@ColonelJessup said:
If you insist, you certainly have not just my permission but my encouragement to continuing to live in ignorance
Who are you even talking too?
No one is insisting on anything.
You sound like one of those grumpy old men who just likes to insult people to make yourself feel better.
Trust me. It won’t bring you happiness.
Excuse me, I misspoke. You don't insist on your ignorance, you simply persist in it. I'm fed up with newbies who haven't done their homework. It's got a naked-eye scratch. The coin is lovely, but has an obvious fatal flaw. If not obvious to you, to others.
They've schooled you. And yet, you persist.
@MKUltra24 said:
The obverse and reverse surface colors are different?
But that doesn’t really mean anything.
I’ve seen Morgan Dollars that have rainbow colors on the obverse and blast white on the reverse.
You just spent over a grand on a coin and you state this?
Crap on a cracker
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
@BillJones said:
If you ignore the small scratch on the obverse, you still can't get passed the reverse, which has been cleaned. I don't think that it will pass the test.
That’s a fair point I should probably send it in to NGC for their guarantee or replacement rather than send it into CAC if it’s been cleaned.
That probably wouldn't get you anywhere. It's unlikely that NGC would agree that the coin merits use of their grading guarantee - they will probably find it to be perfectly acceptable, as is.
Yeah but they didn’t note it was a problem coin by putting “cleaned” like they usually do. Which means the coin is over graded.
@lkenefic said:
My first impression was: nice 18th C Type coin... but I noticed the vertical scratch and an old cleaning. It's still a coin I'd love to have in my collection, but I doubt it would CAC. Nice piece regardless...
The scratch isn’t noticeable at all under normal lighting.
It looks like this in hand. I can’t even see it. Can you?
I’m not even sure if CAC would see the scratch unless they looked at it under super high powered lights.
If I had noticed it I would’ve negotiated a lower price.
Both PCGS and NGC accept a certain amount of cleaning on bust coins, since most of them have been cleaned at some point. It's not a problem coin (for the issue) nor is it over-graded. It just won't pass muster with CAC is all.
I think the old cleaning (not unusual with these big coins, hence the NGC decision to slab) combined with the scratches will likely result in a rejection from CAC. No big deal! Enjoy owning a wonderful piece of history!
Seated Half Society member #38 "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
@fluffy155 said:
Both PCGS and NGC accept a certain amount of cleaning on bust coins, since most of them have been cleaned at some point. It's not a problem coin (for the issue) nor is it over-graded. It just won't pass muster with CAC is all.
Thanks for clarifying!
I was getting really confused. O_o
Because on one hand people were saying “It could be old cleaning and not too severe so NGC didn’t mark it cleaned.”
But then they were saying:
“It’s cleaned so it won’t get the CAC.”
It’s confusing because if it doesn’t matter to NGC it shouldn’t matter to CAC either.
@BillJones said:
If you ignore the small scratch on the obverse, you still can't get passed the reverse, which has been cleaned. I don't think that it will pass the test.
That’s a fair point I should probably send it in to NGC for their guarantee or replacement rather than send it into CAC if it’s been cleaned.
That probably wouldn't get you anywhere. It's unlikely that NGC would agree that the coin merits use of their grading guarantee - they will probably find it to be perfectly acceptable, as is.
Yeah but they didn’t note it was a problem coin by putting “cleaned” like they usually do. Which means the coin is over graded.
As I posted previously:
"Many coins that have been cleaned receive straight-grades from the major grading companies. But if they feel the cleaning is too severe, they assign a details-grade, instead.
I suspect that the area I mentioned has been cleaned, due to the light color there, compared to much of the rest of the reverse. My guess is that the coin won’t sticker, but I hope I’m mistaken."
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@fluffy155 said:
Both PCGS and NGC accept a certain amount of cleaning on bust coins, since most of them have been cleaned at some point. It's not a problem coin (for the issue) nor is it over-graded. It just won't pass muster with CAC is all.
Thanks for clarifying!
I was getting really confused. O_o
Because on one hand people were saying “It could be old cleaning and not too severe so NGC didn’t mark it cleaned.”
But then they were saying:
“It’s cleaned so it won’t get the CAC.”
It’s confusing because if it doesn’t matter to NGC it shouldn’t matter to CAC either.
But apparently the standards are different.
Well yes, that's the whole point. There is a range for a given grade and for whether a problem is bad enough to warrant a details grade. CAC focuses on the upper end of the grade range and tends almost completely to "no trace of a problem." The reason people buy CAC coins is to not get coins like this, which are market acceptable, but have some issues. That doesn't mean it's a bad coin, but it's not a wholly original coin that CAC will appreciate.
@BillJones said:
If you ignore the small scratch on the obverse, you still can't get passed the reverse, which has been cleaned. I don't think that it will pass the test.
That’s a fair point I should probably send it in to NGC for their guarantee or replacement rather than send it into CAC if it’s been cleaned.
That probably wouldn't get you anywhere. It's unlikely that NGC would agree that the coin merits use of their grading guarantee - they will probably find it to be perfectly acceptable, as is.
Yeah but they didn’t note it was a problem coin by putting “cleaned” like they usually do. Which means the coin is over graded.
As I posted previously:
"Many coins that have been cleaned receive straight-grades from the major grading companies. But if they feel the cleaning is too severe, they assign a details-grade, instead.
I suspect that the area I mentioned has been cleaned, due to the light color there, compared to much of the rest of the reverse. My guess is that the coin won’t sticker, but I hope I’m mistaken."
I know you did and I appreciate it.
What I’m saying though is; as you said, “if they feel the cleaning is too severe they assign a details grade.”
But if mine isn’t too severe to get the details grade from NGC why would CAC think it’s too severe?
I’m just confused about how one TPG doesn’t really think it warrants details grade but another does.
@fluffy155 said:
Both PCGS and NGC accept a certain amount of cleaning on bust coins, since most of them have been cleaned at some point. It's not a problem coin (for the issue) nor is it over-graded. It just won't pass muster with CAC is all.
Thanks for clarifying!
I was getting really confused. O_o
Because on one hand people were saying “It could be old cleaning and not too severe so NGC didn’t mark it cleaned.”
But then they were saying:
“It’s cleaned so it won’t get the CAC.”
It’s confusing because if it doesn’t matter to NGC it shouldn’t matter to CAC either.
But apparently the standards are different.
