Beware of rainbow toning

But is it really close to the same?
Those album toned coins that most have mentioned here were collected, preserved, and cherished by a collector such as myself that filled a hole in an album. It just seems that the passion he had to preserve history was lost, when his coins didn't change color.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

To some, myself included, yes. When there are millions of coins to chose from, I want something that stands out, has history, is eye appealing, and has what I describe as the "neat factor." In many cases, toning can do that for me. On other coins, it is rarity and eye appeal, cameo contrasts, PL fields, unusually strong luster/strike, etc. I know it when I see it.

 

Okay, I was up to my eyeballs in medical issues again for a couple of days. Here's what still bugs me. I'm still not happy with a vocabulary that sounds as subjective as "market acceptable", because at least one TPG firm insists they ARE the final arbiter of both words. That leads to circular definitions, and in my book, that amounts to "because we say so".

In the case of THAT particular TPG firm, the one that drips with the "royal we" attitude, no thanks boys, I'm not willing to cede that much power to quite THAT much arrogance. YMMV indeed, but I ain't playin' their game. I'll stick to the ANA and PNG official TPG.

And I need something resembling an objective standard on AT/NT, before I'll commit hard-earned bucks into "chasing rainbows", and ESPECIALLY splotchy brown toning which ALSO is being bumped up in grade by the "royal" TPG.

 

No really you the one everyone is laughing at edited ...you just can't see past your own arrogance and hypocrisy. You were called out a long time ago in this thread and you are too blind to see it. So yes I will keep on ROFL'ing at you all day long and please keep it coming....<continues to pass popcorn to fellow forums members/takes cash for winning the bet on "who can rile him up the most". ROFL

 

Joe and Angie from the PCGS satelite site in Burbank, CA. Look them and see it for your self!!!!

 

What do you think of my 2013 toned dimes I found in a couple of rolls of dimes from the bank a while back?

 

Not to be a wise guy, but frankly, I call it "post-strike damage", just like I describe MOST (not all) toning.

We are all aware, I hope, that this whole subject is DEEPLY cultural. I hear the Chinese pretty much hate ALL toning. I don't know first hand, but I believe the source. As the collecting market becomes a world-wide one, how does "market acceptable" hold up as a definition base?

Keep in mind, MY time horizon is when my kid is an old man, not the next few years.

 

And I call it true beauty.... see I didn't pay a premium for these... as a true collector I went through several rolls searching for coins I would like to keep and found these beautys. Clearly someone didnt do it on purpose with the intent to profit from them. These obviously were made by accident yet aren't extremely old.... best of all is I found them... saw them.... liked them... put them in 2x2's.... and stored them away. You won't hear me complain about whether they are real or artificially toned... why? Because I got them and kept them because I liked them. That's what coin collecting is about. They arent for sell.... I didnt pay anything extra.... these are not only natural but they were found in a natural manner.... spend all the money you want on your toned coins and premiums but you cant spend enough to get the story and feeling of finding coins like these that I have. to put it frankly.... lol

 

Oh, no prob. They're pretty as all git out, for sure. I just don't understand a world in which someday they grade higher than the one next to it in the roll which doesn't have the color, and might have fewer contact marks to boot.

 

Doug, are you sure you're not overstating the case just a wee bit? I mean, there IS such a thing as hamfisted obviousness, isn't there? Where I'm right with you is that there is undeniably a continuum here, and the TPG's have apparently convinced THEMSELVES, and want to convince ME, that there is a bright line distinction between AT and NT. I think they're pretty good at it, but "pretty good" just isn't good enough for me to buy in. And even LESS good enough for me is "because We said so". I am completely certain of fairly few things, but of this I am certain - both terms "market" and "acceptable" are movable goalposts in the long run, just like the AU/MS line has turned out to be. Am I missing something?

 

I have stated very clearly what evidence I would accept and have done so multiple times now. This leads me to believe that you are posting without having read what has been stated. So far, we have several people - yourself included - who are making very bold claims with nothing to support them. If it can be done reliably and it is possible to duplicate any toning pattern as you and others have claimed in this and other threads, then it seems to me that someone can show me. It is very simple: Prove me wrong and I'll shut up.

