I won't disclose the seller of this coin, as I respect them a great deal. Nonetheless, I want to use this coin as an example to kick off this thread. I think this is the ugliest Franklin I have seen in an MS66 FBL holder. What is your candidate for ugliest coin for the grade (straight grade)?
These two gold pieces, which I purchased directly from the mint, were never professionally graded, but this is how they looked when I got them. When you buy Proof coins from the mint, they should grade at least PR-68 and be attractive in my opinion. Here's what I got for the Thomas Jefferson First Lady coin. You will remember that if a president didn't have a living spouse, a coin design from the period was used instead. Thomas Jefferson's wife died circa 1782, and they had an agreement that they would never re-marry if one of them died first. And yes, I know the Sally Hemmings story. This piece looks like it has the mumps. Here is the 2009 Ultra High Relief $20 gold I got from the mint. The obverse is marred by ugly die polishing. I was very disappointed with the quality of both of these coins. Neither is now in my collection.
My intent was that this thread was for Third Party Graded coins but, yes, this is absolutely shoddy "workmanship" for a collector-destined product.
This one popped into my head. It reminds me of that Seinfeld episode where his girlfriend is gorgeous in certain lighting and elsewhere he goes "yikes!" Seller images: In the other booth at the cafe: It's not that bad really.
Okay, here's an example that has be graded twice, once by PCGS and then by CAC. Here's the whole slab. The entire surface of this 1873 dollar has been rubbed with an abrasive perhaps to make it look brighter. If I had submitted this for grading, I would have expected a "details grade" (for improper cleaning) in the modern era, or a "body bag" when no grade coins were not slabbed. Instead it not only got an AU-50 from PCGS, but a CAC sticker as well.
Shocked, I am. Not as much at the PCGS grade, as at the CAC endorsement. I'd pass on this coin at generic money for the grade, let alone the monstrous CAC-associated premium for this date / grade.
Never mind introducing a CAC "Brown Bean" for coins that are low for their grade -- these examples clearly show that we need a black bean.
I don't really look at Franklins but I wholly agree this coin is undeserving of the grade by a long shot.
That dollar grade is wrong in so many ways. Even accounting for the leeway the TPGs give these LS dollars, the PMD on this coin should have earned it a details grade even ignoring the cleaning. The cleaning itself warrants a details grade on its own. You can see the dark "halo" around every device where the criminal applied his pencil eraser but couldn't get close to the edges of the devices. It's not even a particularly rare die marriage, either the OC-1 Rarity 4 or OC-2 Rarity 2 so a very rare coin allowance doesn't account for it. (and, just for the record, I don't agree with the very rare coin allowance that you sometimes see) To think that the TPG and CAC gave this a straight grade is pretty unbelievable.
Here's another one. This 1852 gold dollar has an "L" scratched in above Ms. Liberty's head. Once more I would have expected a "no grade" for graffiti. Instead the piece received this grade.
As Jimmy Durante used to say, "I got a million of em!" Well, not quite, but here's another one. This is an example of technical grading run amuck. And the reveal. This sold for over $50,000. Here's the one in my Bust Dollar date set. Which one would you rather have? I paid a fraction of the price paid for the "AU-58" shown above. This one is graded EF-45.
Here's one more for you, and if you paid big bucks for this, you are in trouble. It's an 1877 Indian Cent that was called "AU-55." Look at the legend on the left side. The verdigris inside all of the letters. That is not a hallmark of AU-55 grade. The reverse is worse. It has more verdigris and it looks as if the center was cleaned. I see no mint luster which is required for a true AU coin. And now for the grade. Can some of you understand why I am not on the CAC bandwagon?