Well yes, that's the whole point. There is a range for a given grade and for whether a problem is bad enough to warrant a details grade. CAC focuses on the upper end of the grade range and tends almost completely to "no trace of a problem." The reason people buy CAC coins is to not get coins like this, which are market acceptable, but have some issues. That doesn't mean it's a bad coin, but it's not a wholly original coin that CAC will appreciate.
I wish dealers would tell customers that coins were cleaned even if it’s not labeled as cleaned .
It sounds like I got ripped off buying a problem coin as if it were a problem free coin.
That’s the reason I buy slabbed coins because I thought the whole point of TPGs was to identify things like that.
You hit the nail on the head. CAC looks for coins that are "solid" for the grade and with no major issues. They are an approval service, not a TPG. For 19th and 18th century silver they seem to prefer nice original toning for circulated grades especially. The reverse on this coin is not original, as others have pointed out.
@fluffy155 said:
Both PCGS and NGC accept a certain amount of cleaning on bust coins, since most of them have been cleaned at some point. It's not a problem coin (for the issue) nor is it over-graded. It just won't pass muster with CAC is all.
Thanks for clarifying!
I was getting really confused. O_o
Because on one hand people were saying “It could be old cleaning and not too severe so NGC didn’t mark it cleaned.”
But then they were saying:
“It’s cleaned so it won’t get the CAC.”
It’s confusing because if it doesn’t matter to NGC it shouldn’t matter to CAC either.
But apparently the standards are different.
Well yes, that's the whole point. There is a range for a given grade and for whether a problem is bad enough to warrant a details grade. CAC focuses on the upper end of the grade range and tends almost completely to "no trace of a problem." The reason people buy CAC coins is to not get coins like this, which are market acceptable, but have some issues. That doesn't mean it's a bad coin, but it's not a wholly original coin that CAC will appreciate.
I wish dealers would tell customers that coins were cleaned even if it’s not labeled as cleaned .
It sounds like I got ripped off buying a problem coin as if it were a problem free coin.
That’s the reason I buy slabbed coins because I thought the whole point of TPGs was to identify things like that.
Some dealers will disclose anything less than perfection, and others sell what's in front of them. If you bought the coin as an NGC F12 without any wording hyping how uber-original the surfaces are, then you got exactly what was described. I say this with all due respect, many people have looked at these photos and told you the same thing; even if not stated in words, the photos told a story. It may be a cost of tuition, but perhaps the lesson here is not to spend 4 figures without an understanding of what exactly you are buying. You could have done a lot worse, but you could have done better. I've been collecting for going on 3 decades, and I still ask questions of people I trust before I buy certain coins. If you want to ensure you're getting the right coin for you, the time to ask a question is before you buy, not after.
@ColonelJessup said:
If you insist, you certainly have not just my permission but my encouragement to continuing to live in ignorance
Who are you even talking too?
No one is insisting on anything.
You sound like one of those grumpy old men who just likes to insult people to make yourself feel better.
Trust me. It won’t bring you happiness.
Excuse me, I misspoke. You don't insist on your ignorance, you simply persist in it. I'm fed up with newbies who haven't done their homework. It's got a naked-eye scratch. The coin is lovely, but has an obvious fatal flaw. If not obvious to you, to others.
They've schooled you. And yet, you persist.
@MKUltra24 said:
The obverse and reverse surface colors are different?
But that doesn’t really mean anything.
I’ve seen Morgan Dollars that have rainbow colors on the obverse and blast white on the reverse.
You just spent over a grand on a coin and you state this?
Crap on a cracker
You’re obviously not even reading what I write.
First of all: Asking follow up questions is NOT insisting or persisting on anything. It’s how people learn.
You seem to expect people to just accept what they are told as the truth without asking anything.
Secondly: you say: “It’s got a naked eye scratch.”
No it doesn’t! This is not visible to the naked eye.
It's a decent coin for the date and grade. Multiple flaws acceptable by some as not grade-limiting.
Consider my grading skills (as one of the founders of NGC) to be more than adequate
However
It's been pointed out that you yourself have previously started a thread on this coin in January of this year.
I'll now not consider you as simply willfully ignorant, but rather both intellectually dishonest and deliberately deceptive.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
@Steven59 said:
I have no idea about the CAC sticker but it looks like the correct grade at F12
Oh really?
I just feel like it looks better than other F12s like this one.
And it looks worse than this one
Finding a less attractive example of a coin doesn't make a coin great, it just makes it not the worst one out there.
Ehhh idk I wouldn’t say that one is better than mine either.
Almost the entire “E Pluribus Unum” is faded away. Plus the high points on the hair are less detailed.
But I guess it’s all about personal opinion.
You're right. Your coin has 3 more letters of PLURIBUS than my coin does and perhaps a bit more detail. But here's the rub (pun intended): grades are a continuum, and not every coin within a grade will have exactly the same detail. In fact, it's not uncommon that a coin with a minor issue be dropped a grade rather than given a details grade. If my coin had been lightly cleaned, perhaps it would be a VG10 instead of an F12. I don't think your coin has the details for it, but an F15 with the surfaces of your coin may be graded F12 instead. If you want the absolute max amount of detail for a given grade on the holder, you'll probably pull it off by sacrificing something else. How many people have pointed out to you that your coin has been cleaned, to the extent that you have said you feel ripped off by the dealer that sold it to you? I'll take the surfaces of my coin over your coin, even if yours has a few incuse letters that are slightly more visible.
@ColonelJessup said:
If you insist, you certainly have not just my permission but my encouragement to continuing to live in ignorance
Who are you even talking too?
No one is insisting on anything.
You sound like one of those grumpy old men who just likes to insult people to make yourself feel better.
Trust me. It won’t bring you happiness.
Excuse me, I misspoke. You don't insist on your ignorance, you simply persist in it. I'm fed up with newbies who haven't done their homework. It's got a naked-eye scratch. The coin is lovely, but has an obvious fatal flaw. If not obvious to you, to others.
They've schooled you. And yet, you persist.
@MKUltra24 said:
The obverse and reverse surface colors are different?
But that doesn’t really mean anything.
I’ve seen Morgan Dollars that have rainbow colors on the obverse and blast white on the reverse.
You just spent over a grand on a coin and you state this?
Crap on a cracker
You’re obviously not even reading what I write.
First of all: Asking follow up questions is NOT insisting or persisting on anything. It’s how people learn.
You seem to expect people to just accept what they are told as the truth without asking anything.
Secondly: you say: “It’s got a naked eye scratch.”
No it doesn’t! This is not visible to the naked eye.
