@winesteven said:
I’ve been a CAC Collector submitter since the very beginning, over 15 years ago. As @lermish correctly states, a LOT of my 20th century silver, and some of my 19th century silver, has been dipped. However, the dipping apparently was done gently enough where the coin still merits CAC stickers on EVERY one that I own!
Here’s just one example:
Steve
Hi Steve,
They must like your coins more than mine, because the few lightly dipped coins I sent in didn't sticker because they were dipped.
CAC doesn’t decline to sticker dipped coins unless they’ve been over-dipped. If yours were just lightly dipped, they failed to sticker for other reasons.
Hi Mark, a problem is when you are dealing with a matter of opinion are the liners. With coins, what is gently dipped, and what crosses the line? While we can all agree on what is a gently dipped coin done correctly and what is not, there are others where honest people can agree to disagree.
It's similar to "just made it" FH Standing Liberty Quarters, or in sports like soccer, where do you draw the line between a foul and a yellow card? It depends on the official and the particular set of circumstances.
"Vou invadir o Nordeste, "Seu cabra da peste, "Sou Mangueira......."
@oreville said:
I happen to think that this 1943 quarter looks to be a MS-65+ and is very nicely struck on the obverse and lustrous but it is does not look like a MS-66 because there is too much chatter on the obverse field particulary on the left side.
Thanks for your feedback and all the opinions from expert board members. Seems most forum members say no to the sticker. I am more aware now of the chatter in the left obverse field. But seeing the coin in hand, to my eye the marks seem very light and minimally detracting. Also the luster is super intense. So my more amateur opinion is it looks like it has a very good chance to sticker. Regardless it will be a great learning experience.
@P0CKETCHANGE said:
Agree with @TomB —if OP had stated their goal was to increase the value and sell the coin, by all means berate his foolish decision, but there are plenty of reasons to send in a coin other than ROI. I sent in the inexpensive WQ that @lermish mentioned mostly for education and entertainment value (for myself and the forum)—80% of folks said it’d fail so there was more than $22 in education value there alone. Plus it rode along with some other coins I needed evaluated, so the incremental shipping costs were nil. And if it failed, it would have been $0 thanks to my Collector membership.
I agree, and to clarify my earlier position, I wasn't trying to come off as "elitist" or be a stick in the mud. It's just that I don't recall OP ever stating in previous threads that his goal was to complete an all-CAC type set, and as far as I can remember, the vast majority of his purchases have been sight unseen non-cac eBay gambles, which seems counterintuitive to that goal. Generally, I would advise that someone with that goal buy as many coins as possible that are already stickered, and historically It seemed, to me at least, that OP was more interested in finding the best deal, than the best coins.
Just for the record, I don't "collect" CAC stickers for prestige. I'm pretty confident in my grading skills, but I like to buy CAC coins because they're easier to sell when the time comes, and because it's a respected opinion that the coin hasn't been monkeyed with, which is crucial with gold. Also, I buy alot from pictures only so a sticker is a tool that i use to protect myself on the front end. @Walkerfan, I understand that you would like the pride and satisfaction of getting the sticker on your own, but I would still advise that you try to view as many coins as possible, in hand, to get an idea of what John likes and what he doesn't. What bothers John doesnt always bother me, my most expensive coin bears no sticker. However, I think you'd have a lot to gain if you started to view a ton of coins at a local show or an LCS if possible, and that might give you a better success rate than buying coins sight unseen from outfits like "Great Southern Coins" (known rascals) on ebay.
Absolutely will post when finished grading at CAC.
Just for curiosity, what is wrong with a coin like this for example? It seems like it would fit what you are trying to do, and took me a very short time to find. I just want to understand the mentality, as I’ll admit I was tougher on your posts when you were doing the whole, return if the group doesn’t like thing. But in this case, I would like to try to help and understand the thinking, because that allows us to understand your prospective, and then try to help specifically.
Absolutely will post when finished grading at CAC.
Just for curiosity, what is wrong with a coin like this for example? It seems like it would fit what you are trying to do, and took me a very short time to find. I just want to understand the mentality, as I’ll admit I was tougher on your posts when you were doing the whole, return if the group doesn’t like thing. But in this case, I would like to try to help and understand the thinking, because that allows us to understand your prospective, and then try to help specifically.
That may have been a newer listing I missed but the coin looks nice and it has the sticker already, just seller photos slightly blurry. Still I prefer my coin as it has that super intense luster that I love ❤️ and the older holder is a plus for me and it cost much less $63. For me Luster and undipped original fresh look is most important.
I intend to send it in with a Franklin I just purchased today that looks really good.
Of course if my coin fails than I am the loser but I have confidence from learning from this coin forum and seeing so many photos online that this coin will sticker and a few failures from past CAC submissions
This 1943 quarter is attractive enough as a keeper even if rejected by CAC. I have about a dozen such coins out of close to 1400 approved PCGS slabbed coins.
