I need to respectfully disagree with the people who repeatedly post comments on this board suggesting that acid-restoring a date renders a coin worthless. Perhaps it may according to RedBook or Grey Sheet values, but in reality, value is set by the price the market will bear.
Dateless coins are generally that way for a reason...they are severely worn and of little value based solely on their overall condition. Acid-restoring the date is not going to hurt the value of these coins, because they essentially have no value to begin with.
In the case of silver, the coins are worth only melt value whether or not they have been restored...but they could be worth more if a key date is revealed in the restoration.
In the case of Buffalo nickels, those with acid-restored dates generally sell for more than no-date nickels and, again, they could be worth significantly more if the restoration reveals a key date.
The benefit to restoring is that the severely worn coins are generally older dates, and possibly key dates. Key date coins have value even if they are acid-restored. I understand that most of the hard-core collectors on this board don't see any value in them; however, beginners see the value, as do collectors with limited finances who want to fill holes in their albums.
A few weeks ago I posted some photos of a horrible looking 1918 Buffalo nickel. If it were to be graded, it would probably end up as either "FR-2 Acid-Restored" or (at best) "AG-3 Acid-Restored." The restored date showed what appeared to be a 7 under the 8. People from this board seemed to agree that it was most likely a 1918/17. In my opinion, it wasn't worth the cost of joining ANACS and the cost of attributing/grading, since it was in such bad condition and wouldn't have significant value either way. However, even in its horrible, unattributed condition, I found somebody who paid me $60 shipped for it.
I know it isn't much, especially to the hard-core collectors, but it's sure a heck of a lot more than the $.15 that it was worth when it was a no-date.
I've never personally restored a coin, but I'm giving serious thought to doing some. It's all a personal decision, but to render a coin valueless simply because the date has been restored is wrong. I agree it devalues the coin, but it doesn't necessarily make it valueless.
Dateless coins are generally that way for a reason...they are severely worn and of little value based solely on their overall condition. Acid-restoring the date is not going to hurt the value of these coins, because they essentially have no value to begin with.
In the case of silver, the coins are worth only melt value whether or not they have been restored...but they could be worth more if a key date is revealed in the restoration.
In the case of Buffalo nickels, those with acid-restored dates generally sell for more than no-date nickels and, again, they could be worth significantly more if the restoration reveals a key date.
The benefit to restoring is that the severely worn coins are generally older dates, and possibly key dates. Key date coins have value even if they are acid-restored. I understand that most of the hard-core collectors on this board don't see any value in them; however, beginners see the value, as do collectors with limited finances who want to fill holes in their albums.
A few weeks ago I posted some photos of a horrible looking 1918 Buffalo nickel. If it were to be graded, it would probably end up as either "FR-2 Acid-Restored" or (at best) "AG-3 Acid-Restored." The restored date showed what appeared to be a 7 under the 8. People from this board seemed to agree that it was most likely a 1918/17. In my opinion, it wasn't worth the cost of joining ANACS and the cost of attributing/grading, since it was in such bad condition and wouldn't have significant value either way. However, even in its horrible, unattributed condition, I found somebody who paid me $60 shipped for it.
I know it isn't much, especially to the hard-core collectors, but it's sure a heck of a lot more than the $.15 that it was worth when it was a no-date.
I've never personally restored a coin, but I'm giving serious thought to doing some. It's all a personal decision, but to render a coin valueless simply because the date has been restored is wrong. I agree it devalues the coin, but it doesn't necessarily make it valueless.
Edited by mahgobbi
02/05/2008 10:13 am
02/05/2008 10:13 am























