The vapor block key between the label and the coin is a dead giveway... also the plain white label, and the thickness.
And the edge view prongs, and the completely different logo and hologram, and the label being on the obverse side of the slab. Really the only similarity between the two is the color of the insert. Except for that they are completely different
I suppose this is an appropriate place to ask... given that the PCGS doily holders themselves are collectible, what kind of premium is reasonable to assign to them? I'm eyeing a common-date mercury dime in one of these holders with a gold CAC sticker, and the seller is asking what seems like a crazy premium for it, even taking the gold CAC into account. Certainly this holder isn't worth $200+ regardless of the coin in it, is it? Because that's about how much this common Merc is overpriced, IMO. :/
The doily thread popped up on page 1 at the PCGS board. Or search for doily. Probably the best place to look. As I recall the premium is about $50. And I paid no premium for one of mine - dealer did not recognize it as anything more than a common date Morgan.
Paul, I can't speak for the doily per se and not the specific coin you reference, but at coin shows I've attended the OGH's seem to command a 10-20% premium on Saints. At least on the asking price.
There were a few PCGS members who were hoarding the old doily holder coins and one member was advertising he would pay a $50 bounty for any doily holder coin that could also receive a CAC sticker. This is a large premium for a $50 coin, but a decidedly small premium for a $5,000 coin.
If the crack-out game came into high-flying existence in the 2000's, then that would be one period when grading was most definitely 'looser.' Presumably, the OGH and near-OGH and Doily slabs -- the ones listed as PCGS 1.0 - 4.0 on that list -- are the ones not associated with loose grading. For whatever that is worth.
But was it as popular overall ? After the Coin Bubble Burst, everybody had to be below water, so unless you moved up 2-3 grades with a grossly undervalued coin, I can't believe the game was profitable to the extent it is under stable-to-rising coin prices. And that assumes the standards were as bad then as they were in the early-2000's which apparently is what led Albanese & Co. to start CAC.
It was wildly popular prior to 2000. Remember, I am not writing about most of the folks who participate in forums such as this who aren't that savvy; I am writing about professionals who would churn through enormous numbers of coins. That was where the biggest impact was felt. CAC does not only look at the grade, but it looks for methods of manipulation that were not known at the time of certification. These are two very different, but important, things.