No grader looks at a coin without rotating it in light. I've taken hundreds of thousands of coin photographs. It's very easy to have a scratch like the one on your coin go from visible to completely invisible by changing the light; all the more so if you use diffused light such as a CFL (which will hide a scratch) versus spot lighting (incandescent, halogen... which graders use). I can hide the scratch on your coin all day long, or I can make it stand out like a sore thumb. Just because a photo hides it doesn't mean it's not there, and if it's there even at just some angles, CAC will know and consider it.
@fluffy155 said:
Both PCGS and NGC accept a certain amount of cleaning on bust coins, since most of them have been cleaned at some point. It's not a problem coin (for the issue) nor is it over-graded. It just won't pass muster with CAC is all.
Thanks for clarifying!
I was getting really confused. O_o
Because on one hand people were saying “It could be old cleaning and not too severe so NGC didn’t mark it cleaned.”
But then they were saying:
“It’s cleaned so it won’t get the CAC.”
It’s confusing because if it doesn’t matter to NGC it shouldn’t matter to CAC either.
It's a decent coin for the date and grade. Multiple flaws acceptable by some as not grade-limiting.
Consider my grading skills (as one of the founders of NGC) to be more than adequate
However
It's been pointed out that you yourself have previously started a thread on this coin in January of this year.
I'll now not consider you as simply willfully ignorant, but rather both intellectually dishonest and deliberately deceptive.
@fluffy155 said:
Both PCGS and NGC accept a certain amount of cleaning on bust coins, since most of them have been cleaned at some point. It's not a problem coin (for the issue) nor is it over-graded. It just won't pass muster with CAC is all.
Thanks for clarifying!
I was getting really confused. O_o
Because on one hand people were saying “It could be old cleaning and not too severe so NGC didn’t mark it cleaned.”
But then they were saying:
“It’s cleaned so it won’t get the CAC.”
It’s confusing because if it doesn’t matter to NGC it shouldn’t matter to CAC either.
It's a decent coin for the date and grade. Multiple flaws acceptable by some as not grade-limiting.
Consider my grading skills (as one of the founders of NGC) to be more than adequate
However
It's been pointed out that you yourself have previously started a thread on this coin in January of this year.
I'll now not consider you as simply willfully ignorant, but rather both intellectually dishonest and deliberately deceptive.
In his defense, overall, the comments about the coin weren't nearly as negative.
That was different though because I was simply sharing my coin when I picked it up.
This time I’m asking a question about it.
I also don’t mind people giving their opinion but they can at least be polite about it without feeling the need to be sarcastic or make negative comments about me as a person.
@ColonelJessup said:
If you insist, you certainly have not just my permission but my encouragement to continuing to live in ignorance
Who are you even talking too?
No one is insisting on anything.
You sound like one of those grumpy old men who just likes to insult people to make yourself feel better.
Trust me. It won’t bring you happiness.
Excuse me, I misspoke. You don't insist on your ignorance, you simply persist in it. I'm fed up with newbies who haven't done their homework. It's got a naked-eye scratch. The coin is lovely, but has an obvious fatal flaw. If not obvious to you, to others.
They've schooled you. And yet, you persist.
@MKUltra24 said:
The obverse and reverse surface colors are different?
But that doesn’t really mean anything.
I’ve seen Morgan Dollars that have rainbow colors on the obverse and blast white on the reverse.
You just spent over a grand on a coin and you state this?
Crap on a cracker
You’re obviously not even reading what I write.
First of all: Asking follow up questions is NOT insisting or persisting on anything. It’s how people learn.
You seem to expect people to just accept what they are told as the truth without asking anything.
Secondly: you say: “It’s got a naked eye scratch.”
No it doesn’t! This is not visible to the naked eye.
No grader looks at a coin without rotating it in light. I've taken hundreds of thousands of coin photographs. It's very easy to have a scratch like the one on your coin go from visible to completely invisible by changing the light; all the more so if you use diffused light such as a CFL (which will hide a scratch) versus spot lighting (incandescent, halogen... which graders use). I can hide the scratch on your coin all day long, or I can make it stand out like a sore thumb. Just because a photo hides it doesn't mean it's not there, and if it's there even at just some angles, CAC will know and consider it.
Oh I know the lightning definitely can hide a scratch or make it stand out.
What I was saying though is that he said that my coin had a scratch “visible to the naked eye” and that’s just not true.
Under most lighting (including at the dealership which had a bunch of lights to make all the coins look as shiny as possible as a sales tactic) the scratch isn’t visible at all. I have it in my hand right now and I can’t see the scratch but I know it’s there now.
When someone says “visible to the naked eye” I assume they mean under normal lightning conditions.
Here is one I used to own that did get the CAC green bean. It was graded F15. Perhaps it helps as a reference for (1) the original toning in the fields that various posters are discussing, and (2) what would be expected for an upgrade from F12.
@ProfLiz said:
Here is one I used to own that did get the CAC green bean. It was graded F15. Perhaps it helps as a reference for (1) the original toning in the fields that various posters are discussing, and (2) what would be expected for an upgrade from F12.
@fluffy155 said:
Both PCGS and NGC accept a certain amount of cleaning on bust coins, since most of them have been cleaned at some point. It's not a problem coin (for the issue) nor is it over-graded. It just won't pass muster with CAC is all.
Thanks for clarifying!
I was getting really confused. O_o
Because on one hand people were saying “It could be old cleaning and not too severe so NGC didn’t mark it cleaned.”
But then they were saying:
“It’s cleaned so it won’t get the CAC.”
It’s confusing because if it doesn’t matter to NGC it shouldn’t matter to CAC either.
But apparently the standards are different.
Well yes, that's the whole point. There is a range for a given grade and for whether a problem is bad enough to warrant a details grade. CAC focuses on the upper end of the grade range and tends almost completely to "no trace of a problem." The reason people buy CAC coins is to not get coins like this, which are market acceptable, but have some issues. That doesn't mean it's a bad coin, but it's not a wholly original coin that CAC will appreciate.
I wish dealers would tell customers that coins were cleaned even if it’s not labeled as cleaned .
It sounds like I got ripped off buying a problem coin as if it were a problem free coin.
That’s the reason I buy slabbed coins because I thought the whole point of TPGs was to identify things like that.
I work in a B&M and I will tell a customer, even if it's means losing a sale as I appreciate the honesty and would hope for the same if it was an area I'm not that familiar with...
@ColonelJessup said:
If you insist, you certainly have not just my permission but my encouragement to continuing to live in ignorance
Who are you even talking too?
No one is insisting on anything.
You sound like one of those grumpy old men who just likes to insult people to make yourself feel better.
Trust me. It won’t bring you happiness.