Unfortunately the quarter did not pass CAC. I guess the chatter in the left field was a little too strong for the 66 grade.
My problem now is whether to keep the coin or sell it as I really want a CAC coin. So either I will buy the next coin with a sticker or skip the Washington quarter as the design is bland and one of my least favorites.
Good news is the Franklin passed which is more important to me
@calgolddiver said:
not at all surprised ... buy a CAC next time. PLENTY available ...
I am mildly surprised as I thought the super luster and strong obverse strike would make up for the contact marks reflecting in the left obverse field, which didn’t look too distracting in hand. But I do understand what there reasoning is.
However it seems to me that CAC overvalues contact marks relative to luster and eye appeal as their grading model which is their prerogative. I still don’t understand why coins lacking strong luster and eye appeal should grade grade similar to coins with strong eye appeal and a superior luster by CAC
I am surprised that the Franklin passed, because I didn't expect either of them to pass at all. I guess there is more wiggle room on lower-valued coins.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
@hummingbird_coins said:
I am surprised that the Franklin passed, because I didn't expect either of them to pass at all. I guess there is more wiggle room on lower-valued coins.
Why the Franklin I never doubted it and I put my reputation on the line stating I would never buy a coin without a sticker? I understand the quarter grade though.
As a matter of fact on a regrade I think it would get 66 at PCGS as a C coin. I am a gambler. You pay for my express regrade at PCGS and if no 66 I will eat the cost
@hummingbird_coins said:
I am surprised that the Franklin passed, because I didn't expect either of them to pass at all. I guess there is more wiggle room on lower-valued coins.
Why the Franklin I never doubted it and I put my reputation on the line stating I would never buy a coin without a sticker? I understand the quarter grade though.
As a matter of fact on a regrade I think it would get 66 at PCGS as a C coin. I am a gambler. You pay for my express regrade at PCGS and if no 66 I will eat the cost
What reputation are you talking about?
Also, you yourself already said that you have no more coins to buy to complete your set.
@hummingbird_coins said:
I am surprised that the Franklin passed, because I didn't expect either of them to pass at all. I guess there is more wiggle room on lower-valued coins.
Why the Franklin I never doubted it and I put my reputation on the line stating I would never buy a coin without a sticker? I understand the quarter grade though.
As a matter of fact on a regrade I think it would get 66 at PCGS as a C coin. I am a gambler. You pay for my express regrade at PCGS and if no 66 I will eat the cost
@hummingbird_coins said:
I am surprised that the Franklin passed, because I didn't expect either of them to pass at all. I guess there is more wiggle room on lower-valued coins.
Why the Franklin I never doubted it and I put my reputation on the line stating I would never buy a coin without a sticker? I understand the quarter grade though.
As a matter of fact on a regrade I think it would get 66 at PCGS as a C coin. I am a gambler. You pay for my express regrade at PCGS and if no 66 I will eat the cost
@hummingbird_coins said:
I am surprised that the Franklin passed, because I didn't expect either of them to pass at all. I guess there is more wiggle room on lower-valued coins.
Why the Franklin I never doubted it and I put my reputation on the line stating I would never buy a coin without a sticker? I understand the quarter grade though.
As a matter of fact on a regrade I think it would get 66 at PCGS as a C coin. I am a gambler. You pay for my express regrade at PCGS and if no 66 I will eat the cost
So… heads you win, tails I lose?
Yes I enjoy a good wager.
Except when you were returning your eBay purchases right and left...
@hummingbird_coins said:
I am surprised that the Franklin passed, because I didn't expect either of them to pass at all. I guess there is more wiggle room on lower-valued coins.
Why the Franklin I never doubted it and I put my reputation on the line stating I would never buy a coin without a sticker? I understand the quarter grade though.
As a matter of fact on a regrade I think it would get 66 at PCGS as a C coin. I am a gambler. You pay for my express regrade at PCGS and if no 66 I will eat the cost
So… heads you win, tails I lose?
Yes I enjoy a good wager.
Except when you were returning your eBay purchases right and left...
What I am almost 100%. certain is this coin will grade minimum 65+ at PCGS on reconsideration
After a good deal of thought I came up with something positive to say about how this collector collects and makes decisions: I’m a big fan of lustrous coins too!!
@hummingbird_coins said:
I am surprised that the Franklin passed, because I didn't expect either of them to pass at all. I guess there is more wiggle room on lower-valued coins.
Question is how does a coin like this pass CAC with such a dark ugly look. Reinforcing my opinion that luster and eye appeal don’t rate as much as contact marks and original surfaces.
@hummingbird_coins said:
I am surprised that the Franklin passed, because I didn't expect either of them to pass at all. I guess there is more wiggle room on lower-valued coins.
Question is how does a coin like this pass CAC with such a dark ugly look. Reinforcing my opinion that luster and eye appeal don’t rate as much as contact marks and original surfaces.
