So I've got a 1926 NGC MS65 Saint Gaudens Double Eagle. It's in an NGC gen 9 slab with a low serial number. The slab is in pretty good shape, but it's a little scuffed up. On a regrade it's got a solid shot at MS66 by today's standards. On a bad day I can't see it going lower than an MS65+. I'm sorry I don't have any pictures on hand, so for this exercise just trust that my assessment of the grade is accurate. I'm debating what to do with this coin. I don't have any immediate plans to sell it, but I'm dropping off submissions tomorrow and it's easy to let it ride along if I want to regrade. Would you keep the coin as is, submit it for a regrade (it would lose the low serial number, but gain an edge view and a clearer slab), submit it to CAC, or I guess other (perhaps regrade and then CAC)?
Regrade then cac. Cac in that holder would very lickly be a waste of time if it’s visuals are impaired, they’re already hard enough on gem level saints when the slab is crystal clear
That's a good thought and I was leaning in that direction. My only reservation is that I know people like them in the older NGC slabs because they're generally undergraded now. I suppose the question is whether it's better to have an older NGC MS65 slab or a new NGC MS66.
Generally, you are correct about CAC placing a bean on a generic Gem state Double Eagle unless it's a plus coin. However, if it's felt the coin is greater than an average MS65, it's less expense for a CAC submission than a top tier TPG, and if it doesn't receive a "bean", its unlikely to upgrade. JMHO
Isn’t it one of the newer “old” slabs though? If it was a rattler or no line fatty I might try cac first even if it’s scuffed up but if it’s slab from the last 10 years I generally wouldn’t be worried about it.
NGC certs don’t necessarily correlate with age. If someone had an old paper sheet they used you could get a much lower number than the slab would suggest. That said it may be about that old since obviously I haven’t seen it
Here are some cell phone pics. I tried to get as shallow an angle as possible that minimized the scuffing on the slab over the coin. Looks like a gen 9 slab (2001-2003).
Don't 'crack' that lovely girl.........submit to CAC, but do not let this beauty escape the plastic. But that is entirely up to you, my friend.
That’s a gorgeous coin. What’s the CAC fee? I think it might be worth a submission. See what happens.
Hard to tell if there is a bit of chatter on the top edge of the wings and in the sun rays on the reverse or if that is just the picture. If so then just do the CAC thing. The obverse fields look really clean.
There are no significant marks on the obverse, and the head is fully struck. There is some chatter on the top edge of the lower wing (around the center of the coin) and a minor hit on the top wing straight down from the right leg of the A in DOLLARS. The rays are clean. I looked over (in hand) a couple dozen recently graded examples from NGC that were 65, 65+, and 66, and this coin was closer to a 66 than to a 65+. But since the obverse is virtually flawless I figured it had a good shot to carry it as a 66.