Possibly AT Franklin. Thoughts?

I'm skeptical.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/260967688510?_trksid=p5197.c0.m619#ht_2118wt_1004

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Definitely AT, a quick glance shows that the seller sells other coins with the same toning

 

Yep.... All the others are with the same 3 color scheme......

 

That gold, red, blue progression is always artificial.

 

At

 

At

 

AT without a doubt. plus when a seller has that many coins with the same exact type toning. thats a dead giveaway

 

Ah, the infamous "Melthelegend", formerly known as "Mel-ko". She went inactive for a while, and I wondered if eBay had disciplined her for the AT shenanigans. Apparently not.

I got a lot of silver proofs from her for something like half melt last year, so I'm a happy customer, but most of her stuff I wouldn't go near.

 

As you should be

But on another note, Why would someone want a coin like that:scratch:

 

In some instances less sophisticated collectors often find such coloring attractive, or simply do not know any better. Just look at the prices the seller has achieved. In many cases 2-3 or more times what he may have gotten before adding the color. While this is blatantly obvious AT, people are clearly buying.

 

Yes, I guess there is a demand, but when I look at that coin, my first thought is, WOW, that is one butt ugly coin. Different strokes I imagine

 

Its definitely AT, but I see people buying coins even when the seller states AT in the title and description. Sometimes I just don't get people.

 

Appears to have some doubling in the date. Also, would this have been a "Full bell lines" coin?

 

fake for sure

 

All you gotta do is look at their other listings. Screams AT all the way.

 

Just read this thread again....

Really?



I'd substitute "always" with "often".

 

Hmmmm, I am not saying it is or isn't from that picture, but what makes you believe that is NT. That bulls eye effect is pretty easy to achieve for a good coin doctor. What is done is the half is stacked with other (usually junk) halves and put is a little scoop or dip net. Then it is lowered in the solution and given a swirl. This causes the halves to slide around a bit and the perimeters get a stronger dose, hence the bull's eye toning.

If you know the history of the coin or in hand it really looks NT, that is good enough for me, but the picture alone or even if it is cleanly slabbed is not.

Also I have found that on coins that have been AT'd with this method, the obverse and reverse tend to mirror each other. So on this coin where the blue goes deeper from the perimeter from about 5:00 to 8:00, if the obverse would have the same pattern from 10:00 to 1:00, I would be more suspect. The opposite would also be true, if the obverse was completely different, I would be leaning towards NT

I am not trashing the coin here, but just giving food for thought.

Mike

 

That Franklin's tone is quite unappealing.

 

Hi Mike,

Trash away! You are certainly entitled to your opinion, and your right to defend it!

For your consideration...

Here's the front of the coin:



Here's what the coin looks like in-hand (these two photos are a bit overexposed):




Here's what I know about the coin: I've owned the coin for about 6 years. The coin is slabbed NGC PF 64. I purchased it from Mark Feld, a former NGC grader (and a heck of a coin dealer and gentleman). The coin subsequently was approved by the CAC in 2008. The coin has remain unchanged in appearance from the day I bought it -- not that any of that means the coin is necessarily NT.

Now having seen both sides, and read the above, what do you think?

To me, the coin looks like it was partially toned, then was lightly wiped (leaving a few telltale hairlines almost entirely on the front and very typical of proofs of this era), and has since retoned. It does not appear artificially toned to me in the least.

But what do you think?

Take care...Mike