I was looking at coins on eBay and ran across a 1799 US Gold coin, the slab said "cleaned". Why would someone clean a gold coin? Gold does not tarnish.
Same reason someone would want to clean a 1832 bust half. thinking they know how to improve its looks
A common belief, but an inaccurate belief. Especially 90% gold, which all US gold coins are. It is just as common to find harshly cleaned gold coins as it is to find harshly cleaned silver and copper coins. Problem is, it is often a lot harder to detect harsh cleaning on gold coins than it is to detect harsh cleaning on silver and copper coins. That is why if you do not know gold coins, and I mean really know them, you should not buy them raw.
But they do get dirty and gold alloys can and do tarnish. Also some people liked to polish up their coins in bygone days, a practice that shocks our sensibilities now.
I have a nice EF 1879 quarter eagle that I bought as scrap 10 years ago that has lead-tin soldier on the reverse (removed from a cuff-link I believe). This is a case where cleaning would be the way to go. I plan to put it into a gold bezel and chain for my wife.
Of course gold coins tone with the 10% copper. I have seen a huge variation of tones and colors and spots of various sizes and colors and descriptions, so yes, people WANT TO GET THAT BLEMISH OFF THE COIN BUT IT CANNOT BE DONE BY IDIOTS!!! People, including many dealers have dipped gold coins or cleaned them with ultrasonic cleaners or with soap and water for years looking to get a higher grade. Such can result in much lower grades and/or bright shiny coins that do get a higher grade but not a more aesthetic one.
Here we go again It's not just the gold coins with 10% copper alloy that tone. Even the .999 and the .9999 gold coins tone.
A Simple Explanation Why do "conservers" clean mint state coins that are recovered from wrecks, dealers "dip" gold coins, Top Tier TPG grade cleaned coins from their affiliates and others? I believe one will find the simple answer is because consumers generally are reluctant to purchase a natural filthy coin at a fair market price, although it may have era proper mint detail/handling appropriately aged appearance. Todays' consumer generally never having seen a US coin from the last era of US Gold coin mintage, but having viewed ~80 year more recent modern era US Gold coins, with relatively flawless appearance have come to expect the same of antiquated coinage. Even the A.N.A. with its' misguided grading standard for 160 year old Gold coins states that a MS60 grade coin "has full mint luster with surfaces lightly marred", which I believe is generally only a dealers' dream. Generally, regardless of where you would have stored that coin 160 years ago, it wouldn't have full mint luster today. I have numerous MS60 coins graded by top tier TPG, and I can hardly remember a coin below MS62 meeting this criteria, and have MS65 certified coins that don't meet this criteria. When I started collecting US Double Eagle coins I sought out a dealer who was a "card carrying member", coin club president, and certified estate appraiser. My primary criteria was "mint state" condition, certified by top tier TPG. I was provided with a list to select from, with the assurance that because these were the top tier TPG, I could be assured that they were correctly graded, and resale wouldn't be a problem. I received "mint state" (MS60-61) top tier certified coins that looked as if they were buried for a century, eventually purchasing MS62 grade coins which significantly more expensive, but less than the prohibitedly priced MS63 . They had more luster, but generally didn't meet the "full mint luster" A.N.A. standard. After a strong 5 figure investment, I figured if I found a PCGS site advertised dealer, I would receive far more expensive, but "properly graded" coins. That was only a dream. It took a major investment and several years effort before I found a dealer who had some beautiful certified Gold Double Eagle coins of Type III St. Gaudens design, that were priced considerably less than Type II coins which had higher mintage and looked like they were covered with manure. I told him that I was interested in purchasing a large sum if he would explain the why and how of these less expensive lower mintage lustrous identical composition Gold coins. He took me aside to show me the where with all of "conserving" Gold coins, which was basically "dipping", which he explained "everyone did" often to the newer type coins, because "buyers expected it". Over the years I was informed about the inconsistent grading standards of the "top tier" TPG, and that a cleaned lower grade coin from one top TPG could possibly be removed from holder, and submitted to another, receiving an equal or greater grade. Sure enough, I could consistently acquire "cleaned" coins from one TPG and have them acceptably graded by another. This perception of flawless expectations has results in recent posts/comments on this site questioning how a higher graded mint state "top tier" TPG certified coin could receive even a grade other than GENUINE. The majority of posts agreed that the coin couldn't be mint state. We now have TPG "Market Grading" seemingly supported by the majority of sellers, because it appears that the simple answer is: Market Expectations trump Reality. You might possibly acquire that cleaned coin, send it to a "conserver", and have it become an acceptable product?
Rich I think there is glaring difference in what you are talking about and what the OP is talking about. Yes, it can correctly be said that dipped coins have been cleaned. But unless the dip is done incorrectly it cannot be said that they were harshly cleaned. Harshly cleaned is what the OP is talking about.