In general, both PCGS and CAC (likely CACG, too) regard luster and eye appeal far more greatly than marks (within reason). I am not certain what you mean by "original surfaces" in the case of this coin since the image is poor and the coin is almost absolutely certainly from an original 1956 US Mint Set. This is how many of the silver issues toned from the 1956 sets.
The images of the coin in question aren't great, but I would guess it is pretty darn clean as far as marks are concerned and that the luster is not impeded in-hand. The eye appeal is rather low in the images, but I'd bet in-hand it wouldn't be so poor. Regardless, it isn't going to win many beauty pageants.
Sure, "original" coins can be blast-white, and 20th century ones often are, but not all blast-white coins are original. Many coins have been dipped to simulate luster. CAC probably knows how to tell the difference, and I am sure that is one of their factors in determining whether a coin merits the sticker or not.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
@hummingbird_coins said:
Sure, "original" coins can be blast-white, and 20th century ones often are, but not all blast-white coins are original. Many coins have been dipped to simulate luster. CAC probably knows how to tell the difference, and I am sure that is one of their factors in determining whether a coin merits the sticker or not.
Dipping coins doesn’t “simulate” luster, though it can (better) expose luster that’s already present.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@hummingbird_coins said:
I am surprised that the Franklin passed, because I didn't expect either of them to pass at all. I guess there is more wiggle room on lower-valued coins.
Question is how does a coin like this pass CAC with such a dark ugly look. Reinforcing my opinion that luster and eye appeal don’t rate as much as contact marks and original surfaces.
In general, both PCGS and CAC (likely CACG, too) regard luster and eye appeal far more greatly than marks (within reason). I am not certain what you mean by "original surfaces" in the case of this coin since the image is poor and the coin is almost absolutely certainly from an original 1956 US Mint Set. This is how many of the silver issues toned from the 1956 sets.
The images of the coin in question aren't great, but I would guess it is pretty darn clean as far as marks are concerned and that the luster is not impeded in-hand. The eye appeal is rather low in the images, but I'd bet in-hand it wouldn't be so poor. Regardless, it isn't going to win many beauty pageants.
I don’t think many collectors would disagree that coin is a dog, 🐕 something you might see in a parking lot.
The reason CMQ was established I believe was to incorporate a modicum of eye appeal into the equation of stickering a coin, but they seem to lack consistency like CAC in their grading and failed to gain traction among collectors. But the concept was good, to blend strict grading with attractive eye appeal to achieve a sticker. In that scenario my coin would pass as it has great luster but slightly too much contact marks
@oldabeintx said:
Parking lot? Many collectors appreciate original toning, which isn’t always colorful. My guess is that the 56 is stunning in hand.
Stunning or not, I think it's absurd to say "I don’t think many collectors would disagree that coin is a dog, 🐕 something you might see in a parking lot." as @Walkerlover did.
Apparently, not only does ownership add a point, but also, lack of ownership subtracts a lot. And for the record, by a " a lot" I didn't mean a "parking lot."
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@oldabeintx said:
Parking lot? Many collectors appreciate original toning, which isn’t always colorful. My guess is that the 56 is stunning in hand.
Stunning? Are you joking. If this was posted as a guess the grade I don’t think anyone would come close to 66. And nobody would state this coin is attractive, they would say it’s an ugly dark mottled toned coin and a hard pass for me.
There is NO CORRELATION between eye appeal and a CAC sticker. And all we have is the photo to judge. In fact the coin could look worse in hand as most EBay coins are photographed to look better as a selling point.
@Higashiyama said: @Walkerlover said: “There is NO CORRELATION between eye appeal and a CAC sticker”
Are you saying that eye appeal is not a factor in distinguishing between, for example, a B and a C coin?
Yes it’s only a small factor. There are many unattractive coins in CAC holders as well as many amazing ones
In my opinion, it’s not “only a small factor”. For all you know, many of those coins you find unattractive might have graded higher, if not for the lack of better eye appeal. And seeing how you’re so enamored with luster and apparently not a fan of darker coins, it’s quite possible that other collectors like many of the coins that you dislike. Your perceptions, alone, don’t speak for the graders or the market.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Higashiyama said: @Walkerlover said: “There is NO CORRELATION between eye appeal and a CAC sticker”
Are you saying that eye appeal is not a factor in distinguishing between, for example, a B and a C coin?
Yes it’s only a small factor. There are many unattractive coins in CAC holders as well as many amazing ones
In my opinion, it’s not “only a small factor”. For all you know, many of those coins you find unattractive might have graded higher, if not for the lack of better eye appeal. And seeing how you’re so enamored with luster and apparently not a fan of darker coins, it’s quite possible that other collectors like many of the coins that you dislike. Your perceptions, alone, don’t speak for the graders or the market.
