Do you think a coin w/a huge finger print on the obv should get a bean?

KollectorKing

..

BryceM

I have no issue with this. It’s a key date and a pretty nice coin. I’m guessing it gets a 65 without the print.

MasonG

I think the people who decide to put the stickers on should put them on whatever coins they like.

DIMEMAN

I would take that coin in a heartbeat! CAC or no CAC!!

RogerB

Depends on whose fingerprint that is.

Ronyahski

Doesn't matter what I think.

kbbpll

I suppose it's "solid for the 64's that would have been 65 without the fingerprint".

tradedollarnut

I’m more concerned about the black crap under the print

golden

Not a coin that I would want.

cameonut2011

Yuck and no. For a solid or PQ 64, I could accept the print or the black junk behind the print, but not both.

MrMonkeySwag96

As we all know, CAC loves "originality." A fingerprint is as original as it gets. Personally I hate fingerprints, dirt, and grime on Mint State coins. I don't understand how some Mint State coins accumulate dirt/grime on their surfaces. Pre-1933 gold coins have sat in bank vaults for decades, yet most have dirty surfaces despite never circulating.

PerryHall

Yuck! That's an ugly coin. Pass.

DiggerJim

Would never consider that coin at all. Sticker or not. 👎

DiggerJim

jmlanzaf

What you are really asking is whether a coin with a fingerprint should straight grade. Ask it that way and you have your own answer.

jmlanzaf

@cameonut2011 said:
Yuck and no. For a solid or PQ 64, I could accept the print or the black junk behind the print, but not both.

And what if it's a65 or 66 net graded?

Twobitcollector

NO

cameonut2011

@jmlanzaf said:

@cameonut2011 said:
Yuck and no. For a solid or PQ 64, I could accept the print or the black junk behind the print, but not both.

And what if it's a65 or 66 net graded?

My answer doesn't change. When grading you grade the coin as it is not what it might be after a dip.

coinkat

Dipping a coin such as this is just a train wreck waiting to happen. The dark area in the field behind the print will not likely come out and the finger may not either. So stripping the surfaces that look original will then further highlight the dark spot and print even more than how it looks in the current holder.

matt_dac

Hmmm...you’ve covered politics and CAC thus far this week...trolling?

ricko

I do not like fingerprints on coins, however, I do not assign CAC stickers.... Cheers, RickO

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Cougar1978

No - I consider that one a C coin.

The fingerprint then black garbage. Would be tough to sell.

They stickered that lol? Me pass big time. Spend the money on something else. The coin needs conservation big time.

jmlanzaf

@cameonut2011 said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@cameonut2011 said:
Yuck and no. For a solid or PQ 64, I could accept the print or the black junk behind the print, but not both.

And what if it's a65 or 66 net graded?

My answer doesn't change. When grading you grade the coin as it is not what it might be after a dip.

I didn't tell you to dip it. IF it's a 66 net graded to a 64 because of the print, it could still be solid for the 64 grade. Now, you may hate it, but grading isn't based on personal preference but market preference.

MFeld

On the chance that you're interested in getting (relatively) unbiased replies, you might want to consider a less biased question, which omits the words "huge fingerprint".

cameonut2011

@jmlanzaf said:

@cameonut2011 said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@cameonut2011 said:
Yuck and no. For a solid or PQ 64, I could accept the print or the black junk behind the print, but not both.

And what if it's a65 or 66 net graded?

My answer doesn't change. When grading you grade the coin as it is not what it might be after a dip.

I didn't tell you to dip it. IF it's a 66 net graded to a 64 because of the print, it could still be solid for the 64 grade. Now, you may hate it, but grading isn't based on personal preference but market preference.

Eye appeal is a component of mint state grading. It doesn't matter whether it has MS68 surfaces underneath; it is a problem coin as is and calling it solid for a 64 is absurd IMHO.

cameonut2011

@MFeld said:
On the chance that you're interested in getting (relatively) unbiased replies, you might want to consider a less biased question, which omits the words "huge fingerprint".

Normally, I would agree with you; however, in this instance, I think someone would need to be blind to miss it. I could be wrong, but I don't think the wording would change the responses in this case.

Walkerfan

I have no problem with CAC stickering it, as it is VERY original.

It's just not a coin for me, in light of the fingerprint.

Did you purchase it @KollectorKing ?

derryb

depends on whose fingerprint it is.

cameonut2011

@cameonut2011 said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@cameonut2011 said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@cameonut2011 said:
Yuck and no. For a solid or PQ 64, I could accept the print or the black junk behind the print, but not both.

And what if it's a65 or 66 net graded?

My answer doesn't change. When grading you grade the coin as it is not what it might be after a dip.

I didn't tell you to dip it. IF it's a 66 net graded to a 64 because of the print, it could still be solid for the 64 grade. Now, you may hate it, but grading isn't based on personal preference but market preference.

Eye appeal is a component of mint state grading. It doesn't matter whether it has MS68 surfaces underneath; it is a problem coin as is and calling it solid for a 64 is absurd IMHO.

P.S. I didn't say that it was an inaccurate grade. Even ugly coins need to be graded, and there is nothing that should preclude it from receiving a straight grade. I said only that calling this coin anything other than a liner 64 was wrong IMO.

