mikenoodle’s GTG #2 1967 SMS Washington Quarter

I was hoping for UCAM. I figured it was worth the gamble.

PS- My photography skills are less than adequate, but I continue to learn.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I realize I'm being hard on you. Sorry if I'm coming across mean - not my intention at all. If it had gotten UCAM, it totally would have been worth it.

For the purpose of teaching us, can you (or somebody else?) maybe explain the differences between CAM and UCAM on SMS coins. What made you think it was UCAM, and why did it perhaps not get UCAM? This is purely for educational purposes - not to be mean or aggressive at all. You have seen the coin, NGC has seen the coin, we've only seen the pictures. What do you think it is the difference between your expectations, NGC's standards, and the reality of the coin? This sort of harsh analysis is necessary for us to learn.

 

These pics show how deep the frost on this coin is. It’s difficult for me to capture.

In fairness, Matt (the dealer who submitted them) said CAM when he saw the coin.

At the ANA in August, I will get an opinion from my friend, James Sego. He owns QA check. If he says to resubmit it, I will.

 

I'd get a better opinion than from that guy.

 

68 CAM

 

What guy?

 

Sego.

What do you call a seller that tries to pimp a misattributed coin?

http://www.lincolncentforum.com/for...53-FS-402-RED-CAM-POP-1-0&p=349396#post349396