I agree but don’t you admit that coin is truly an ugly coin? And as you say we can only judge by the photos I submit for opinions. Same should be said for this coin, can only be judged by the photos provided by the seller. I doubt he will ever sell it unless it’s heavily discounted. It’s surely a hard or soft pass for almost every forum member
@hummingbird_coins said:
Sure, "original" coins can be blast-white, and 20th century ones often are, but not all blast-white coins are original. Many coins have been dipped to simulate luster. CAC probably knows how to tell the difference, and I am sure that is one of their factors in determining whether a coin merits the sticker or not.
Artificially white...
Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value. Zero. Voltaire. Ebay coinbowlllc
Stunning? Are you joking. If this was posted as a guess the grade I don’t think anyone would come close to 66. And nobody would state this coin is attractive, they would say it’s an ugly dark mottled toned coin and a hard pass for me.
There is NO CORRELATION between eye appeal and a CAC sticker. And all we have is the photo to judge. In fact the coin could look worse in hand as most EBay coins are photographed to look better as a selling point.
You speak with authority on what collectors and CAC will like and accept, and yet you come to this forum asking for our advice and opinions on very common 20th century coins. Think about it.
Stunning? Are you joking. If this was posted as a guess the grade I don’t think anyone would come close to 66. And nobody would state this coin is attractive, they would say it’s an ugly dark mottled toned coin and a hard pass for me.
There is NO CORRELATION between eye appeal and a CAC sticker. And all we have is the photo to judge. In fact the coin could look worse in hand as most EBay coins are photographed to look better as a selling point.
You speak with authority on what collectors and CAC will like and accept, and yet you come to this forum asking for our advice and opinions on very common 20th century coins. Think about it.
Yall have to see a lot of coins in hand and sort’em. Work in a big coin shop for a while. You get to experience a lot of coins in a very short period of time. You start to see things that others don’t.
Stunning? Are you joking. If this was posted as a guess the grade I don’t think anyone would come close to 66. And nobody would state this coin is attractive, they would say it’s an ugly dark mottled toned coin and a hard pass for me.
There is NO CORRELATION between eye appeal and a CAC sticker. And all we have is the photo to judge. In fact the coin could look worse in hand as most EBay coins are photographed to look better as a selling point.
You speak with authority on what collectors and CAC will like and accept, and yet you come to this forum asking for our advice and opinions on very common 20th century coins. Think about it.
Dunning–Kruger effect
I just expressed an opinion on a coin that is very legitimate and you are downgrading it. Guaranteed if this coin was posted by a member here it would be a soft or hard pass by 95% of collectors. If you don’t agree post it as a new discussion to see what collectors who haven’t seen this post say about this particular coin. See if I am right or wrong before knocking my opinions.
This is a challenge to you!!
As for CAC this is an observation that isn’t just my opinion but acknowledged by other collectors who have stated on this forum that CAC green stickers some really ugly coins due to their bias towards contact marks and technical grading over eye appeal and luster.
Yeah I think cheek hits may bring it to a 65 or 65+ in my books. It is very lustrous, has a dipped look for sure, and GSC... but whatever, it's still a nice coin!!
@Higashiyama said: @Walkerlover said: “There is NO CORRELATION between eye appeal and a CAC sticker”
Are you saying that eye appeal is not a factor in distinguishing between, for example, a B and a C coin?
Yes it’s only a small factor. There are many unattractive coins in CAC holders as well as many amazing ones
In my opinion, it’s not “only a small factor”. For all you know, many of those coins you find unattractive might have graded higher, if not for the lack of better eye appeal. And seeing how you’re so enamored with luster and apparently not a fan of darker coins, it’s quite possible that other collectors like many of the coins that you dislike. Your perceptions, alone, don’t speak for the graders or the market.
I agree but don’t you admit that coin is truly an ugly coin? And as you say we can only judge by the photos I submit for opinions. Same should be said for this coin, can only be judged by the photos provided by the seller. I doubt he will ever sell it unless it’s heavily discounted. It’s surely a hard or soft pass for almost every forum member
Big difference in what we're looking for. If you show us white coins with notable marks, the pictures can be junk but still helpful in formulating an opinion. The dark Washington is one that I can imagine looks better in person, though the exact color and eye appeal I wouldn't guess from the photo. I wouldn't buy the coin from the picture provided, but I wouldn't flat-out say it's a bad coin, rather, it's a bad image. The photos you tend to provide are too flattering; if there are flaws still visible, likely there are more we don't see. That dark Washington is about as unappealing an image as you can get. So bad images all around, but not for the same reason.
Stunning? Are you joking. If this was posted as a guess the grade I don’t think anyone would come close to 66. And nobody would state this coin is attractive, they would say it’s an ugly dark mottled toned coin and a hard pass for me.
There is NO CORRELATION between eye appeal and a CAC sticker. And all we have is the photo to judge. In fact the coin could look worse in hand as most EBay coins are photographed to look better as a selling point.
