Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;CamaroDMD, post: 606165, member: 5233&quot;]I disagree.&nbsp; But I think the definition of AT is different to everyone.&nbsp; I would define AT as physically altering the surface of the coin with the use of chemicals or heat.&nbsp; But, if I put a coin in an envelope for a year on a window sill...is that AT?&nbsp; To me it&#039;s not.&nbsp; That coin toned naturally.&nbsp; Is album toning natural or AT...someone put that coin in the album.&nbsp; Is selling that coin as NT OK?&nbsp; I mean...human&#039;s made those canvas bags and placed the Morgan Dollars in them.&nbsp; <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie2" alt=";)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>I don&#039;t think anyone here disagrees that altering a coin&#039;s surface to deceive the buyer and gain a profit from that deception is wrong.&nbsp; But, be that as it may...we can still appreciate the beauty of the coin.&nbsp; Those are two completely separate discussions that are being combined here.</p><p><br /></p><p>Do the TPGs get these wrong sometimes...of course.&nbsp; They get other things wrong too but I would imagine the toning issue is probably their greatest problem.&nbsp; There is just too many variables in toning, even the best experts in the world might get them wrong.&nbsp; It has already been shown that PCGS policy is basically &quot;when in doubt don&#039;t slab.&quot;&nbsp; That means they can&#039;t confirm it as NT not that it isn&#039;t.&nbsp; That&#039;s just the nature of toning.[/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