Excuse me, I misspoke. You don't insist on your ignorance, you simply persist in it. I'm fed up with newbies who haven't done their homework. It's got a naked-eye scratch. The coin is lovely, but has an obvious fatal flaw. If not obvious to you, to others.
They've schooled you. And yet, you persist.
@MKUltra24 said:
The obverse and reverse surface colors are different?
But that doesn’t really mean anything.
I’ve seen Morgan Dollars that have rainbow colors on the obverse and blast white on the reverse.
You just spent over a grand on a coin and you state this?
Crap on a cracker
You’re obviously not even reading what I write.
First of all: Asking follow up questions is NOT insisting or persisting on anything. It’s how people learn.
You seem to expect people to just accept what they are told as the truth without asking anything.
Secondly: you say: “It’s got a naked eye scratch.”
No it doesn’t! This is not visible to the naked eye.
No grader looks at a coin without rotating it in light. I've taken hundreds of thousands of coin photographs. It's very easy to have a scratch like the one on your coin go from visible to completely invisible by changing the light; all the more so if you use diffused light such as a CFL (which will hide a scratch) versus spot lighting (incandescent, halogen... which graders use). I can hide the scratch on your coin all day long, or I can make it stand out like a sore thumb. Just because a photo hides it doesn't mean it's not there, and if it's there even at just some angles, CAC will know and consider it.
Oh I know the lightning definitely can hide a scratch or make it stand out.
What I was saying though is that he said that my coin had a scratch “visible to the naked eye” and that’s just not true.
Under most lighting (including at the dealership which had a bunch of lights to make all the coins look as shiny as possible as a sales tactic) the scratch isn’t visible at all. I have it in my hand right now and I can’t see the scratch but I know it’s there now.
When someone says “visible to the naked eye” I assume they mean under normal lightning conditions.
Visible to the naked eye means it's big enough to be seen by the naked eye, as opposed to something that requires magnification to be seen.
@fluffy155 said:
Both PCGS and NGC accept a certain amount of cleaning on bust coins, since most of them have been cleaned at some point. It's not a problem coin (for the issue) nor is it over-graded. It just won't pass muster with CAC is all.
Thanks for clarifying!
I was getting really confused. O_o
Because on one hand people were saying “It could be old cleaning and not too severe so NGC didn’t mark it cleaned.”
But then they were saying:
“It’s cleaned so it won’t get the CAC.”
It’s confusing because if it doesn’t matter to NGC it shouldn’t matter to CAC either.
But apparently the standards are different.
Well yes, that's the whole point. There is a range for a given grade and for whether a problem is bad enough to warrant a details grade. CAC focuses on the upper end of the grade range and tends almost completely to "no trace of a problem." The reason people buy CAC coins is to not get coins like this, which are market acceptable, but have some issues. That doesn't mean it's a bad coin, but it's not a wholly original coin that CAC will appreciate.
I wish dealers would tell customers that coins were cleaned even if it’s not labeled as cleaned .
It sounds like I got ripped off buying a problem coin as if it were a problem free coin.
That’s the reason I buy slabbed coins because I thought the whole point of TPGs was to identify things like that.
I work in a B&M and I will tell a customer, even if it's means losing a sale as I appreciate the honesty and would hope for the same if it was an area I'm not that familiar with...
As a seller, there's a delicate balance in what information to offer and how. I face it when I sell on eBay, since I want to do right by my consignors, but at the same time, my reputation with my buyers (which is, after all, what brings me my consignors) requires that I describe potential flaws. Often I balance things for a slabbed coin by writing out issues that the photograph doesn't show, but if you can see it in the picture (and in the case of the OP's coin, you can see the light/market acceptable cleaning) my mention of it (or not) will depend on exactly how it looks in hand and in the photo (perhaps ignore it if very light, or maybe mention that it was light, done long ago, and is market acceptable today). I do think there is some onus on the buyer to be educated in what they're buying. Of course, if someone were to ask me directly, I would directly answer the question.
I don't mean to sound judgmental, but these are my thoughts. The coin in question is okay for the type, but why not search for a coin with even better eye appeal, slabbed or raw ... with or without CAC ... a coin for which you don't need others' opinions? Ask yourself if you would love the coin in whatever holder it is housed in. Collectors have been paying premiums for beautiful examples since forever. Be prepared for that. Forget the stickers. I have seen a great number of CAC coins that don't hold my interest. That said, if you love the coin, keep it as is ... or submit it for crossover and TrueView ... or crack it out and keep it in an Air-Tite holder .... whatever allows you to enjoy what you love. Learning to grade doesn't hurt.
Case in point. I bought this eye-appealing example on eBay ... raw!!! When I eventually sent it in for grading, it came back VF20. No sticker is needed. I think the eye-appealing surfaces bumped up the grade
@asheland said:
I have the half dollar, same grade, but this one screams original to me.
I believe this one would sticker, but I would stand aside to those with more experience than me.
I would value opinions on mine by several that have posted on this thread…. not to hi Jack the thread
I think your coin is similar to the OP's in that the reverse looks, to me, like it's been wiped. The lighter fields but dirt remaining around the protected areas near the devices gives me that impression. That said, I do think the obverse looks wholly original. I'm not as much of a fan of the lighter devices as others are (personal preference--I tend to like circulated coins which are more uniform in color), but that doesn't take away from my thinking it's original and attractive for those who prefer that look.
@jackpine20 said:
I don't mean to sound judgmental, but these are my thoughts. The coin in question is okay for the type, but why not search for a coin with even better eye appeal, slabbed or raw ... with or without CAC ... a coin for which you don't need others' opinions? Ask yourself if you would love the coin in whatever holder it is housed in. Collectors have been paying premiums for beautiful examples since forever. Be prepared for that. Forget the stickers. I have seen a great number of CAC coins that don't hold my interest. That said, if you love the coin, keep it as is ... or submit it for crossover and TrueView ... or crack it out and keep it in an Air-Tite holder .... whatever allows you to enjoy what you love. Learning to grade doesn't hurt.
I bought this one because it’s the only one I had and I liked the cameo look. I just wish they had said something like “the reverse may have been wiped at some point.”
@lkenefic said:
My first impression was: nice 18th C Type coin... but I noticed the vertical scratch and an old cleaning. It's still a coin I'd love to have in my collection, but I doubt it would CAC. Nice piece regardless...
The scratch isn’t noticeable at all under normal lighting.
It looks like this in hand. I can’t even see it. Can you?
I’m not even sure if CAC would see the scratch unless they looked at it under super high powered lights.