You speak with authority on what collectors and CAC will like and accept, and yet you come to this forum asking for our advice and opinions on very common 20th century coins. Think about it.
Dunning–Kruger effect
I just expressed an opinion on a coin that is very legitimate and you are downgrading it. Guaranteed if this coin was posted by a member here it would be a soft or hard pass by 95% of collectors. If you don’t agree post it as a new discussion to see what collectors who haven’t seen this post say about this particular coin. See if I am right or wrong before knocking my opinions.
This is a challenge to you!!
As for CAC this is an observation that isn’t just my opinion but acknowledged by other collectors who have stated on this forum that CAC green stickers some really ugly coins due to their bias towards contact marks and technical grading over eye appeal and luster.
As for NGC, my opinion, which has been acknowledged by other collectors is that they give some lofty grades to some really ugly coins due to their bias towards luster and market grading over originality and surface preservation.
As for PCGS, my opinion that has also been acknowledged by others, is that they give lofty grades to some really ugly coins due to their bias towards surface preservation and luster over originality and color.
See what I did there? You can make that statement about any grading service, or any grader for that matter. Each service may weigh the components of the grade differently, but none of them are "wrong" or "right", and it's unfair to claim a "bias" just because they don't agree with you. As you know, CAC seemingly places a higher emphasis on originality than the other services, which Iand several others here, happen to appreciate. The '56 quarter, while not particularly attractive, looks to have pretty immaculate surfaces concerning contact marks. The luster also looks pretty good, homely mottled toning notwithstanding. If you took 30 seconds to dip that crap off, that coin would likely make yours look like the "parking lot coin".
As I mentioned earlier, I found it odd to that you were aiming to put together an all CAC type set based on your history here, or at least what I could recall. To put my mind at ease, I took a quick tally of your discussions since you started posting. I only counted discussions where you had purchased or were seriously contemplating a purchase. I counted 30 coins, and of those 30, 25 of them were NOT stickered. Only 5 were already stickered, and for someone with your stated goal, that seems..... ass backwards. In addition, you don't hesitate to criticize CAC or question their decision to sticker a coin. In fact, you might have more CAC critique threads than you do CAC purchases.
Your collecting pattern confuses us, and perhaps could be because you're green, and you haven't dialed in your focus yet. It could also be that you change your mind often, or you enjoy using CAC as a $16 or $22 gamble that will lead to further education. With that said, many here have tried to bestow their wisdom upon you, with minimal success, so that makes the latter scenario rather nonsensical. In one of your previous threads, you had asked about GSC and were promptly informed that they are a shady, fly by night dealer with unethical practices., yet you bought this coin from them based on pictures, sight unseen, hoping for an upgrade or a sticker.
I would suggest that you cease from trying to make some profound statement about TPG grading, or CAC specifically, stop making proclamations about longshot upgrades, and start listening to the forum members who take the time out of their day to compose a thoughtful reply in an effort to educate you. You've been slowly dismantling your credibility with these threads, and credibility is very difficult to regain after it has been lost. You can collect whatever the hell you want to, it's your money, but generally this forum is fiscallly conservative and many have a low risk tolerance so they will never cosign your strategy. I'm sorry if I'm coming off as an ass, but sometimes the truth needs to be said, even when it's brash or "offensive" to some. Let this thread die already, please, for your own sake. When Cougar is the only one who agrees with your post, I think It's time to reevaluate your position.
Let me fill you in on something else as well; One of my biggest takeaways from Grading 2 at Summer Seminar is that a coin's value has a tremendous impact not only on what a coin grades, but also how it's graded, and how long it's graded for. The more expensive the coin, the more scrutiny is used in the grading room. This issue has a price guide of $80 in 6, and $285 in 7. If you're a decent grader and this coin comes across your desk, at first glance you see that it's obviously gem. From there, it takes approximately 2 seconds to determine it's not a superb gem, leaving two whole logical grades to choose from. The price guide in 5 is $50, so with a mere $30 difference, they slap the coin with a grade and keep it moving. Its no big deal if a 5 ends up in a 6 holder or vice versa, PCGS's main concern is their guarantee, which is of minute concern when you're talking about a $30 spread.
Like I said, In no way trying to put you down or or belittle you, but something's gotta give here. I can tell that you genuinely mean well, but we have two ears and one mouth for good reason. I would like to extend a virtual olive branch to you, so I welsome any PMs or emails from you if you ever want to get my opinion of something or pick my brain on a purchase. FYI I enjoy looking at all coins, not just trophies, and I'm always happy to help a fellow collector if they want my help. Theoretically, If you were my student or mentee, I would have you pause buying and your assignment would be to go to a local or national show and look at 1000 coins, covering the label with your hand and assigning a grade before you uncover it. Summer Seminar is an amazing learning opportunity as well, and I think it would behoove you to attend if you can swing it next year. We're never too old to learn, or too young to teach, but there is no Santa Clause in numismatics and this hobby can be remarkably rewarding once you put in the effort to sharpen your skills and knowledge to an above-average level.