When you understand how coins tone, you'll understand what I am saying regarding the indicators mentioned. All "toning" is not equal.

Apparently I didn't get the memo on that one, but suffice it to say, I don't take TPG labels as gospel and can think for myself.

 

Kurt, congratulations, I think you reached the first plateau. It's these standards. They're arbitrary and capricious. When the TPGs say "market acceptable" translate that as meaning "in the market for their plastic acceptable." Sure, it's pretentious. When they themselves don't know what they mean by the standards, that's what it is. But, understand, that plastic that coin is in is their trademark. In short, it represents the level of quality in grading they desire to project to the public. That's their choice. And these standards they're applying are arbitrary and capricious. And there's no getting around that. A delusional consumer has a need to believe otherwise, that's his or her problem. "Subjective?" Huh? Subjectivity enters in only when applying rational, definable standards. It presumes rational, definable standards, going in. Luster, strike, wear, those are all rational, definable standards. Arbitrary and capricious. Arbitrary and capricious are not rational, definable standards. Arbitrary and capricious are bogus standards, incapable of rational definition. That's the problem. It's also the reason the TPGs love the standards. Just condition the consumers to swallow them, i.e., grade their coins by them, then keep feeding the consumers a steady diet of them. Screw the standards. Get off them. Give them up. Judge the toning, not on the standards, but on whether the toning impaired the surface. If it didn't, that coin is fine, and entitled to a grade. Do you like it, is the toning appealing to your eyes? Collect it. Do you not like it, is it unappealing? Don't collect it. Real complicated...

 

Holy guacamole! It's enough to make Charles Lutwidge Dodgson (Lewis Carroll) blush, ne pas? Alice on Acid is more like it.

 

Lol. You're embracing delusional standards to grade coins by and going around in circles for it, and I'm delusional.

 

Hey! Hey! Just 'cuz somebody's delusional, doesn't mean we don't ALL get to be delusional, too, there, fella! After all, we collect little metal disks. As Henry Kissinger said of Nixon once, "Paranoids can have enemies too, you know."

 

Kurt, just get off the standards. You're going to keep chasing your tail if you don't because there's no answer outside of the standards themselves are bad.

Let the record reflect I advocate just collecting the toning you want without regard to applying these bad standards. Just make sure the surface of the coin isn't hurt. Let the TPGs and whomever else have their game, they need it, don't take it seriously.

We're pretty close, actually. This is just where we drift off, seems to me.

 

Yeah, I think so too. I guess I just came "wired" to expect rationality. Maybe a few too many Leonard Nimoy performances watched, eh? I thought I understood the need for technical grading to give way to market grading - ugly shouldn't rank higher than attractive (the 58-62 change issue). Then all this toning stuff essentially creates two different grade/price curves for any coin - one for whitish, and one for tone-ish. I thought the idea was for there to be only one. It simply can't be done with this much disagreement about toning. There are at least two whole worlds colliding, and nothing ANY schmuck says will convince me I need to pay a premium for brown splotches on a coin, just because Hall's boys say I should.

And yes, I don't "revere" some of this field's demi-gods as much as I laugh my buns off at them. So sue me.

 

Too scared to join the debate huh. Don't worry, it is a typical trait of trolls who don't have the requisite knowledge to compete. So go ahead and continue your ad hominem attacks and keep on trollin!

I think you should crackout that monstrosity and send it to them again, then you will have a GENUINE ASE.

 

Okay, now I'm absolutely CERTAIN David Hall is but a sad joke. He's doing inflation-predicting generic gold and silver hawking on his site. Oops, sorry, no one doing that gets ANY respect from me. I don't care HOW MUCH he knows about grading coins, he is NOT an economist. (I am.) There is ZERO reason to "fear" inflation in this economy, and anyone who says there is is a complete charlatan, and JUST MAYBE PERHAPS, a moron. There, I said it.

We've been TRYING for years now to nudge inflation to 2%, and all the King's horses and all the King's men can't do it. But now the "Annointed One", David Hall, says buy silver and gold? Ridiculous. What a joke! Stick to plastic hawking, Dave. And while you're at it, buy a proper shirt once in a while, why dontcha?