The Toning Premium Thread Part 2

Were they purchased raw and then you graded them?

The colors are nice and this set deserves a premium, but not what I would consider monster money. The fact that it is a matching set with ascending grades, adds a coolness factor. I do think that a lack of stars can hurt toned coins in new NGC holders. However, I have seen some coins that should have the star but didn't get it and vice versa. So the lack of a star should never automatically disqualify a coin.

Either way, I'll say you got them for $175 total and would receive about $300 if selling.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Those 85o's are only going to get a small premium at best.

 

$160 paid, and maybe could get $240

 

They were graded when I purchased them.

 

The NGC ⋆ designation is more subjective than one may think. When graded, if any of the graders or finalizer disagree with the star designation, it is not awarded.

It is also not only awarded for pretty colors and toning.

It can be given to MS coins for "eye appeal" including beautiful toning, for superb/exceptional luster, or for nearly prooflike surfaces.

On proof coins, it can mean many things -- sometimes more than one thing, and it leaves the owner guessing what it means. On proofs it can be given for nice toning, nearly cameo contrast (on non-cameo coins), or nearly ultra cameo contrast (on cameo but non-ultra-cameo coins). It can also be given if a coin is fully cameo (or ultra-cameo) on one side, but not on both sides.

For the set of coins posted by @Beefer518 , I would guess he paid $185. Just a WAG.

 

Good points! This is why I was suggesting that the star can help sell a coin, but it shouldn't be the main deciding factor.

 

You gave 190$
And agree, split them up and get 350 to 370 out of them.

 

Like I mentioned earlier, I really do respect their coins with stars. Ones without don't necessarily guarantee an unappealing coin but when they have toning patterns that pictures make look great without a star it definitely is one I'm passing on.

Unfortunately it seems like the star is more than priced in lately though and it's very tough to find any sort of reasonably priced one.

 

I have never paid, nor will I EVER pay, even one cent extra for toning. I just simply won't do it.

 

Love ya Kurt but you deserve this after that statement...

 

Why? Toning ain't worth SQUAT to ME. (Except to use it to make fun of others who overpay for it.) I'm calling "passing fad" on the whole subject.

 

Blasphemy!

 

"Vhy sank you, doktor."

 

So you won't pay more money for a coin with more original surfaces than one that has been dipped out? The "original surfaces" are a form of toning associated with age.

Paying more money for toned coins has been called a "passing fad" for more than 20-25 years -- it hasn't "passed" yet, and the majority of coins that sell for record prices are those with superb eye appeal and original surfaces (translation = "toning"). You're entitled to your opinion, and your preferences -- but, superbly original and eye appealing coins these days (and for a long time) can not be bought or sold for Grey Sheet prices. Let's focus on reality here...

 

"Reality" is toning premiums are FALLING in the current market. Some markets take longer than others to shake the "fad" and "fetish" out of them. Yes, if you've been buying color over the last decade or two, I expect you'll get a lot angrier soon.

I expect the whole market to collapse once it's known how high a percentage of toners are faked.

 

Everything is falling in the current market. Your argument is weak at best. But carry on.

 

I have a DEEPLY rim and radial toned '64 Kennedy half (greens, purples, russets) that is a stupid ordinary MS63 without the toning, but which NGC graded MS65 last year. It has "beaucoup" marks on it. But because some jabronie stuck it in a snap-close Whitman holder with a cardboard insert that toned it up over a few decades, it's now a stinking 65?!!? Not in any world that makes sense, pal. I keep it on my desk as a reminder of how stupid the whole toner scene is.

What did I do with the original holder? I put a nice '65 Kennedy in it to see how fast 40% silver Kennedies gain in "stupidity value".

 

Come on just admit to yourself you keep it on your desk cause you kinda like looking at it

I agree that the example of your Kennedy is absurd but I think that is 100% an outlier. They don't routinely (or ever in my experience to be honest) bump a coin that much because of color.

 

I hear you, and I hope desperately you're right about that, but what I'm seeing gives me doubts.

 

A good chunk of my Morgan set so far has some kind of color on it and I'm pretty confident out of those it's a normal dispersion of mostly graded properly (by today's standards), with some over and under graded ones sprinkled in. I don't think by any stretch even my real nice toners got much of a bump if any. A few of my most attractive ones (by the general toning fan market I'm sure you'd not be a fan) as it turns out I feel are under graded and I'll be sending in for reconsideration at some point if I ever want to sell.

This is another reason I like NGC's star system so much. Instead of a nice eye appeal coin that's normally a 64 getting a 64+ or 65, they slap a star on it at 64* and call it a day.