Dan, I hope your extremely thoughtful and excellent post doesn’t fall on deaf ears. However, unfortunately, based on past history, that wouldn’t surprise me.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Dan, I hope your extremely thoughtful and excellent post doesn’t fall on deaf ears. However, unfortunately, based on past history, that wouldn’t surprise me.
I was going to let this thread die but while I was looking for CAC Washington Quarters I came across this coin. Dark toned with black ugly spotting. Worse than the other coin I posted even though the reverse isn’t that bad.
How on earth does a coin like this earn a green sticker with these issues. Even if it would have graded 68 if attractive. As I am far from an expert like Mark Feld or some other senior board members I would love to learn from you guys. This is a sincere request for enlightenment. It further enforces my own opinion that CAC does not care too much about eye appeal.
@Walkerlover said:
I was going to let this thread die but while I was looking for CAC Washington Quarters I came across this coin. Dark toned with black ugly spotting. Worse than the other coin I posted even though the reverse isn’t that bad.
How on earth does a coin like this earn a green sticker with these issues. Even if it would have graded 68 if attractive. As I am far from an expert like Mark Feld or some other senior board members I would love to learn from you guys. This is a sincere request for enlightenment. It further enforces my own opinion that CAC does not care too much about eye appeal.
I'm confused. Why do you want CAC stickers on your slabs?
@Walkerlover said:
I was going to let this thread die but while I was looking for CAC Washington Quarters I came across this coin. Dark toned with black ugly spotting. Worse than the other coin I posted even though the reverse isn’t that bad.
How on earth does a coin like this earn a green sticker with these issues. Even if it would have graded 68 if attractive. As I am far from an expert like Mark Feld or some other senior board members I would love to learn from you guys. This is a sincere request for enlightenment. It further enforces my own opinion that CAC does not care too much about eye appeal.
I'm confused. Why do you want CAC stickers on your slabs?
No confusion, I pick coins with super luster and good strikes with no spotting or other issues and top eye appeal as you can see from my previous posts. I want the assurance that the coins pass as solid or high for the grade. And that I didn’t miss pvc, hairlines or high point friction. I feel it also makes the coins more prestigious and saleable even if doesn’t add too much monetary value in case I decide one day to upgrade or sell the coin or collection
@Walkerlover said:
I was going to let this thread die but while I was looking for CAC Washington Quarters I came across this coin. Dark toned with black ugly spotting. Worse than the other coin I posted even though the reverse isn’t that bad.
How on earth does a coin like this earn a green sticker with these issues. Even if it would have graded 68 if attractive. As I am far from an expert like Mark Feld or some other senior board members I would love to learn from you guys. This is a sincere request for enlightenment. It further enforces my own opinion that CAC does not care too much about eye appeal.
I'm confused. Why do you want CAC stickers on your slabs?
No confusion, I pick coins with super luster and good strikes with no spotting or other issues and top eye appeal as you can see from my previous posts. I want the assurance that the coins pass as solid or high for the grade. And that I didn’t miss pvc, hairlines or high point friction. I feel it also makes the coins more prestigious and saleable even if doesn’t add too much monetary value in case I decide one day to upgrade or sell the coin or collection
Based on your last few posts, it doesn't sound like you trust CAC to do that.
I would like to add that the concept of a fairly strict grading service that would incorporate eye appeal as well for a sticker I think makes sense.
CMQ tried to fill this space but was too inconsistent to gain acceptance from mainstream collectors and thus seems to be a failure
Dan, I hope your extremely thoughtful and excellent post doesn’t fall on deaf ears. However, unfortunately, based on past history, that wouldn’t surprise me.
I was going to let this thread die but while I was looking for CAC Washington Quarters I came across this coin. Dark toned with black ugly spotting. Worse than the other coin I posted even though the reverse isn’t that bad.
How on earth does a coin like this earn a green sticker with these issues. Even if it would have graded 68 if attractive. As I am far from an expert like Mark Feld or some other senior board members I would love to learn from you guys. This is a sincere request for enlightenment. It further enforces my own opinion that CAC does not care too much about eye appeal.
As @Catbert hypothesized, perhaps the coin deteriorated after CAC stickered it.
Another possibility is that the coin looks very different/much better in hand. I’ve seen many coins that looked undesirable in images and wonderful in person. I’ve also seen large numbers of the opposite.
That and the fact that the grading companies have assessed the coins in hand is why I give them the strong benefit of the doubt over images.
Often, I think coins look over-graded or under-graded in pictures. But I try not to be critical of the grading or jump to conclusions, based just on images.
You seem to have it in your head that CAC places very little emphasis on eye appeal. Based on all of the coins I see, I have a different opinion.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Walkerlover said:
I was going to let this thread die but while I was looking for CAC Washington Quarters I came across this coin. Dark toned with black ugly spotting. Worse than the other coin I posted even though the reverse isn’t that bad.