Comments
Hi Mark, a problem is when you are dealing with a matter of opinion are the liners. With coins, what is gently dipped, and what crosses the line? While we can all agree on what is a gently dipped coin done correctly and what is not, there are others where honest people can agree to disagree.
It's similar to "just made it" FH Standing Liberty Quarters, or in sports like soccer, where do you draw the line between a foul and a yellow card? It depends on the official and the particular set of circumstances.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
Thanks for your feedback and all the opinions from expert board members. Seems most forum members say no to the sticker. I am more aware now of the chatter in the left obverse field. But seeing the coin in hand, to my eye the marks seem very light and minimally detracting. Also the luster is super intense. So my more amateur opinion is it looks like it has a very good chance to sticker. Regardless it will be a great learning experience.
let us know about the results
We are studying a 1943 washingtin quarter not a 1943 walker?
Absolutely will post when finished grading at CAC.
Just for curiosity, what is wrong with a coin like this for example? It seems like it would fit what you are trying to do, and took me a very short time to find. I just want to understand the mentality, as I’ll admit I was tougher on your posts when you were doing the whole, return if the group doesn’t like thing. But in this case, I would like to try to help and understand the thinking, because that allows us to understand your prospective, and then try to help specifically.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/196352308095?chn=ps&mkevt=1&mkcid=28&srsltid=AfmBOopfjzgxyW4zrvJ17nGyS232SU5jd_UMFGZ7G5l0s0bWDKtRmSD6p0s
That may have been a newer listing I missed but the coin looks nice and it has the sticker already, just seller photos slightly blurry. Still I prefer my coin as it has that super intense luster that I love ❤️ and the older holder is a plus for me and it cost much less $63. For me Luster and undipped original fresh look is most important.
I intend to send it in with a Franklin I just purchased today that looks really good.
Of course if my coin fails than I am the loser but I have confidence from learning from this coin forum and seeing so many photos online that this coin will sticker and a few failures from past CAC submissions
This 1943 quarter is attractive enough as a keeper even if rejected by CAC. I have about a dozen such coins out of close to 1400 approved PCGS slabbed coins.
Unfortunately the quarter did not pass CAC. I guess the chatter in the left field was a little too strong for the 66 grade.
My problem now is whether to keep the coin or sell it as I really want a CAC coin. So either I will buy the next coin with a sticker or skip the Washington quarter as the design is bland and one of my least favorites.
Good news is the Franklin passed which is more important to me
not at all surprised ... buy a CAC next time. PLENTY available ...
Top 10 Cal Fractional Type Set
successful BST with Ankurj, BigAl, Bullsitter, CommemKing, DCW(7), Elmerfusterpuck, Joelewis, Mach1ne, Minuteman810430, Modcrewman, Nankraut, Nederveit2, Philographer(5), Realgator, Silverpop, SurfinxHI, TomB and Yorkshireman(3)
I am mildly surprised as I thought the super luster and strong obverse strike would make up for the contact marks reflecting in the left obverse field, which didn’t look too distracting in hand. But I do understand what there reasoning is.
However it seems to me that CAC overvalues contact marks relative to luster and eye appeal as their grading model which is their prerogative. I still don’t understand why coins lacking strong luster and eye appeal should grade grade similar to coins with strong eye appeal and a superior luster by CAC
I am surprised that the Franklin passed, because I didn't expect either of them to pass at all. I guess there is more wiggle room on lower-valued coins.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
Why the Franklin I never doubted it and I put my reputation on the line stating I would never buy a coin without a sticker? I understand the quarter grade though.
As a matter of fact on a regrade I think it would get 66 at PCGS as a C coin. I am a gambler. You pay for my express regrade at PCGS and if no 66 I will eat the cost
What reputation are you talking about?
Also, you yourself already said that you have no more coins to buy to complete your set.
So… heads you win, tails I lose?
Yes I enjoy a good wager.
Except when you were returning your eBay purchases right and left...
What I am almost 100%. certain is this coin will grade minimum 65+ at PCGS on reconsideration
just because your frankie got a green bean doesn't mean it will upgrade
i'm not a cac submitter, but i think if you get it upgraded on a reconsideration you lose the sticker and must resubmit to cac
you collect cac stickers. as a rule of thumb, c coins don't sticker
Yes I will leave it alone as it’s in a slightly older holder anyway.
Both coins are attractive. Congrats on the Franklin CAC.
After a good deal of thought I came up with something positive to say about how this collector collects and makes decisions: I’m a big fan of lustrous coins too!!
Question is how does a coin like this pass CAC with such a dark ugly look. Reinforcing my opinion that luster and eye appeal don’t rate as much as contact marks and original surfaces.
