The grade on the holder was a bit surprising to me. The marks on the reverse (noted above) are scuffs on the slab and not the coin. The surfaces are very clean, yet PCGS graded this MS64. It has a gold CAC sticker indicating that CAC also feels it is undergraded.
64? Wow, that's a little lower than I would have expected. I think even at 65, this would probably still get a gold CAC.
The second time he got 64 in, although you helped with the rattler hint....so I'd say half credit at best.
Unless it goes MS67, it would be worth less money even if it upgrades because I would lose (1) the rattler; (2) the gold CAC sticker; and (3) any hope that speculators would push the price up.
"Special" is an interesting word to use. Long ago the sticker itself fetched a huge premium even for common coins like this, but the premium appears to have vanished. I bought this out of a Great Collections auction years ago without a CAC sticker because I thought it looked insane in a 64 holder. I submitted it myself to CAC thereafter and held on to it because I actually like it. The luster is a bit stronger in hand. It is incredibly nice for the grade and issue and was dirt cheap IIRC.
I found something similar at GC a few years ago and thought it was a lock for gold. Somehow it didn’t even get a green. See here for picture: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/guess-the-grade-1941-s-mercury-dime.300388/
"I am on the beach now in Aruba, and When I get back to my Villa, I will look at the photos on my laptop." HaHa ole Ed was a crack up.
Maybe 63. I'm just comparing it to mine, which I was very disappointed with! Like @Pickin and Grinin says; "Buffalo Nickels have always been graded tough." At least in this case!:
Special was kind of tongue in cheek. I agree that folks used to go crazy, But with Gradeflation and CAC still giving these coins bumps. Folks that know are losing faith in there ability's.
It looked like a typical 65 when I had it in hand. I recall there might have been something on the reverse, but it wasn’t anything too obvious.