So what exactly does this mean? I know some members in here have got their coins with that grade and then they re-submitted them with the sniffer and it came back with a grade. I'm looking at some Indians on TT and I see 3 that say questionable color. How do you know if the color has been altered or if the coin just needs to hit the sniffer? Here's one I was looking at http://www.teletrade.com/coins/lot.asp?auction=3456&lot=1052&nextlot=-1
The color in the photos of the 1896 IHC looks good to me. I don't know why it would be "questionable", unless it looks "too new".
Copper cents get this more than most other types of coins. When TPGs see a look that's not normal, they question it. They are not saying it's AT but are not sure if it's NT. Sometimes they do get a clear grade the second time around. Copper is tough.
As Larry said, when the graders see a toned coin and something about the toning just looks "off" to them they will label it as Questionable Color. The first word kind of says it all, meaning - maybe it is AT, and maybe it isn't AT, we don't know for sure. But this time we are going with the maybe it is side. But if the owner cracked it out and sent it back in again it very well might be deemed acceptable and graded. The graders are fickle that way, and not just about color. They are fickle about color, grade, special designations, if a coin has been harshly cleaned, altered surfaces, damage, etc etc. What confuses me is why you seem to think that the sniffer has anything to do with them changing their decision. The sniffer cannot tell you if the toning is AT or NT. The only thing the sniffer can do is tell you if there is a foreign substance on the coin like putty, nose grease, oils, etc. As for why this particular coin was labeled QC, my guess would be because it was dipped and then intentionally re-toned.
I agree with Doug on the sniffer, and I would not bid on it, as its appearance ( if true in graphic) kicks my brain as wrong for the coin. I suspect an early cleaning and a long re-toning period also, but the odd coloration from the initial action still peeks through. I also agree that broken out and resubmitted might get a different opinion.
Copper can be tricky. I can't comment on the coin in question since I don't look at late modern coinage (even when it's a century old). I gringe, however, when I see old coppers (nearly three centuries old, made in a damp Tower of London Mint, and probably stored in a rainy England) retaining some of its "original" mint red (not my coin): Copper is one of those things I prefer "natural." guy
I think you guys have all missed the real explanation here. When TPG first became a force in the world of numismatics, only the very nicest material was submitted for grading and authentication. As time has gone on, and as slabs have become almost an unhealthy obsession for collectors, nearly every decent coin out there has already been sent in for grading. The only exception being new issues that are can be graded by a 3 year-old as either MS69 or MS70 depending on his/her disposition at that moment. As for the rest of the traditional series of coins, --including Indian Head Cents-- most of the coins your typical grader at NGC and PCGS see now days is a piece of crap. That is, stuff no one would have dreamed of sending in 20 years ago because it would have been (and still is) a total waste of money. Coins with PVC damage, coins with massive hairlines, unbelievably NOT very deceptive counterfeits....,, And so, after looking at 75 boxes of coins a day, a nice coin turns-up in a submission, the normal reaction for a TPG in 2013 is to immediately grade the coin as "TGTBT" --that is, Too-Good-To-Be-True. Their instincts tell them that if the coin really is original, it would have been sent in many years ago, and while there is always the possibility that the coin is a crack-out, that chance is negligible. Besides, even if they are wrong, --as with this particular 1896 cent-- disparaging the coin does them no harm and might even generate some additional revenue if the submitter is foolish enough to send it back in for a second round of potential disparagement.
Princeofwaldo, I agree with your assertion that most nice coins have already been sent in for grading; however, I don't think we all have an unhealthy obsession with slabs. I like them because they keep a coin protected from everyday disasters while authenticating the coin as genuine. I do agree that the registry set crowd does have an unhealthy obsession with the slab.
Not just the registry set crowd... the everyday collector too. For example, I can sell a raw XF 1829 Capped Bust Half on eBay for $115, but in a PCGS holder I can get $200+ for one, even if it is less attractive than the raw one. People are addicted to the holder. Often, when I am selling them raw people email me and ask, "If I send this to PCGS or NGC, will it grade???"
Well, I'm not one of them. I do believe you though. I can't believe the PCGS fervor on their message boards. You say something remotely bad about PCGS and you get banned.
PERFECT explanation! I don't see anything bad in the pictures. That coin could easily pass the next time - crack it out and let nature restore its health on a window sill. It will eventually regain a more neutral RB color.
This just might have something to do with who pays the bills. You could always sub eco and reap the rewards... but then comes the $64,000 question. This very well could have more to do with the prevalence of problems and/or fear of buying them than because of plastic envy. Even if left raw, in most cases collectors still want their coins to be gradable, and is the same reason why detail/genny holders are the numismatic equivalent of a scarlet A.
Well I don't think its a matter of addiction, I pretty much only buy CAC graded NGC/PCGS coins, and there are numerous reason for doing so which I wont go into again here, however I will state this: You may prefer your carrots raw, some prefer them cooked. It's not an addiction, its a matter of preference.