If I had noticed it I would’ve negotiated a lower price.
As others have already said, I think it's accurately graded and TPG's have historically straight-graded early silver with light cleanings like this. I just don't think there's enough there to warrant CAC.
As for the the scratch... let me put it this way: Had I seen the image in the OP (with scratch) and bid with that knowledge in had, I'd be pleasantly surprised to receive the coin in the follow-up post. However, had I been sold on the second image and received coin in the OP (now I can see the scratch), I'd likely return it... But that's just me....
Collecting: Dansco 7070; Middle Date Large Cents (VF-AU); Box of 20;
If you ask a question on this forum, you're almost always likely to get more than you bargained for. Don't take offense. I might suggest to re-read the responses, consider them in the context of coming from someone who has worked their entire life in the coin business, and try to understand the meaning behind what is offered. There's plenty of BS and poseurs in this hobby/business and those with decades of experience simply don't have time or patience to deal with it. Not saying that's the issue here, but understand you're conversing with some of the brightest and most experienced minds in the coin business. I'm a collector with 10 years of experience with LOTS to learn still.
There is a scratch.
The coin doesn't look original to most of us.
The coin looks to be properly graded.
It likely wasn't misrepresented to you. You have eyes. If you can't see the scratch or don't know the importance of the appearance of the surfaces, that's on you.
It's a nice coin.
Most of us don't think it will CAC.
It's still a nice coin.
There is only one way to know for sure if it will CAC.
Copied from the NGC website, note the bolded part:
"Cleaning
Among the most common reasons for a coin to receive Details Grading is unskilled and improper cleaning. The temptation to "improve" a coin's appearance by chemically or mechanically cleaning it seems acceptable, until the possible detrimental effects are later explained to the collector. Light, non-destructive cleaning, particularly when found on older coins, may still permit numeric grading. Harsher cleaning that is destructive to a coin's aesthetic appeal, however, will result in Details Grading only, and such cleaning is not correctable with conservation."
@jackpine20 said:
I don't mean to sound judgmental, but these are my thoughts. The coin in question is okay for the type, but why not search for a coin with even better eye appeal, slabbed or raw ... with or without CAC ... a coin for which you don't need others' opinions? Ask yourself if you would love the coin in whatever holder it is housed in. Collectors have been paying premiums for beautiful examples since forever. Be prepared for that. Forget the stickers. I have seen a great number of CAC coins that don't hold my interest. That said, if you love the coin, keep it as is ... or submit it for crossover and TrueView ... or crack it out and keep it in an Air-Tite holder .... whatever allows you to enjoy what you love. Learning to grade doesn't hurt.
I bought this one because it’s the only one I had and I liked the cameo look. I just wish they had said something like “the reverse may have been wiped at some point.”
One lesson I can't repeat enough is that patience is a virtue. There are many coins you can buy whenever you want if you care only about the label. This is one of them. 1799 dollars outside of particularly high grades are easy to find. Nice ones may be much more difficult to locate. Granted I didn't check every dealer's website every day, but the coin I had came after a few years of looking for a coin with the right look and the right price. If a dealer just has one coin, that should never be a reason to buy it. Unless it's the coin you want, it should just be a reason to wait and keep looking. The coins I've regretted buying are the ones where I really wanted to buy something, so I bought what was available. The coins I really treasure are the ones where I spent a lot of effort finding the right coin for me, even if it meant months or years without one.
Now that's a nice coin! Virtually unimprovable at the grade. A near-perfect circulated example. Nice, beautiful, even toning. Distraction free. Nice contrast between devices and the fields. Gorgeous eye appeal. If that didn't upgrade on resubmission I'd be astonished.
@jackpine20 said:
I don't mean to sound judgmental, but these are my thoughts. The coin in question is okay for the type, but why not search for a coin with even better eye appeal, slabbed or raw ... with or without CAC ... a coin for which you don't need others' opinions? Ask yourself if you would love the coin in whatever holder it is housed in. Collectors have been paying premiums for beautiful examples since forever. Be prepared for that. Forget the stickers. I have seen a great number of CAC coins that don't hold my interest. That said, if you love the coin, keep it as is ... or submit it for crossover and TrueView ... or crack it out and keep it in an Air-Tite holder .... whatever allows you to enjoy what you love. Learning to grade doesn't hurt.
I bought this one because it’s the only one I had and I liked the cameo look. I just wish they had said something like “the reverse may have been wiped at some point.”
So when people say buy books, look at thousands of coins, etc---it is so you can make knowledgeable decisions and you wont have to "wish" the slab said this or that or the dealer said this or that. If you dont want to put in the time, then simply buy pcgs CAC coins if you want to avoid the problems you are concerned about.
USAF (Ret) 1974 - 1994 - The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries. Remembering RickO, a brother in arms.
Why is there a need to even consider sending this coin to CAC? It is an F12... and that does not appear to be in controversy. What also should not be in controversy is that the coin sustained a cleaning many years ago which most would consider market acceptable... and that is clear from a reasonable look at the images. I am confident that an in hand review would merely confirm my opinion.
The 1799 posted by Airplanenut is significantly better that the coin which is the subject of the OP...it is not even close. Take a good look at the surface quality of his 1799... it is amazing... that coin exemplifies quality for the grade.
edited to add- a No on the CAC sticker
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
What is weird though, is that in the previous post on the same coin, there were many comments saying "solid for the grade", " easy f15", "CAC is no brainer", and other supportive comments. Just shows that sometimes, rather correctly or not, humans tend to follow a certain comment. I like the coin for the grade, but I would not comment on CAC or no CAC, mainly because I never did give a hoot about the beans. Just a comment on how opinions can change from one post to another...
@Treeman said:
What is weird though, is that in the previous post on the same coin, there were many comments saying "solid for the grade", " easy f15", "CAC is no brainer", and other supportive comments. Just shows that sometimes, rather correctly or not, humans tend to follow a certain comment. I like the coin for the grade, but I would not comment on CAC or no CAC, mainly because I never did give a hoot about the beans. Just a comment on how opinions can change from one post to another...
