Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Troodon, post: 1575728, member: 4626&quot;]Glad you sensed the animosity, sometimes I worry I&#039;m being too subtle about it lol...&nbsp; Many people eat at McDonalds, but that doesn&#039;t make them a gourmet restaurant.&nbsp; Popularity does not prove quality.&nbsp; I can concede that many and probably most rely on TPGs&#039; opinions when buying and selling coins, but that doesn&#039;t mean they should.&nbsp; However I love it when TPGs undergrade coins or declare them problems.&nbsp; I get a lot of bargains for my collection that way.&nbsp; My favorite so far was an AU trade dollar that NGC gave a details grade to because of chopmarks on the reverse.&nbsp; Easily knocked $100 off the price, and it&#039;s still a great coin IMO (and as far as I&#039;m concerned, the chopmarks added to the historic interest of the coin, rather than detract from its appearance.&nbsp; Proves it was actually used instead of just sitting in a box for the last 134 years).</p><p><br /></p><p>Hey learning to grade coins is harder than someone else doing it for you.&nbsp; But the effort can be well worth it, especially when you find nice coins that TPGs undergrade or &quot;bodybag&quot; in the interest of so-called &quot;high standards.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>Back to the original subject at hand, I think that cent&#039;s toning is probably natural.&nbsp; But if TPGs think it&#039;s artificial and you still like it, who cares?&nbsp; It&#039;s still just as good of a coin.&nbsp; Only reason AT/NT even matters is if you sell it, and even then some would want it anyway even if it is artificial.&nbsp; I think the toning on this looks nice, and I usually HATE toning most of the time.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in