For new collectors visiting the site, regarding "blast white" coins--

I understood everything you said Tom, but my main problem is that when I have been noticing extensive hairlines, it generally seems to be more abundant on the open fields and not so much on the main design element.

I cant stand the look of a beautiful coin that has nice luster in hidden device areas, but then it has tons of hairlines on the open fields and next to nothing (for hairlines) on say the barber face or across a seated liberty. I just cant wrap my mind how it can blatantly appear to be mechanically cleaned and yet still grade.

In my mind circulation should be completely random from random handling. I dont expect to really see heavy hairlines in the field but the same amount absent from the design. Just makes me not trust the TPG, especially when you see a truly original XF-40 thru AU-55

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Here are 3 that i consider alright for AU grades:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/261425769424?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649

http://www.ebay.com/itm/390800452853?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649

http://www.ebay.com/itm/121283778765?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649

Then you have these AU coins that just so happened to wear the most in the deepest parts of the fields. To me I see this as intentionally being cleaned.

Heres an example of that:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/380826460120?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1868-P-Seat...11?pt=Coins_US_Individual&hash=item46170829ef

 

I pretty much only submit dirty coins anymore, like that first one. Just because if it's a mid to early 1800's coin and it's white, then it's too good to be true.

 

I like blast white on somethings and patina on others. It really just depends on the overall appearance.

Im still trying to figure out who buys all of these non-eye appealing coins. Like blotchy toned or that dark brown almost black toning. Grosss

 

Shouldn't all XF or lower coins from say, the 1820's be dark in tone? I've even seen an NGC AU55 1799 Draped Dollar that was almost white. While it was a beauty, my first thought was, "definitely cleaned."

 

On EF/AU coins hairlines should be more visible and more readily apparent within open fields vs. in or around busy design elements. These open fields are not protected as well during circulation and handling and they will pick up hairlines fastest, the hairlines will be most noticeable and they will lose their luster in these areas first. That is just a natural byproduct of circulation.

None of the five coins in the links above do anything for me, but several are more scary than the others. Again, the TPGs reflect the market.

 

Tom you seem to be well respected and an old coin sage yourself. Would you mind explaining to me what is wrong with the first three coins I provided and why you would run from these coins specifically? Is it simply because you collect higher grades or is there something atrociously wrong with the coins and the grades assigned.

I just want to understand through your eyes why to avoid such a coin. For me, I feel like they are obtainable stepping stones in my quest for more knowledge and better and better coins. I would also like to learn what the right AU coins are and what ones to avoid.

 

I am not as expert in matters as is Tom--he's not only wise about coins, but rather eloquent. However, in my opinion, the toning on coin #1 is patchy and ugly--it looks more like corrosion than toning, although it is toned. Coin #2 has that flat, lusterless look as if it were over dipped in the past, and hasn't recovered, and probably never will. Coin #3 has that "terminal toning" look--where the toning crosses over into being environmental damage. IMHO, none of the three look attractive, even though they are probably accurately graded.

 

Haha, no worries.
I know I definitely make mistakes in some of my posts here as well.

 

"Tom you seem to be well respected and an old coin sage yourself."

I showed this post to my wife, we are both in our forties, and she said to me "At least he didn't write ancient". Well...I guess that's one way of looking at it. Heck, last year I posted a thread about the Saint Gaudens National Historic Site and included pictures of my wife and little girls; I look the same age as my wife.

Kidding aside, I believe you and I do not possess the same aesthetic when we look at coins. I have seen this multiple times when coins are posted and you would not be the first person who values the appearance or surfaces of coins differently than I do. That does not mean that one of us is wrong; it just is what it is.

I don't always like to offer public opinions on coins that I know are for sale by other folks and there are multiple reasons for that. The first is that there are myriad ways to image coins and comparing multiple coins from multiple sellers with various lighting techniques is not always fair to the coins or the sellers. Also, as a full-time dealer, I know how fragile a potential sale might be and I would not want to slam someone else's sale for not good reason other than to discuss a thought issue. Lastly, with this many coins linked, I might write something quite long and no one wants to read that. All that aside, I will admit that I don't particularly care for any of the coins linked for my own reasons.

I have no qualms with the grade ranges chosen, but if you would like more detail then it may be best to send a private message.