For toner lovers--this looks like a wild one--not mine!!

Geez, all of this about a simple post of what I thought was an attractive Morgan dollar. Talk about everybody getting needlessly excited. Please chill out, folks. I tell you, I love this forum, and am not going anywhere, but if you think I am ever going to post a coin and ask what somebody's opinion is of it again? Not a chance---the responses are not positive, constructive.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

All i will say is, I think there will be plenty of toned coin collectors that think, that coin is awesome. It will probably go pretty high. Toned coins are like art, a person may hate a painting because they don't understand it, or they don't appreciate it. Then there are people who see a painting and do what ever it takes to get it.

 

This is a discussion forum on coins. If you don't like opinions that differ from your own then you shouldn't post here. This isn't an ego-stroking fan-boy society.

 

So, why are you posting now? You're not discussing a coin--your intention is exclusively to put me down. If this is a place of learning, diverse opinions should be welcomed, tolerated, and not treated with instant negativity. I wish a moderator would take down this thread, as my ONLY intention was to post a coin for the benefit of folks who own toned coins. I happened to like it, and shared it for other people's benefit. This was NOT an exercise in "guess the grade," or "evaluate the coin." My bad to think that it could just be left that way--live and learn.

 

I already posted my opinion of the coin. Which you didn't like. Remember, you are the one who turned a few opinions of a coin into supposed personal attacks.

 

Whatever. I am not here to argue with you. I liked the coin and was sharing it for the benefit of some folks I know who like toners. Let's stop the back and forth, please. I thought Doug's response was very appropriate--the coin wasn't his cup of tea, but there is "Vanilla and Chocolate" seemed rather appropriate.

 

I love toned coins and have built my small collection around them. I dislike the linked coin's obverse for the 2:00 toning progression (too dark) and for the unattractive reddish tones on the reverse (that appear unnatural to me - no expert though). However, if the number of bidders (54) so far are indicative of what toning is enjoyed by many collectors, I'm in the minority!

 

Catbert, 44 of the 54 bids are by the same bidder one increment at a time

 

Probably a shill, because if you really want something, why would you draw so much attention to it.

 

I like it just fine.

 

I really am not sure where to start with this thread so I will start with the coin itself.



You are gonna have to add me to the list of people who don't like the look of this coin. I won't go so far as to say the toning is artificial, but why mess around with an apparently album toned 1881-S Morgan Dollar when there are literally thousands of certified bag toned examples available.

As for your comments towards Tom. I have learned more about toned coins from Tom than any other collector or dealer who frequents the internet coin forums. Lots of people like to throw my name around as a so called "expert" on toning. And while I do have extensive experience in the toned coin market, Tom is one of my teachers. I would trust his eye for toning above just about anybody else.

The fact that we don't like the coin should not be taken as an indictment of your evaluation of the coin or its eye appeal. Rather, as Doug pointed out, this is a chocolate & vanilla issue.

 

I have no problem with your response. You were polite--he wasn't. That is really the bottom line. I hate being patronized, and Tom did do so. Yes, I recognize that he's alleged to be experienced ( I don't know him, so I trust your statement that he has the expertise, but to me he's a stranger), but patronization is no excuse for responding in a negative and cynically rude manner. You didn't like the coin, but didn't personalize your response. He did. That is why I reacted as I did, and I don't regret it. Some folks may have expertise, but don't communicate it all that well with others in a given situation. If I offended anybody, my bad, but I am expressing my feelings. It wasn't my coin in the first place, and I offered the link just for folks to take a look, if they so desired. Likewise, I thought Doug's response was polite and non-patronizing. It clearly is a Vanilla and Chocolate issue, but trying to make someone look like an uninformed "underling" isn't the best way to make a point in this hobby.

Your comment described the reasons you didn't like the coin. His was merely a condemnation, as if I had no idea what I was doing. Sorry, but this is just how I feel.

Tom's comment:
"That was fairly rude. Why don't you go to my website, not to buy anything, but to read, and then post again. You may learn something."

That more than draws inferences that I don't know what I am talking about. I'd say it was behind patronizing, inasmuch as I didn't know who he is, and still don't see expertise as a vehicle for condescending comments.

 

If you post on a public forum your gonna need a thicker skin.. or get medicated..lol.

As to the coin, I'd pass. QT imo, not attractive, not definitely NOT rainbow toning.

 

Let's be somewhat accurate here. Your first post described the pictures as "crappy" and the photos as "inadequate". Those are certainly statements of condemnation toward the seller and his images and they were not couched as opinion. They were written as statements of fact. I responded very simply and directly that I would interpret the coin as having negative eye appeal and I used the word "interpret" because you had already disparaged the images and, therefore, called into question their accuracy. Therefore, my interpretation of the images was that the coin would have negative eye appeal. There was nothing insulting in my post; it was merely a statement of opinion "I would interpret...".

Your response to me was over the top and, yes, very, very rude. Again, I replied with a short, honest statement that you may well learn something if you read my site. Apparently, you not only did not go to my site to read anything, but you also jumped to the conclusion that I thought you knew nothing about this niche. Of course, your responses since then have not completely elaborated your issues, which appear to be myriad, but I imagine you never thought that my intent for you to read my site was to discover for yourself that I actually love toned coins. You were directed to my site to discover this because of the question in your post-

"On what planet? Do you know anything about toned coins, and what people who collect toners think of rainbow toning? Or is this just the typical board "Knee Jerk" remark?"

Since then, I have remained out of actively discussing this topic since I do not know if there is anything constructive to add to it, but have posted again to set the record straight about who said what and when. You are free to be insulted, perturbed, offended or whatever you like, but please have the courage to send me a PM about the issues you face in the event that they still boil over.

 

Nothing more to say about this. Let it be.

 

You should have. Can't believe you would act this way.

 

175.00 hammer price. I think at least a couple of people thought it had a positive eye appeal.

 

FWIW, the coin's toning is too flaky and inconsistent to be considered "attractive" in my eyes. But that's in comparison to ALL of the Morgan issue. As it stands, the rainbow coloring isn't exactly "unattractive," in it of itself.

Another problem with the coin is the way it's been presented. The fact that the seller needs to use diffused lighting (and this coin is not PL/proof) in order to highlight the colors makes me think that under "normal" lighting this coin would be much less spectacular. Not to mention diffused lighting hides a lot of scratches/luster breaks in the coin.

Like TomB said, I would interpret the coin, based off the seller's photos, to be a bit unattractive. In-hand examination might prove a completely different conclusion. But as it stands there's not a whole lot going for the coin. But perhaps all of us are so used to seeing spectacular Rainbow monsters that we become bored and unimpressed by less-spectacular specimens, lol