This is something that I think is a bit of an issue on the boards, though understandable. If someone asks a question about a coin before they buy it, it's easy to give an honest opinion, even if it doesn't put the coin in good light. It's much harder to be critical of a coin that someone is showing off having just spent a good sum of money. When a direct question is asked, it's again much easier to answer that, even if the answer is critical or perhaps not what the OP would ideally want to hear. When a coin is fine but I'm not a huge fan of it, I tend not to reply to a "look what I just bought" thread because I don't want to rain on someone's parade, but there's no need to be harsh, either (what I won't do is be flowery just for the sake of patting someone on the back). If a coin is really nice I'm happy to say so, and if a coin has a real issue where I think the poster totally missed the mark, it may be worth pointing that out, too. For the coin in question, I think it's a typical example. It's not what I would have bought, but it could be much worse. I wouldn't reply to a thread saying it's an awesome example, but if there's a direct question about its quality, I will reply.
Many years ago I bought a buffalo nickel at a show and proudly showed it to @MFeld. He asked me why I bought it and somewhat chastised me for missing this and overlooking that, because if I had waited I could have done better (I don't think the coin was awful, just not as good as it could have been). He also walked me to a table where he knew two much nicer examples were available, and I ended up buying both. I can't say I was happy to have him tamp down my excitement, but he taught me a very valuable lesson that day (not to mention I got two much better coins out of it). What he did was much easier because we already had a relationship. I don't think that's something easy to do when a random person posts a new purchase if they didn't make an egregious mistake in their assessment of the coin.
I feel that it won't CAC.
The scratch is to much of a focal point for me and the spots on the wings
say "cleaned".
I hope that I am wrong.
If you do chose to send it in, let us know the outcome.
Either way, it is a nice coin.
Wayne
PCGS has produced a series of short videos that provide an introduction to grading: https://www.pcgs.com/education. The ANA also has grading courses that are well worth your time and money.
It's in your interest to study these videos, grading guides, and much more. Pictures alone can be quite deceiving, so make a determined effort to view LOTS of coins in hand.
You bought a coin that you evidently do not understand (at least, you don't understand what you are looking at and how to properly view/evaluate a coin in the first place). Learn how to grade, or you will likely learn some tough financial lessons (and do not expect slabs with grades or auxiliary stickers to always bail you out).
Member: EAC, NBS, C4, CWTS, ANA
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
@coinkat said:
Why is there a need to even consider sending this coin to CAC? It is an F12... and that does not appear to be in controversy. What also should not be in controversy is that the coin sustained a cleaning many years ago which most would consider market acceptable... and that is clear from a reasonable look at the images. I am confident that an in hand review would merely confirm my opinion.
The 1799 posted by Airplanenut is significantly better that the coin which is the subject of the OP...it is not even close. Take a good look at the surface quality of his 1799... it is amazing... that coin exemplifies quality for the grade.
edited to add- a No on the CAC sticker
Thank you very much for your opinion. But thank you even more for being polite about it without any snark or sarcasm.
Comments
Excuse me, I misspoke. You don't insist on your ignorance, you simply persist in it. I'm fed up with newbies who haven't done their homework. It's got a naked-eye scratch. The coin is lovely, but has an obvious fatal flaw. If not obvious to you, to others.
They've schooled you. And yet, you persist.
You just spent over a grand on a coin and you state this?
Crap on a cracker
Yeah but they didn’t note it was a problem coin by putting “cleaned” like they usually do. Which means the coin is over graded.
The scratch isn’t noticeable at all under normal lighting.
It looks like this in hand. I can’t even see it. Can you?
I’m not even sure if CAC would see the scratch unless they looked at it under super high powered lights.
If I had noticed it I would’ve negotiated a lower price.
Both PCGS and NGC accept a certain amount of cleaning on bust coins, since most of them have been cleaned at some point. It's not a problem coin (for the issue) nor is it over-graded. It just won't pass muster with CAC is all.
This coin was discussed earlier this year:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1049771/new-pickup-from-northern-nevada-coin/p1
I think the old cleaning (not unusual with these big coins, hence the NGC decision to slab) combined with the scratches will likely result in a rejection from CAC. No big deal! Enjoy owning a wonderful piece of history!
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Thanks for clarifying!
I was getting really confused. O_o
Because on one hand people were saying “It could be old cleaning and not too severe so NGC didn’t mark it cleaned.”
But then they were saying:
“It’s cleaned so it won’t get the CAC.”
It’s confusing because if it doesn’t matter to NGC it shouldn’t matter to CAC either.
But apparently the standards are different.
As I posted previously:
"Many coins that have been cleaned receive straight-grades from the major grading companies. But if they feel the cleaning is too severe, they assign a details-grade, instead.
I suspect that the area I mentioned has been cleaned, due to the light color there, compared to much of the rest of the reverse. My guess is that the coin won’t sticker, but I hope I’m mistaken."
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Well yes, that's the whole point. There is a range for a given grade and for whether a problem is bad enough to warrant a details grade. CAC focuses on the upper end of the grade range and tends almost completely to "no trace of a problem." The reason people buy CAC coins is to not get coins like this, which are market acceptable, but have some issues. That doesn't mean it's a bad coin, but it's not a wholly original coin that CAC will appreciate.
I know you did and I appreciate it.
What I’m saying though is; as you said, “if they feel the cleaning is too severe they assign a details grade.”
But if mine isn’t too severe to get the details grade from NGC why would CAC think it’s too severe?
I’m just confused about how one TPG doesn’t really think it warrants details grade but another does.
Maybe it just depends on the grader?
I wish dealers would tell customers that coins were cleaned even if it’s not labeled as cleaned
.
It sounds like I got ripped off buying a problem coin as if it were a problem free coin.
That’s the reason I buy slabbed coins because I thought the whole point of TPGs was to identify things like that.
And it looks worse than this one
Finding a less attractive example of a coin doesn't make a coin great, it just makes it not the worst one out there.
You hit the nail on the head. CAC looks for coins that are "solid" for the grade and with no major issues. They are an approval service, not a TPG. For 19th and 18th century silver they seem to prefer nice original toning for circulated grades especially. The reverse on this coin is not original, as others have pointed out.
Aercus Numismatics - Certified coins for sale
Some dealers will disclose anything less than perfection, and others sell what's in front of them. If you bought the coin as an NGC F12 without any wording hyping how uber-original the surfaces are, then you got exactly what was described. I say this with all due respect, many people have looked at these photos and told you the same thing; even if not stated in words, the photos told a story. It may be a cost of tuition, but perhaps the lesson here is not to spend 4 figures without an understanding of what exactly you are buying. You could have done a lot worse, but you could have done better. I've been collecting for going on 3 decades, and I still ask questions of people I trust before I buy certain coins. If you want to ensure you're getting the right coin for you, the time to ask a question is before you buy, not after.
Ehhh idk I wouldn’t say that one is better than mine either.
Almost the entire “E Pluribus Unum” is faded away. Plus the high points on the hair are less detailed.
