Haha, and CAC at that. I'm afraid the photos aren't detailed enough to help me really look at them, but it's very interesting to see coins with the same grade but looking very different.
I'm confused -- which one is the beauty, and which is the beast? The 1907 seems to have been dipped/stripped of its original surfaces. The 1900 looks to have original, unadulterated surfaces -- thought not the most attractive, I don't see anything that makes me think it should not be graded MS63.
I am assuming the intent was that the 1900 is supposed to be the "beast". It may not have wild colors but I don't find anything about it's look to be a turn off
Mark wise they are both 63s,but when it is time to sell I can sell the 1907 a lot easier b/c of its eye appeal. A coin with EX cartwheel luster will sell much easier.
I think if you take good images (i.e., not like the ones you posted here) you could sell the 1900 in a heartbeat -- assuming you're not asking moon money for it.
....to those collectors who do not immediately assume it's been dipped and is no longer original. In reality, I believe either to be equally marketable - to slightly different collector demographics - and see no reason (in these images) why the CAC coin doesn't deserve the grade. The toning does not reach the point of being a detriment to the technical grade.
Yeah, and for that reason there's nothing wrong with your dislike of the one coin. The blast-white one, though, seems to me almost certain to have been dipped, and poorly at that. The dark areas near the right stars do_not_get that dark with no involvement anywhere else on the coin. Even in small images, the coin is telling me "I've been dipped within an inch of my life."
I think CAC is concerned with the grade of the coin and not its idea of eye appeal. Eyewise, both of those coins are appealing for different reasons.