How on earth does a coin like this earn a green sticker with these issues. Even if it would have graded 68 if attractive. As I am far from an expert like Mark Feld or some other senior board members I would love to learn from you guys. This is a sincere request for enlightenment. It further enforces my own opinion that CAC does not care too much about eye appeal.
I'm confused. Why do you want CAC stickers on your slabs?
No confusion, I pick coins with super luster and good strikes with no spotting or other issues and top eye appeal as you can see from my previous posts. I want the assurance that the coins pass as solid or high for the grade. And that I didn’t miss pvc, hairlines or high point friction. I feel it also makes the coins more prestigious and saleable even if doesn’t add too much monetary value in case I decide one day to upgrade or sell the coin or collection
Based on your last few posts, it doesn't sound like you trust CAC to do that.
I have trust and respect for CAC consistency and overall strictness. I just don’t understand coins with apparent negative eye appeal getting stickers and coins with great luster and eye appeal failing for a slight amount more of contact marks.
Dan, I hope your extremely thoughtful and excellent post doesn’t fall on deaf ears. However, unfortunately, based on past history, that wouldn’t surprise me.
I was going to let this thread die but while I was looking for CAC Washington Quarters I came across this coin. Dark toned with black ugly spotting. Worse than the other coin I posted even though the reverse isn’t that bad.
How on earth does a coin like this earn a green sticker with these issues. Even if it would have graded 68 if attractive. As I am far from an expert like Mark Feld or some other senior board members I would love to learn from you guys. This is a sincere request for enlightenment. It further enforces my own opinion that CAC does not care too much about eye appeal.
As @Catbert hypothesized, perhaps the coin deteriorated after CAC stickered it.
Another possibility is that the coin looks very different/much better in hand. I’ve seen many coins that looked undesirable in images and wonderful in person. I’ve also seen large numbers of the opposite.
That and the fact that the grading companies have assessed the coins in hand is why I give them the strong benefit of the doubt over images.
Often, I think coins look over-graded or under-graded in pictures. But I try not to be critical of the grading or jump to conclusions, based just on images.
You seem to have it in your head that CAC places very little emphasis on eye appeal. Based on all of the coins I see, I have a different opinion.
Okay I can agree with that as I am trying to be more open minded to this possibility you are explaining.
@Walkerlover You should start your own company called Certified Return Corporation. If the coin meets your standards, it gets a "CRC" sticker. If not, you just return the coin to the seller.
Dan, I hope your extremely thoughtful and excellent post doesn’t fall on deaf ears. However, unfortunately, based on past history, that wouldn’t surprise me.
There was enough excellent information and logic within Dan's statement that others- such as myself- are able to take-away seasoned advice and incorporate it into our collecting goals, even if the OP didn't read it thoughtfully.
Dan, I hope your extremely thoughtful and excellent post doesn’t fall on deaf ears. However, unfortunately, based on past history, that wouldn’t surprise me.
There was enough excellent information and logic within Dan's statement that others- such as myself- are able to take-away seasoned advice and incorporate it into our collecting goals, even if the OP didn't read it thoughtfully.
It truly was a thoughtful and extremely well written post that could benefit all, even very seasoned collectors/dealers. Easily post of the week.
...and the one line that made me laugh is post of the month all by itself.
Dan, I hope your extremely thoughtful and excellent post doesn’t fall on deaf ears. However, unfortunately, based on past history, that wouldn’t surprise me.
There was enough excellent information and logic within Dan's statement that others- such as myself- are able to take-away seasoned advice and incorporate it into our collecting goals, even if the OP didn't read it thoughtfully.
It truly was a thoughtful and extremely well written post that could benefit all, even very seasoned collectors/dealers. Easily post of the week.
...and the one line that made me laugh is post of the month all by itself.
@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
Nonsense.
You are focusing on only one factor. The overall grade has to balance ALL factors. So an excellent strike with good luster and no contact marks can still grade highly overall even with negative eye appeal.
@Walkerlover said:
I was going to let this thread die but while I was looking for CAC Washington Quarters I came across this coin. Dark toned with black ugly spotting. Worse than the other coin I posted even though the reverse isn’t that bad.
How on earth does a coin like this earn a green sticker with these issues. Even if it would have graded 68 if attractive. As I am far from an expert like Mark Feld or some other senior board members I would love to learn from you guys. This is a sincere request for enlightenment. It further enforces my own opinion that CAC does not care too much about eye appeal.
I'm confused. Why do you want CAC stickers on your slabs?
No confusion, I pick coins with super luster and good strikes with no spotting or other issues and top eye appeal as you can see from my previous posts. I want the assurance that the coins pass as solid or high for the grade. And that I didn’t miss pvc, hairlines or high point friction. I feel it also makes the coins more prestigious and saleable even if doesn’t add too much monetary value in case I decide one day to upgrade or sell the coin or collection
Based on your last few posts, it doesn't sound like you trust CAC to do that.
