I must be further out of whack on this series than I thought. I was trying to decide between 15 and 20.
Thanks for playing all. I noted the scratches, but they are not deep scratches and seemed passable to me for the grade level. A good education for what the standards are, though a bit of a shame to detail a well circulated coin for light scratches that got picked up along the way. It’s possible they also thought the surfaces were a bit too dark and chose to detail it for the scratches, I’m not sure. Either way, it was informative to me for what I will avoid sending in the future, so I figured I would share with fellow CTers in case it is helpful.
It could have straight graded, the scratches don’t look too bad on your pictures, especially considering the coin’s condition. It’s ok that they detailed it, but the green CAC icon on the label is ridiculous.
Yeah, I didn't even notice those "scratches" on a coin with this state of wear. I hope I would've spotted them in-hand, but in these photos, they look really minor (in fact, the one to the right just looks like a toning disturbance to me). This confirms my opinion that either (a) I'm no good at grading from photos or (b) TPG grades don't correlate very well with how much I like a coin. Or, of course, (c) all of the above.
I really believe CAC should add a black icon to their green/gold beans, specifically for ungraded "details" coins! Observers are easily confused by a "details" coin, seemingly receiving a green "bean" without a grade! JMHO
When they were taking feedback leading up to the service, this was something I voiced as well. I feel like the sticker is their brand for quality and it feels weird to use it on details coins and I believe I recommended a different color bean as well (red like they put on reject coins with a note of why.) At the same time I can see how that could become another branding issue of its own.
…just get rid of the sticker for details coins and you’d have a „green“ PCGS holder. Problem solved, collectors happy.
