CAC Results Revealed for 1899 O Rattler 12/9 post
Joey29
Posts: 458 ✭✭✭
Disappointed no gold sticker only green. But JA did tell me this is a A coin that would grade MS 64+ today or slight chance for a low end 65.
3
Comments
Nice Morgan.... and old holder with a bean....Cheers, RickO
As most here and on the CAC forum expected. Still a great coin and holder combo.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
Just curious how does one request an opinion on a given coin from JA? I've often thought to myself I'd even pay extra to get the "why" on failed coins.
Most of my rejects I end up figuring out after the fact, though after nine submissions I'm getting better at predicting which coins will fail. I am still tending toward submitting prospective rejects in the off chance maybe I'm overthinking it, but will eventually move toward not submitting my own rejects. My CAC journey has been quite educational up to this point. On occasion, there are coins that just leave me scratching my head... One was a 1941-S WLH that failed CAC at MS64 but graded at PCGS as MS65 after a crack/resubmit. Another was an 1878-S Morgan in 65 that looks amazing to my eye but failed, I'll reassess and consider whether I crack/resubmit or just leave it be.
Thank you for any input!
Send coins in, put note; "Would like to discuss with JA". I'd only do it once in a while.
"It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."
If you got a comment that it would technically upgrade to a “+” or even another numerical grade higher then why no gold sticker?
It's all about what the people want...
Because 1) CAC ignores the plus when assessing coins and 2) they only award gold stickers to coins that are at a minimum, solid for the next grade up.
Edited to add: The original quote from the OP was “ ..But JA did tell me this is a A coin that would grade MS 64+ today or slight chance for a low end 65.”
A “slight chance for a low end 65” is a far cry from “...even another numerical grade higher.”
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Thanks for the info @MFeld
It's all about what the people want...
Definitions:
MS65: The strike should be at least average for the issue and preferably sharp for the issue. The luster should be above average although full mint luster is not required like MS66 and MS67 grades are. Bagmarks can be present, but should not detract greatly from the coin's overall beauty. Generally, MS65's are above average for the issue with attractive luster and are appealing coins overall.
MS64: The strike is average and preferably slightly better than average. Luster should be at least average for the issue. Full mint luster is not required. Average strike for the issue. Bagmarks are present, sometimes heavier than others.
https://www.pcgs.com/news/a-quick-reference-guide-to-grading-mint-state-coins
Those definitions don’t tell me what grade the coin should have received. And I’d say the same about a number of other written definitions for contiguous grades of coins. Words rarely adequately cover each of the infinite number of combinations of marks, luster, strike and eye appeal.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Thank you for the tip! I suppose I could write a note like "Would like to discuss with JA if this coin fails." If I ever do make the request it would certainly be sparingly.
as pictured, that coin looks like what CAC said, a solid MS64, but then PCGS said the same thing over 30 years ago. to my thinking, it isn't like anything about the grading has changed, the change has been in collector awareness and confidence in what they are looking at.