I have trust and respect for CAC consistency and overall strictness. I just don’t understand coins with apparent negative eye appeal getting stickers and coins with great luster and eye appeal failing for a slight amount more of contact marks.
Er... because you have to count EVERYTHING. Luster and eye appeal are a boost but they don't eliminate the contact marks. And negative eye appeal is a negative but doesn't create contact marks.
If you take two identical coins with identical marks, the eye appeal difference will create a grade difference. But if you have two different coins with very different marks, they could well send up with the same grade despite the eye appeal difference.
Respectfully, you're making a rookie mistake. We see it all the time. Someone will post a coin with booming luster and suggest it should be a 66 or 67 when contact marks limit it to 64 or 65. They are blinded by the shiny object. You will even see people make similar posts about obviously AU coins.
There are plenty of 67s I wouldn't want to own and 58s that I would want to own. That doesn't mean the grades should be reversed.
And it is worth noting that MY PREFERENCES are just that. They are not generalizable to all market participants nor binding on grading companies.
You want someone to sticker eye appeal alone. That is impossible. The people that like bright white would never like toned coins and the people who liked toned coins wouldn't accept bright white. That's why, regardless of grade or sticker, you have to look at the actual coin and decide for yourself.
@jmlanzaf said:
Respectfully, you're making a rookie mistake. We see it all the time. Someone will post a coin with booming luster and suggest it should be a 66 or 67 when contact malls limit it to 64 or 65. They are blinded by the shiny object. You will even see people make similar posts about obviously AU coins.
If you have contact malls on your coins, you're in trouble.
Maybe I can help with an example. The photo of this coin when I bought it featured a solid black, drab reverse. You would have called it dark and ugly.
@Walkerlover said:
I was going to let this thread die but while I was looking for CAC Washington Quarters I came across this coin. Dark toned with black ugly spotting. Worse than the other coin I posted even though the reverse isn’t that bad.
How on earth does a coin like this earn a green sticker with these issues. Even if it would have graded 68 if attractive. As I am far from an expert like Mark Feld or some other senior board members I would love to learn from you guys. This is a sincere request for enlightenment. It further enforces my own opinion that CAC does not care too much about eye appeal.
I'm confused. Why do you want CAC stickers on your slabs?
No confusion, I pick coins with super luster and good strikes with no spotting or other issues and top eye appeal as you can see from my previous posts. I want the assurance that the coins pass as solid or high for the grade. And that I didn’t miss pvc, hairlines or high point friction. I feel it also makes the coins more prestigious and saleable even if doesn’t add too much monetary value in case I decide one day to upgrade or sell the coin or collection
Based on your last few posts, it doesn't sound like you trust CAC to do that.
I have trust and respect for CAC consistency and overall strictness. I just don’t understand coins with apparent negative eye appeal getting stickers and coins with great luster and eye appeal failing for a slight amount more of contact marks.
Er... because you have to count EVERYTHING. Luster and eye appeal are a boost but they don't eliminate the context marks.
Don't get me started about those pesky context marks...
@Walkerlover said:
I was going to let this thread die but while I was looking for CAC Washington Quarters I came across this coin. Dark toned with black ugly spotting. Worse than the other coin I posted even though the reverse isn’t that bad.
How on earth does a coin like this earn a green sticker with these issues. Even if it would have graded 68 if attractive. As I am far from an expert like Mark Feld or some other senior board members I would love to learn from you guys. This is a sincere request for enlightenment. It further enforces my own opinion that CAC does not care too much about eye appeal.
I'm confused. Why do you want CAC stickers on your slabs?
No confusion, I pick coins with super luster and good strikes with no spotting or other issues and top eye appeal as you can see from my previous posts. I want the assurance that the coins pass as solid or high for the grade. And that I didn’t miss pvc, hairlines or high point friction. I feel it also makes the coins more prestigious and saleable even if doesn’t add too much monetary value in case I decide one day to upgrade or sell the coin or collection
Based on your last few posts, it doesn't sound like you trust CAC to do that.
I have trust and respect for CAC consistency and overall strictness. I just don’t understand coins with apparent negative eye appeal getting stickers and coins with great luster and eye appeal failing for a slight amount more of contact marks.
Er... because you have to count EVERYTHING. Luster and eye appeal are a boost but they don't eliminate the context marks.
Don't get me started about those pesky context marks...
I think you might have taken his comment out of context.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Walkerlover said:
I was going to let this thread die but while I was looking for CAC Washington Quarters I came across this coin. Dark toned with black ugly spotting. Worse than the other coin I posted even though the reverse isn’t that bad.