In general, both PCGS and CAC (likely CACG, too) regard luster and eye appeal far more greatly than marks (within reason). I am not certain what you mean by "original surfaces" in the case of this coin since the image is poor and the coin is almost absolutely certainly from an original 1956 US Mint Set. This is how many of the silver issues toned from the 1956 sets.
The images of the coin in question aren't great, but I would guess it is pretty darn clean as far as marks are concerned and that the luster is not impeded in-hand. The eye appeal is rather low in the images, but I'd bet in-hand it wouldn't be so poor. Regardless, it isn't going to win many beauty pageants.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Sure, "original" coins can be blast-white, and 20th century ones often are, but not all blast-white coins are original. Many coins have been dipped to simulate luster. CAC probably knows how to tell the difference, and I am sure that is one of their factors in determining whether a coin merits the sticker or not.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
Dipping coins doesn’t “simulate” luster, though it can (better) expose luster that’s already present.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I don’t think many collectors would disagree that coin is a dog, 🐕 something you might see in a parking lot.
The reason CMQ was established I believe was to incorporate a modicum of eye appeal into the equation of stickering a coin, but they seem to lack consistency like CAC in their grading and failed to gain traction among collectors. But the concept was good, to blend strict grading with attractive eye appeal to achieve a sticker. In that scenario my coin would pass as it has great luster but slightly too much contact marks
Parking lot? Many collectors appreciate original toning, which isn’t always colorful. My guess is that the 56 is stunning in hand.
Stunning or not, I think it's absurd to say "I don’t think many collectors would disagree that coin is a dog, 🐕 something you might see in a parking lot." as @Walkerlover did.
Apparently, not only does ownership add a point, but also, lack of ownership subtracts a lot. And for the record, by a " a lot" I didn't mean a "parking lot."
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I don't understand the effort for plastic and stickers on an extremely common <$100 coin
Stunning? Are you joking. If this was posted as a guess the grade I don’t think anyone would come close to 66. And nobody would state this coin is attractive, they would say it’s an ugly dark mottled toned coin and a hard pass for me.
There is NO CORRELATION between eye appeal and a CAC sticker. And all we have is the photo to judge. In fact the coin could look worse in hand as most EBay coins are photographed to look better as a selling point.
@Walkerlover said: “There is NO CORRELATION between eye appeal and a CAC sticker”
Are you saying that eye appeal is not a factor in distinguishing between, for example, a B and a C coin?
Yes it’s only a small factor. There are many unattractive coins in CAC holders as well as many amazing ones
In my opinion, it’s not “only a small factor”. For all you know, many of those coins you find unattractive might have graded higher, if not for the lack of better eye appeal. And seeing how you’re so enamored with luster and apparently not a fan of darker coins, it’s quite possible that other collectors like many of the coins that you dislike. Your perceptions, alone, don’t speak for the graders or the market.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I agree but don’t you admit that coin is truly an ugly coin? And as you say we can only judge by the photos I submit for opinions. Same should be said for this coin, can only be judged by the photos provided by the seller. I doubt he will ever sell it unless it’s heavily discounted. It’s surely a hard or soft pass for almost every forum member
I personally love the toning on the Washington.
Will you buy it though!
Here’s one I like better personally
Sadly can't, I spent all my coin allowance for the year
and IMO I don't like the brown toning on the 55 Washington.
Artificially white...
Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value. Zero. Voltaire. Ebay coinbowlllc
You speak with authority on what collectors and CAC will like and accept, and yet you come to this forum asking for our advice and opinions on very common 20th century coins. Think about it.
Dunning–Kruger effect
Yall have to see a lot of coins in hand and sort’em. Work in a big coin shop for a while. You get to experience a lot of coins in a very short period of time. You start to see things that others don’t.
Then, it becomes much easier to rank coins.
I just expressed an opinion on a coin that is very legitimate and you are downgrading it. Guaranteed if this coin was posted by a member here it would be a soft or hard pass by 95% of collectors. If you don’t agree post it as a new discussion to see what collectors who haven’t seen this post say about this particular coin. See if I am right or wrong before knocking my opinions.
This is a challenge to you!!
As for CAC this is an observation that isn’t just my opinion but acknowledged by other collectors who have stated on this forum that CAC green stickers some really ugly coins due to their bias towards contact marks and technical grading over eye appeal and luster.
Yeah I think cheek hits may bring it to a 65 or 65+ in my books. It is very lustrous, has a dipped look for sure, and GSC... but whatever, it's still a nice coin!!
I just put it together from scratch. California Coins
Vintage site: JayCoinShop.com (Both same stuff just different flavors?) #numismaticmetals
Make some stupid offers now. https://collectorscorner.com/dealer/default.aspx?dealerId=1045&pt=1
Can’t believe the op coin failed CAC when the 56 horribly tarnished qtr did. Disgusting.
No fan that badly tarnished stuff. It will only get worse over time.
For proper RCI investment get material that is PQ, brilliant, with super cartwheel luster.