MFeld

@cameonut2011 said:

@MFeld said:
On the chance that you're interested in getting (relatively) unbiased replies, you might want to consider a less biased question, which omits the words "huge fingerprint".

Normally, I would agree with you; however, in this instance, I think someone would need to be blind to miss it. I could be wrong, but I don't think the wording would change the responses in this case.

I agree about the likelihood of anyone missing the print, but that wasn't the point. If the purpose of the question is to elicit unbiased results, I think it makes more sense to mention obscure flaws (which might be missed) than conspicuous ones.

Connecticoin

As is the case in general, an in-hand examination of the coin is usually necessary to assess whether the coin is A, B, or C for the grade, as the luster is not captured well in that photo. Here is a photo from its appearance in the Regency 28 auction, with the "black crap" being less prominent.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

OldEastside

Doesn't bother me

Steve

KollectorKing

@Realone said:
I love the toning. I see no "black crap", what my eyes see instead is darker toning. The fingerprint is unobtrusive and a testament to the coin's originality. I understand that many here love blast whitey's, and for that error in judgement I forgive them. I will take this look any day of the week. Remembering CAC has it in hand and have 3 graders reviewing subject piece.

Great answer. Thanks!

Broadstruck

Not a coin I'd want to write a MS64 monies check for as beyond the print the toning is quite HO-HUM dull, boring, and unimpressive.

TradesWithChops

I like it.

marcmoish

@Realone said:
I love the toning. I see no "black crap", what my eyes see instead is darker toning. The fingerprint is unobtrusive and a testament to the coin's originality. I understand that many here love blast whitey's, and for that error in judgement I forgive them. I will take this look any day of the week. Remembering CAC has it in hand and have 3 graders reviewing subject piece.

Agreed - wow some of us here are so cynical. Well graded and deserving of a bean as graded - I bet its cool in hand. Congrats.

santinidollar

I wouldn’t want it myself. The print kills it for me.

TommyType

We keep jumping through this hoop.

CAC will do what CAC wants to do. They have no published standards, and haven't asked the public for input. There is no requirement that you have to agree, or even like the coin.

This is in contrast to GRADING, where you can at least say the TPG's verdicts are based on, (or influenced by), published and accepted standards. And even then, I'm betting you disagree with their assigned grades on a daily(?) basis.

Buy what you like. Avoid the coins you don't. And that applies to both assigned grades, and sticker verdicts.

crazyhounddog

Picky, picky, picky😂. I see this walker solid for the grade assigned. Bean or no bean.

Elmhurst

I guess they think the fingerprint is "original,"

cameonut2011

@Connecticoin said:
As is the case in general, an in-hand examination of the coin is usually necessary to assess whether the coin is A, B, or C for the grade, as the luster is not captured well in that photo. Here is a photo from its appearance in the Regency 28 auction, with the "black crap" being less prominent.

Isn't this what Laura would call "expensive dreck?"

As for those defending the coin, it sold for a few grand less than the previous CACed example fetched which says a lot.

Broadstruck

Auction photo looks a bit juiced... Coin might technically grade as a 64, but has 61-62 eye appeal.

cameonut2011

@Broadstruck said:
Auction photo looks a bit juiced... Coin might technically grade as a 64, but has 61-62 eye appeal.

But it has a sticker...

Soldi

John loves that original toning. Nice Strike.

Broadstruck

@cameonut2011 said:

@Broadstruck said:
Auction photo looks a bit juiced... Coin might technically grade as a 64, but has 61-62 eye appeal.

But it has a sticker...

And that's whom you need to sell it to if trying for MS64 wholesale.

jdimmick

I have owned this coin for a very short time, several years ago, it belonged to one of my customers. He had the 21P, 21-d, and 21-s. All three were cac'd. I wanted to buy the 21-s out of the group for many, many years, but he would not break up the set. This coin has nice fresh luster, but I didn't like the tobacco color and print as well. Its what held me up from being able to buy the group at his asking price. Well when he passed, I got the three coins along with the remainder of his collection at a better price, which took into account this coin ,and pricing where I could sell it. as the D & S were white, and nice.

I kept the 21-s, and still have it. phenomenal coin, in fact Dave Kahn told me its the nicest 21-s for the grade he has ever seen. the 21-d was very nice as well, I Placed it with a friend, and he still has it. I could not afford to keep both at the time. The 21 mentioned here was sold to a dealer at the Baltimore show about two weeks after my customers death, and has since traded a few times, I believe as mentioned it appeared in the legend sale sometime back. Now, I believe this coin was upgraded from a 63 to a 64 at sometime during that time before legend, because if I am not mistaken, all were 63's originally. It was sold at the Baltimore Nov 2012 Show. If I have time, I will go back thru tax year 2012 and see if I can find the purchase invoice, cause it will be listed on the invoice for sure.

jim

Broadstruck

@Soldi said:
John loves that original toning. Nice Strike.

Yep also likes when they are on the verge of being considered terminal toned.

BAJJERFAN

I would not pay price guide money for it.

coinbuf

I wouldn't like the coin myself for a multitude of reasons one of which is the fingerprint. I like CAC but this is one of those times I would disagree with the bean.

Cougar1978

I wonder what they could do for it if sent in for conservation. The dark toning will only get worse as time goes on. Someone wants to invest in it as is?