But I guess it’s all about personal opinion.
You’re obviously not even reading what I write.
First of all: Asking follow up questions is NOT insisting or persisting on anything. It’s how people learn.
You seem to expect people to just accept what they are told as the truth without asking anything.
Secondly: you say: “It’s got a naked eye scratch.”
No it doesn’t! This is not visible to the naked eye.
It's a decent coin for the date and grade. Multiple flaws acceptable by some as not grade-limiting.
Consider my grading skills (as one of the founders of NGC) to be more than adequate
However
It's been pointed out that you yourself have previously started a thread on this coin in January of this year.
I'll now not consider you as simply willfully ignorant, but rather both intellectually dishonest and deliberately deceptive.
You're right. Your coin has 3 more letters of PLURIBUS than my coin does and perhaps a bit more detail. But here's the rub (pun intended): grades are a continuum, and not every coin within a grade will have exactly the same detail. In fact, it's not uncommon that a coin with a minor issue be dropped a grade rather than given a details grade. If my coin had been lightly cleaned, perhaps it would be a VG10 instead of an F12. I don't think your coin has the details for it, but an F15 with the surfaces of your coin may be graded F12 instead. If you want the absolute max amount of detail for a given grade on the holder, you'll probably pull it off by sacrificing something else. How many people have pointed out to you that your coin has been cleaned, to the extent that you have said you feel ripped off by the dealer that sold it to you? I'll take the surfaces of my coin over your coin, even if yours has a few incuse letters that are slightly more visible.
No grader looks at a coin without rotating it in light. I've taken hundreds of thousands of coin photographs. It's very easy to have a scratch like the one on your coin go from visible to completely invisible by changing the light; all the more so if you use diffused light such as a CFL (which will hide a scratch) versus spot lighting (incandescent, halogen... which graders use). I can hide the scratch on your coin all day long, or I can make it stand out like a sore thumb. Just because a photo hides it doesn't mean it's not there, and if it's there even at just some angles, CAC will know and consider it.
Yes, the standards are > @ColonelJessup said:
Here's the previous thread: https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1049771/new-pickup-from-northern-nevada-coin/p1
In his defense, overall, the comments about the coin weren't nearly as negative.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
That was different though because I was simply sharing my coin when I picked it up.
This time I’m asking a question about it.
I also don’t mind people giving their opinion but they can at least be polite about it without feeling the need to be sarcastic or make negative comments about me as a person.
I would enjoy that coin with or without CAC. I have no idea if it would bean or not.
Collector, occasional seller
Thanks
. Based on what everyone is saying I’m not going to send it in since I now understand how it all works a bit better.
Oh I know the lightning definitely can hide a scratch or make it stand out.
What I was saying though is that he said that my coin had a scratch “visible to the naked eye” and that’s just not true.
Under most lighting (including at the dealership which had a bunch of lights to make all the coins look as shiny as possible as a sales tactic) the scratch isn’t visible at all. I have it in my hand right now and I can’t see the scratch but I know it’s there now.
When someone says “visible to the naked eye” I assume they mean under normal lightning conditions.
Here is one I used to own that did get the CAC green bean. It was graded F15. Perhaps it helps as a reference for (1) the original toning in the fields that various posters are discussing, and (2) what would be expected for an upgrade from F12.
Nice one! Thank you for sharing that it helps
.
It’s definitely better than mine.
I work in a B&M and I will tell a customer, even if it's means losing a sale as I appreciate the honesty and would hope for the same if it was an area I'm not that familiar with...
My YouTube Channel
I have the half dollar, same grade, but this one screams original to me.
I believe this one would sticker, but I would stand aside to those with more experience than me.
I would value opinions on mine by several that have posted on this thread…. not to hi Jack the thread
My YouTube Channel
Visible to the naked eye means it's big enough to be seen by the naked eye, as opposed to something that requires magnification to be seen.
As a seller, there's a delicate balance in what information to offer and how. I face it when I sell on eBay, since I want to do right by my consignors, but at the same time, my reputation with my buyers (which is, after all, what brings me my consignors) requires that I describe potential flaws. Often I balance things for a slabbed coin by writing out issues that the photograph doesn't show, but if you can see it in the picture (and in the case of the OP's coin, you can see the light/market acceptable cleaning) my mention of it (or not) will depend on exactly how it looks in hand and in the photo (perhaps ignore it if very light, or maybe mention that it was light, done long ago, and is market acceptable today). I do think there is some onus on the buyer to be educated in what they're buying. Of course, if someone were to ask me directly, I would directly answer the question.
I don't mean to sound judgmental, but these are my thoughts. The coin in question is okay for the type, but why not search for a coin with even better eye appeal, slabbed or raw ... with or without CAC ... a coin for which you don't need others' opinions? Ask yourself if you would love the coin in whatever holder it is housed in. Collectors have been paying premiums for beautiful examples since forever. Be prepared for that. Forget the stickers. I have seen a great number of CAC coins that don't hold my interest. That said, if you love the coin, keep it as is ... or submit it for crossover and TrueView ... or crack it out and keep it in an Air-Tite holder .... whatever allows you to enjoy what you love. Learning to grade doesn't hurt.
Matt Snebold
Case in point. I bought this eye-appealing example on eBay ... raw!!! When I eventually sent it in for grading, it came back VF20. No sticker is needed. I think the eye-appealing surfaces bumped up the grade
Matt Snebold
I think your coin is similar to the OP's in that the reverse looks, to me, like it's been wiped. The lighter fields but dirt remaining around the protected areas near the devices gives me that impression. That said, I do think the obverse looks wholly original. I'm not as much of a fan of the lighter devices as others are (personal preference--I tend to like circulated coins which are more uniform in color), but that doesn't take away from my thinking it's original and attractive for those who prefer that look.
I bought this one because it’s the only one I had and I liked the cameo look. I just wish they had said something like “the reverse may have been wiped at some point.”
As others have already said, I think it's accurately graded and TPG's have historically straight-graded early silver with light cleanings like this. I just don't think there's enough there to warrant CAC.
As for the the scratch... let me put it this way: Had I seen the image in the OP (with scratch) and bid with that knowledge in had, I'd be pleasantly surprised to receive the coin in the follow-up post. However, had I been sold on the second image and received coin in the OP (now I can see the scratch), I'd likely return it... But that's just me....
Successful BST transactions with: SilverEagles92; Ahrensdad; Smitty; GregHansen; Lablade; Mercury10c; copperflopper; whatsup; KISHU1; scrapman1077, crispy, canadanz, smallchange, robkool, Mission16, ranshdow, ibzman350, Fallguy, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, jwitten, Walkerguy21D, dsessom.
