Only thing bothering me on this one is the chatter in the neighborhood of "1929". That reverse seems flawless to me. I went with '65......
Some strike issues on the reverse (thanks Denver), obverse right field spot(s) and I'm not sure what's going on by the date.
Terrible eye appeal in my opinion. The splotchy toning of the obverse and the ghosting on the reverse take away any better qualities that coin may have.
I don't know about this one. It is very well struck. The only sign of "weakness" would be the right wheats. That appear to be only one blob where the die was filled (grease?) Luster is great and marks are almost nonexistent. Yes, there is a bit of ghosting on the reverse, but not as obvious as the picture makes it appear. And the obverse is 2 colored. Maybe Doug is correct when he says "Terrible eye appeal in my opinion". However, this is one of the very few coins he has actually guessed as high as it graded. If I were guessing, I would have said 65, but PCGS said 64.
Whoa....harsh grade IMO. I didn't notice the two different colors on the obverse at first, I thought that was a lighting issue. Combine that with the obverse field spot, the reverse motto weakness and the right stalk, I guess I can understand. However, what happened to market grading? Those are typical traits for the issue. These are tough in red!
I agree that is a harsh grade. And no offense, but you can't exactly base eye appeal off your pictures(better than mine, but not as good as others). At least I can't. Still I think the coin is better than 64 and will stick with my grade.
