Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Lehigh96, post: 1090126, member: 15309&quot;]Doug,</p><p><br /></p><p>There is one key difference between your sealed box and coin albums.&nbsp; The use of a coin album is a standard and accepted method for storing coins.&nbsp; I don&#039;t know anyone who would consider a temperature &amp; humidity controlled sealed box with known reactive gasses as an accepted method for coin storage.&nbsp; In your sealed box example, it would absolutely be AT.</p><p><br /></p><p>You are claiming that placing coins in an accepted storage method (coin albums) is AT because the owner placed them there with the intent of developing toning.&nbsp; What if the owner placed the coins in the album with sole intent of storing his coins and they eventually toned despite his efforts to prevent toning?&nbsp; How is one different from the other?&nbsp; The answer is that they are not different at all.&nbsp; In your sealed box example, you had to dismiss the time issue in order to claim that both methods are AT.&nbsp; It doesn&#039;t matter if the coins are in a Wayte Raymond holder or a Dansco album, it will take years to develop toning and there is no way to predict exactly what the toning will look like on the coins.&nbsp; If you don&#039;t like the toning, you don&#039;t have the opportunity to start over like you would with your sealed box scenario.&nbsp; The time issue is an important and relevant factor with relation to toning and can never be ignored.</p><p><br /></p><p>In order to address the AT vs. NT debate, we need to recognize what an AT coin really is.&nbsp; In the eyes of both the professional graders and the collecting community, an AT coin is a problem coin.&nbsp; Just as a cleaned coin has been improperly treated by it&#039;s past owners, AT coins can be the result of improper storage or intentional work of a coin doctor.&nbsp; The professional graders can only evaluate the coin as it appears to them at that time.&nbsp; They don&#039;t have access to historical information about coin and therefore can&#039;t possibly be expected to determine the intent of the coin&#039;s owner.&nbsp; What they can do is evaluate what toning patterns and color schemes are the result of proper long term storage and which are the result of a coin doctor&#039;s work or improper storage.</p><p><br /></p><p>Here is an example.&nbsp; Dansco albums have always been an acceptable method of coin storage even though almost everybody recognizes that over time, this method of storage will not protect the coins from toning.&nbsp; While the toning that results from storage in a coin album over years can vary somewhat, there are known patterns and colors that are currently accepted by the TPG&#039;s as the result of proper coin album storage.&nbsp; However, if you take a coin album and subject it to increased temperatures and humidity levels, similar, but distinctively different patterns will emerge and appear on the coins in a much shorter period of time.&nbsp; These patterns are deemed unacceptable by the TPG&#039;s and are considered AT.&nbsp; It makes no difference if the toning was caused intentionally by a coin doctor or was the result of ignorance by a collector who improperly stored his coin album in an attic in Florida for the summer.&nbsp; In both cases, the coins were impoperly treated and as a result are now problem (AT) coins.&nbsp; Notice that intent had nothing to do with the equation.</p><p><br /></p><p>In understand the &quot;intent&quot; argument and it is not without merit, but since the graders can&#039;t discern intent from looking at a coin, it is not a feasible method for determining the originality of the toning.&nbsp; The inability of the TPG&#039;s to determine intent is also one of the primary reasons for the creation of the concept of &quot;market acceptability&quot;.[/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