To the OP,
If you ask a question on this forum, you're almost always likely to get more than you bargained for. Don't take offense. I might suggest to re-read the responses, consider them in the context of coming from someone who has worked their entire life in the coin business, and try to understand the meaning behind what is offered. There's plenty of BS and poseurs in this hobby/business and those with decades of experience simply don't have time or patience to deal with it. Not saying that's the issue here, but understand you're conversing with some of the brightest and most experienced minds in the coin business. I'm a collector with 10 years of experience with LOTS to learn still.
There is a scratch.
The coin doesn't look original to most of us.
The coin looks to be properly graded.
It likely wasn't misrepresented to you. You have eyes. If you can't see the scratch or don't know the importance of the appearance of the surfaces, that's on you.
It's a nice coin.
Most of us don't think it will CAC.
It's still a nice coin.
There is only one way to know for sure if it will CAC.
Don't buy what you don't understand.
Copied from the NGC website, note the bolded part:
"Cleaning
Among the most common reasons for a coin to receive Details Grading is unskilled and improper cleaning. The temptation to "improve" a coin's appearance by chemically or mechanically cleaning it seems acceptable, until the possible detrimental effects are later explained to the collector. Light, non-destructive cleaning, particularly when found on older coins, may still permit numeric grading. Harsher cleaning that is destructive to a coin's aesthetic appeal, however, will result in Details Grading only, and such cleaning is not correctable with conservation."
FWIW...
One lesson I can't repeat enough is that patience is a virtue. There are many coins you can buy whenever you want if you care only about the label. This is one of them. 1799 dollars outside of particularly high grades are easy to find. Nice ones may be much more difficult to locate. Granted I didn't check every dealer's website every day, but the coin I had came after a few years of looking for a coin with the right look and the right price. If a dealer just has one coin, that should never be a reason to buy it. Unless it's the coin you want, it should just be a reason to wait and keep looking. The coins I've regretted buying are the ones where I really wanted to buy something, so I bought what was available. The coins I really treasure are the ones where I spent a lot of effort finding the right coin for me, even if it meant months or years without one.
Charles III Album
Charles III Portrait Set
Charles IV Album
Charles IV Portrait Set
Spanish Colonial Pillar Set
Now that's a nice coin! Virtually unimprovable at the grade. A near-perfect circulated example. Nice, beautiful, even toning. Distraction free. Nice contrast between devices and the fields. Gorgeous eye appeal. If that didn't upgrade on resubmission I'd be astonished.
Based upon the disaster that my recent submission was, the insight I had in previous years as to what CAC liked is now gone.
So when people say buy books, look at thousands of coins, etc---it is so you can make knowledgeable decisions and you wont have to "wish" the slab said this or that or the dealer said this or that. If you dont want to put in the time, then simply buy pcgs CAC coins if you want to avoid the problems you are concerned about.
USAF (Ret) 1974 - 1994 - The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries. Remembering RickO, a brother in arms.
Why is there a need to even consider sending this coin to CAC? It is an F12... and that does not appear to be in controversy. What also should not be in controversy is that the coin sustained a cleaning many years ago which most would consider market acceptable... and that is clear from a reasonable look at the images. I am confident that an in hand review would merely confirm my opinion.
The 1799 posted by Airplanenut is significantly better that the coin which is the subject of the OP...it is not even close. Take a good look at the surface quality of his 1799... it is amazing... that coin exemplifies quality for the grade.
edited to add- a No on the CAC sticker
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
What is weird though, is that in the previous post on the same coin, there were many comments saying "solid for the grade", " easy f15", "CAC is no brainer", and other supportive comments. Just shows that sometimes, rather correctly or not, humans tend to follow a certain comment. I like the coin for the grade, but I would not comment on CAC or no CAC, mainly because I never did give a hoot about the beans. Just a comment on how opinions can change from one post to another...
One way to find out. Submit it.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
This is something that I think is a bit of an issue on the boards, though understandable. If someone asks a question about a coin before they buy it, it's easy to give an honest opinion, even if it doesn't put the coin in good light. It's much harder to be critical of a coin that someone is showing off having just spent a good sum of money. When a direct question is asked, it's again much easier to answer that, even if the answer is critical or perhaps not what the OP would ideally want to hear. When a coin is fine but I'm not a huge fan of it, I tend not to reply to a "look what I just bought" thread because I don't want to rain on someone's parade, but there's no need to be harsh, either (what I won't do is be flowery just for the sake of patting someone on the back). If a coin is really nice I'm happy to say so, and if a coin has a real issue where I think the poster totally missed the mark, it may be worth pointing that out, too. For the coin in question, I think it's a typical example. It's not what I would have bought, but it could be much worse. I wouldn't reply to a thread saying it's an awesome example, but if there's a direct question about its quality, I will reply.
Many years ago I bought a buffalo nickel at a show and proudly showed it to @MFeld. He asked me why I bought it and somewhat chastised me for missing this and overlooking that, because if I had waited I could have done better (I don't think the coin was awful, just not as good as it could have been). He also walked me to a table where he knew two much nicer examples were available, and I ended up buying both. I can't say I was happy to have him tamp down my excitement, but he taught me a very valuable lesson that day (not to mention I got two much better coins out of it). What he did was much easier because we already had a relationship. I don't think that's something easy to do when a random person posts a new purchase if they didn't make an egregious mistake in their assessment of the coin.
I feel that it won't CAC.
The scratch is to much of a focal point for me and the spots on the wings
say "cleaned".
I hope that I am wrong.
If you do chose to send it in, let us know the outcome.
Either way, it is a nice coin.
Wayne
Kennedys are my quest...
One and done!
Good exercise for the whack-a-mole moderators!
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Somebody is having difficulty with his potty training, I see.
To the OP,
PCGS has produced a series of short videos that provide an introduction to grading: https://www.pcgs.com/education. The ANA also has grading courses that are well worth your time and money.
It's in your interest to study these videos, grading guides, and much more. Pictures alone can be quite deceiving, so make a determined effort to view LOTS of coins in hand.
You bought a coin that you evidently do not understand (at least, you don't understand what you are looking at and how to properly view/evaluate a coin in the first place). Learn how to grade, or you will likely learn some tough financial lessons (and do not expect slabs with grades or auxiliary stickers to always bail you out).
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Thank you very much for your opinion. But thank you even more for being polite about it without any snark or sarcasm.
I appreciate it.