AT. It makes no difference if the toning was caused intentionally by a coin doctor or was the result of ignorance by a collector who improperly stored his coin album in an attic in Florida for the summer. In both cases, the coins were impoperly treated and as a result are now problem (AT) coins. Notice that intent had nothing to do with the equation.

In understand the "intent" argument and it is not without merit, but since the graders can't discern intent from looking at a coin, it is not a feasible method for determining the originality of the toning. The inability of the TPG's to determine intent is also one of the primary reasons for the creation of the concept of "market acceptability".

 

First and foremost, I collect coins with exceptional eye appeal. However, that does not mean that toning is everything. What you are saying was once true, but based mostly on your advice on the subject, I have learned not to ingore the other aspects of coin grading simply because a coin has pretty toning. And I thank you because I have become a more more discerning collector as a result of your advice. Having said that, I will still pay strong money for attractively toned coins.

I would say that this is correct and that it doesn't matter. However, I firmly believe that there are only a handful of people who have the skill to create AT coins that are 100% indistinguishable from the one that took decades. Most coin doctor creations will fall in between the obvious AT and wholly original. It is in this grey area of questionable toning that "market acceptability" reigns supreme.

I am a little different from most collectors. I have what are widely considered to be AT coins in my collection and I celebrate their eye appeal just as I do those that are believed to be NT. IMO, it doesn't really matter if you can't tell. Unfortunately, I am forced to care about the originality of toning for financial reasons. If and when I sell my coins, the price realized will be heavily affected by the perceived originality of my toned coins. For that reason, avoinding coins with toning that is not market acceptable is important to me. Now if I own a coin that has toning that is market acceptable and is the creation of a coin doctor, I say "ignorane is bliss."

 

If the patterns were not different, then all album toning would be quickly be deemed "market unacceptable" (AT) by the TPG's due to the sheer number of coins with those patterns being submitted to the TPG's. Since that has not happened, we are forced to assume that the patterns are different. The other alternative is that you are correct but the number of coin doctors with that skill level is so few that it limits the number of indistinguishable AT coins from entering the market.

You will hear nothing of the sort and I wouldn't ask you to prove it either way.

 

I did want to add that I do have some free submissions to PCGS to burn up and I may be sending this coin to them.

 

let me know if you have an extra, buddy

 

Wanna wager it'll slab the first time through? Say, dinner at a restaurant to be named later?

 

hahaha!!

I'm pretty confident it will too.

But just for fun I'll bet cha a beer next time I see ya that they bag it.