1900 Lafayette Dollar, Do you think this coin should be CAC approved? (I dont)

I'm in the market for a CAC approved Lafayette dollar. This coin showed up on one of my saved searches.

Upon closer inspection, I was surprised that this coin stickered.

I'm not even going to list the PCGS numeric grade, its not relevant to why I think this coin shouldn't be CAC approved.



This is no insult to the coin itself, overall I find it an acceptable circulated commemorative coin. Had it not been for certain areas of this coin, I would have bid on it. But I cannot do it, even with a CAC sticker.

What do you see and what do you say?

 

If the coin were not scratched and numerical grade was 40 or less, I say yes, and I’d say no to 45 or better.

unfortunately, it is scratched (reverse), so emphatically no, even though the scratches are ancient.

 

Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner!

The glue in two major areas of the coin made start to question my sanity. Was I seeing things, or misunderstanding something?

Appears not, if other people are seeing this as well.

My only thinking is that because glue / junk could theoretically be removed from the coin with acetone, perhaps its not considered permanent damage? Like it COULD be removed in the future, so sure, why not just slap a sticker on it?

Keep in mind, I'm a CAC "fanboy", so this isn't coming from a place of hate. I am just shocked is all.

 

that scratch is sort of interesting to me. I saw it, gave me a bit of a pause, but ultimately I was still willing to bid on the coin until I dug a bit deeper.

I also have a coin with a very similar scratch pattern, also CAC approved. This one doesn't bother me a bit, but I can see other people wanting to tagged and bagged.

 

This coin I would think market acceptable, as those 2 long scratches appear to be in the planchet before strike, unlike the innocuous shorter scratch at star 8.

 

While there are doubtless those who disagree, I think the coin with residue and without scratches should have graded, while the coin with scratches and without residue should not have.

The residue was removed in isolated areas, as may be seen at the brighter spots above the hind quarters and at mid tail. Upon recognizing that continued removal of the residue would surely have resulted in a more obviously cleaned coin, the owner was wise to stop where he / she did. Those limited areas where the surface is somewhat lighter are only marginally lighter than the worn high points, and do not look all that unnatural. Had they been more extensive, the coin might look less natural than it presently does.