Big difference in what we're looking for. If you show us white coins with notable marks, the pictures can be junk but still helpful in formulating an opinion. The dark Washington is one that I can imagine looks better in person, though the exact color and eye appeal I wouldn't guess from the photo. I wouldn't buy the coin from the picture provided, but I wouldn't flat-out say it's a bad coin, rather, it's a bad image. The photos you tend to provide are too flattering; if there are flaws still visible, likely there are more we don't see. That dark Washington is about as unappealing an image as you can get. So bad images all around, but not for the same reason.
As for NGC, my opinion, which has been acknowledged by other collectors is that they give some lofty grades to some really ugly coins due to their bias towards luster and market grading over originality and surface preservation.
As for PCGS, my opinion that has also been acknowledged by others, is that they give lofty grades to some really ugly coins due to their bias towards surface preservation and luster over originality and color.
See what I did there? You can make that statement about any grading service, or any grader for that matter. Each service may weigh the components of the grade differently, but none of them are "wrong" or "right", and it's unfair to claim a "bias" just because they don't agree with you. As you know, CAC seemingly places a higher emphasis on originality than the other services, which Iand several others here, happen to appreciate. The '56 quarter, while not particularly attractive, looks to have pretty immaculate surfaces concerning contact marks. The luster also looks pretty good, homely mottled toning notwithstanding. If you took 30 seconds to dip that crap off, that coin would likely make yours look like the "parking lot coin".
As I mentioned earlier, I found it odd to that you were aiming to put together an all CAC type set based on your history here, or at least what I could recall. To put my mind at ease, I took a quick tally of your discussions since you started posting. I only counted discussions where you had purchased or were seriously contemplating a purchase. I counted 30 coins, and of those 30, 25 of them were NOT stickered. Only 5 were already stickered, and for someone with your stated goal, that seems..... ass backwards. In addition, you don't hesitate to criticize CAC or question their decision to sticker a coin. In fact, you might have more CAC critique threads than you do CAC purchases.
Your collecting pattern confuses us, and perhaps could be because you're green, and you haven't dialed in your focus yet. It could also be that you change your mind often, or you enjoy using CAC as a $16 or $22 gamble that will lead to further education. With that said, many here have tried to bestow their wisdom upon you, with minimal success, so that makes the latter scenario rather nonsensical. In one of your previous threads, you had asked about GSC and were promptly informed that they are a shady, fly by night dealer with unethical practices., yet you bought this coin from them based on pictures, sight unseen, hoping for an upgrade or a sticker.
I would suggest that you cease from trying to make some profound statement about TPG grading, or CAC specifically, stop making proclamations about longshot upgrades, and start listening to the forum members who take the time out of their day to compose a thoughtful reply in an effort to educate you. You've been slowly dismantling your credibility with these threads, and credibility is very difficult to regain after it has been lost. You can collect whatever the hell you want to, it's your money, but generally this forum is fiscallly conservative and many have a low risk tolerance so they will never cosign your strategy. I'm sorry if I'm coming off as an ass, but sometimes the truth needs to be said, even when it's brash or "offensive" to some. Let this thread die already, please, for your own sake. When Cougar is the only one who agrees with your post, I think It's time to reevaluate your position.
Let me fill you in on something else as well; One of my biggest takeaways from Grading 2 at Summer Seminar is that a coin's value has a tremendous impact not only on what a coin grades, but also how it's graded, and how long it's graded for. The more expensive the coin, the more scrutiny is used in the grading room. This issue has a price guide of $80 in 6, and $285 in 7. If you're a decent grader and this coin comes across your desk, at first glance you see that it's obviously gem. From there, it takes approximately 2 seconds to determine it's not a superb gem, leaving two whole logical grades to choose from. The price guide in 5 is $50, so with a mere $30 difference, they slap the coin with a grade and keep it moving. Its no big deal if a 5 ends up in a 6 holder or vice versa, PCGS's main concern is their guarantee, which is of minute concern when you're talking about a $30 spread.
Like I said, In no way trying to put you down or or belittle you, but something's gotta give here. I can tell that you genuinely mean well, but we have two ears and one mouth for good reason. I would like to extend a virtual olive branch to you, so I welsome any PMs or emails from you if you ever want to get my opinion of something or pick my brain on a purchase. FYI I enjoy looking at all coins, not just trophies, and I'm always happy to help a fellow collector if they want my help. Theoretically, If you were my student or mentee, I would have you pause buying and your assignment would be to go to a local or national show and look at 1000 coins, covering the label with your hand and assigning a grade before you uncover it. Summer Seminar is an amazing learning opportunity as well, and I think it would behoove you to attend if you can swing it next year. We're never too old to learn, or too young to teach, but there is no Santa Clause in numismatics and this hobby can be remarkably rewarding once you put in the effort to sharpen your skills and knowledge to an above-average level.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook