Useless CAC sticker

Have you used their services?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Ruben, I am surprised you think that 28-s has a "substandard strike". I could not disagree more, and I'd bet if you chose 10 mint state examples of that date at random, this one would be ranked 1 or 2 in terms of strike....Mike

 

Now this is a MS66 FH
worthy of the grade


http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=1151&lotNo=4655#Photo

Notice the head is FULL, and to my quick count has only 4 hits.

Ruben

 

Your hatred of the toning is clouding your judgement. Have NCS dip it, you might like it better. As for the strike, that was not a well struck date/mm, at least according to Cline. As a toning enthusiast, I actually like that type of toning as long as it doesn't affect the luster. If I had a job, I might bid on that coin.

 

Not for that grade. The head is fine but the SHIELD is missing two rivets and is weak.

 

Isn't that always

 

Now this is a good MS66

http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=1171&lotNo=3722#Photo

 

No it isn't. First I don't hate toning. I like a light natural toning on my coins. Secondly, this is rust, not tone.

 

I'll send it too you. Make an offer

 

No I have not.

If it's not marketing fluff as I stated, than why is that slabbed coins with a CAC sticker on them have a price tag much higher than the coin would without that sticker, and in the same grade?

 

You can't compare strikes across different dates/mm. The 1929 had an above average strike while the 1928-S had a below average strike. Almost all of the 1929's are going to have a better strike than the 1928-S'.

At the risk of sounding like a 5 year old, same difference.

 

Perhaps, in many cases they actually are more attractive coins, and sell for a premium. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I've bought many CAC coins.

 

Please don't phrase it that way. A CAC sticker does not mean the coin has above average eye appeal and does not equate to attractiveness. It simply means that the coin is solid for the assigned grade and with respect to the incremental grades (A,B,C), it is either an A or B coin. Here is a quote from the CAC website:

 

NO MS66 means it has above average eye apeal

 

So if the coin turns black - that is toning bias? This coin has BLACK SPOTS. Now who is being fanatical with regard to toning ...

Yur not gonna win this one Paul. Argue in favor of MS 70.

 

Possibly or possibly not.

 

NO CONTEST ! YOU ARE A WINNER! MS66 OVERGRADE UGLY COIN ...RUSTY not TONING!

 

The PCGS standard for MS66 Eye Appeal is:

And while you find this coin horribly ugly, I think your opinion is in the minority. Even if the toning was considered by most to be negative rather than neutral, the luster could still be strong enough to compensate and warrant an MS66 grade. Remember, the TPG is applying their standard, not yours. Having said that, you should apply your standard always when buying coins. By your standard, the coin is overgraded dreck. By NGC's standard, the coin is a premium gem. I submit that you are both correct.

 

I am not trying to win, just offering a dissenting opinion to your own. And as an aspiring coin cataloger, I would characterize it as a "speckeld charcoal patina." Sounds much better than black don't you think.

 

I agree that the toning is attractive, and that it is a premium coin. I don't collect that series at all, so my grading of it would be suspect at best. First impressions for me was that it was a strong 65 as opposed to a 66, but as I said, I don't collect them, so grading a coin I have little to do with is not that precise. It clearly is a premium coin, and I find the eye appeal quite attractive. CAC designations do mean something to me.