Definitions Doug, I'm sorry but I beg to differ with you, as the OP question was seemingly naively specific. I personally haven't ESP capability to read ones' mind when it is asked "Why would someone clean a gold coin?". Nor would I propose to be the authority of what is meant when TPG use a vague word having specific meaning to describe perceived subjective conditions. The question was quite specific, and I provided a verbose, but somewhat specific answer. If TPG were to use words as "scoured", "abraded", "altered", etc., I wouldn't take exception to their efforts. These words are definitive, consuming less label space, why aren't they used? Because, I believe the figurative "Elephant in the room" where definitive words may adversely affect some interested parties. In my opinion, and I believe a panel of objective disinterested jurors, it could easily be shown that use of this word is improper. I believe that if an action were adjudicated, where damages were cited, caused by the use of a general word, a word which isn't used consistently in the professional grading industry, an objective finding would support the complainant. Unless there are specific criteria stated for application of this general word, which I suspect would apply to the majority of "circulated" coins, I pose that the word isn't adequately definitive. If it can be shown that "cleaned" coins can receive a differing result by other equally qualified professionals within, or without of the same organization, I suspect that damages could be affirmed. If we view the facts about the frequency of "cleaning" and subsequent submission by benefiting parties, I believe objective individuals will take exception to only few having authority of definition. I pose that neither you nor I have that ultimate authority to define the word "clean" or add perceived adjectives. An authoritative definition of the word clean, is simply: "Free (remove) from foreign matter or pollution". After viewing the vehemently guttural hostilities posted in this thread when a simple question is asked about a commonly spoken vague word, I feel as I queried the use of a commonly spoken ethnic word at a NAACP meeting. Just my humble opinion folks. I'm sorry, the "Devils' Advocacy" made me do it. :hail:
Rich - The following are the designation numbers/codes used by PCGS and a written explanation of what those codes mean. They are pretty specific, especially about the word - cleaned. NGC follows the same basic rules and definitions. 92|N-2 Cleaned – surface damage due to a harsh, abrasive cleaning 94|N-4 Altered Surface - Whizzed, harsh cleaning, thumbed over (using a pasty substance to cover defects or alter the appearance). You'll notice that they always specify "harsh cleaning" and that use of the word "cleaned" specifically means harsh cleaning. The problem we run into is that whenever people engage in conversation they use the word cleaned/cleaning to mean harshly cleaned or harsh cleaning. That includes use of the word cleaned on a slab. And as you and I both know there many millions of dipped coins in TPG slabs. So dipping is not considered to be harsh cleaning. There are also many millions of coins that have been improperly dipped or over-dipped that have been rejected by the TPGs and not slabbed. So those coins are considered to be harshly cleaned.
Uninformed In Past Doug, I now stand informed. I've never seen the clarifiers, but merely "cleaned". I would think it relatively simple to identify as: 92|N-2 Damage, or 94|N-4 Altered , which would avoid the hostile conversations concerning the word which is not definitive. Both of the conditions outlined literally are not cleaning as authoritatively defined (Free (remove) foreign matter or pollution), but conditions of surface alteration. I believe most objective individuals, including myself would be appalled by the aforementioned treatment to a Numismatic piece. I've generally hardly seen harsh alterations with a loupe when viewing the surfaces of coins labeled "cleaned", so I suspect the general definition of harsh is microscopic alteration. I would expect that harsh alteration would preclude acceptable grading by another TPG. But then again, I suspect that acceptable alteration may be of micron level for some, while at a mil level for others. Thanks for the enlightenment. Rich :hail:
Then perhaps you need a copy of all the designations/codes for future use. It may prove helpful with understanding No Grades PCGS will not grade and encapsulate any coins with the following problems: 86 No Opinion – our experts are unable to determine a coin’s authenticity – fee refunded 87 Not Eligible For Service Selected – the coin is too valuable for the chosen service level – fee refunded 90 Questionable Authenticity – the coin is most likely a counterfeit. 91|N-1 Questionable/Artificial Toning (or Questionable Color for copper) 92|N-2 Cleaned – surface damage due to a harsh, abrasive cleaning 93|N-3 Planchet Flaw - Metal impurity or defect in the planchet – depends on severity 94|N-4 Altered Surface - Whizzed, harsh cleaning, thumbed over (using a pasty substance to cover defects or alter the appearance). 95|N-5 Scratch - depends on the severity of the scratch 96|N-6 No Service – coins we do not certify (i.e. medals, some privately made issues, etc.) or cannot certify (i.e. over-sized coins) 97|N-7 Environmental Damage – i.e. corrosion, coating (lacquer), excessively heavy toning, etc. 98|N-8 Damage – deliberate surface damage, i.e. graffiti, spot(s) removed, etc. – depends on severity 99|N-9 PVC (Poly-Vinyl-Chloride) – a plasticizer used to produce vinyl that will leach out of the holder and onto the coin, eventually damaging the surfaces.