How on earth does a coin like this earn a green sticker with these issues. Even if it would have graded 68 if attractive. As I am far from an expert like Mark Feld or some other senior board members I would love to learn from you guys. This is a sincere request for enlightenment. It further enforces my own opinion that CAC does not care too much about eye appeal.
I'm confused. Why do you want CAC stickers on your slabs?
No confusion, I pick coins with super luster and good strikes with no spotting or other issues and top eye appeal as you can see from my previous posts. I want the assurance that the coins pass as solid or high for the grade. And that I didn’t miss pvc, hairlines or high point friction. I feel it also makes the coins more prestigious and saleable even if doesn’t add too much monetary value in case I decide one day to upgrade or sell the coin or collection
Based on your last few posts, it doesn't sound like you trust CAC to do that.
I have trust and respect for CAC consistency and overall strictness. I just don’t understand coins with apparent negative eye appeal getting stickers and coins with great luster and eye appeal failing for a slight amount more of contact marks.
Er... because you have to count EVERYTHING. Luster and eye appeal are a boost but they don't eliminate the context marks.
Don't get me started about those pesky context marks...
I think you might have taken his comment out of context.
@jmlanzaf said:
Respectfully, you're making a rookie mistake. We see it all the time. Someone will post a coin with booming luster and suggest it should be a 66 or 67 when contact malls limit it to 64 or 65. They are blinded by the shiny object. You will even see people make similar posts about obviously AU coins.
If you have contact malls on your coins, you're in trouble.
@Walkerlover said:
I was going to let this thread die but while I was looking for CAC Washington Quarters I came across this coin. Dark toned with black ugly spotting. Worse than the other coin I posted even though the reverse isn’t that bad.
How on earth does a coin like this earn a green sticker with these issues. Even if it would have graded 68 if attractive. As I am far from an expert like Mark Feld or some other senior board members I would love to learn from you guys. This is a sincere request for enlightenment. It further enforces my own opinion that CAC does not care too much about eye appeal.
I'm confused. Why do you want CAC stickers on your slabs?
No confusion, I pick coins with super luster and good strikes with no spotting or other issues and top eye appeal as you can see from my previous posts. I want the assurance that the coins pass as solid or high for the grade. And that I didn’t miss pvc, hairlines or high point friction. I feel it also makes the coins more prestigious and saleable even if doesn’t add too much monetary value in case I decide one day to upgrade or sell the coin or collection
Based on your last few posts, it doesn't sound like you trust CAC to do that.
I have trust and respect for CAC consistency and overall strictness. I just don’t understand coins with apparent negative eye appeal getting stickers and coins with great luster and eye appeal failing for a slight amount more of contact marks.
Er... because you have to count EVERYTHING. Luster and eye appeal are a boost but they don't eliminate the context marks.
Don't get me started about those pesky context marks...
I think you might have taken his comment out of context.
@Walkerlover said:
I was going to let this thread die but while I was looking for CAC Washington Quarters I came across this coin. Dark toned with black ugly spotting. Worse than the other coin I posted even though the reverse isn’t that bad.
How on earth does a coin like this earn a green sticker with these issues. Even if it would have graded 68 if attractive. As I am far from an expert like Mark Feld or some other senior board members I would love to learn from you guys. This is a sincere request for enlightenment. It further enforces my own opinion that CAC does not care too much about eye appeal.
I'm confused. Why do you want CAC stickers on your slabs?
No confusion, I pick coins with super luster and good strikes with no spotting or other issues and top eye appeal as you can see from my previous posts. I want the assurance that the coins pass as solid or high for the grade. And that I didn’t miss pvc, hairlines or high point friction. I feel it also makes the coins more prestigious and saleable even if doesn’t add too much monetary value in case I decide one day to upgrade or sell the coin or collection
Based on your last few posts, it doesn't sound like you trust CAC to do that.
I have trust and respect for CAC consistency and overall strictness. I just don’t understand coins with apparent negative eye appeal getting stickers and coins with great luster and eye appeal failing for a slight amount more of contact marks.
Er... because you have to count EVERYTHING. Luster and eye appeal are a boost but they don't eliminate the context marks.
Don't get me started about those pesky context marks...
I think you might have taken his comment out of context.
Don't get me started about that pesky context, Mark...
@Walkerlover said:
I was going to let this thread die but while I was looking for CAC Washington Quarters I came across this coin. Dark toned with black ugly spotting. Worse than the other coin I posted even though the reverse isn’t that bad.
How on earth does a coin like this earn a green sticker with these issues. Even if it would have graded 68 if attractive. As I am far from an expert like Mark Feld or some other senior board members I would love to learn from you guys. This is a sincere request for enlightenment. It further enforces my own opinion that CAC does not care too much about eye appeal.
I'm confused. Why do you want CAC stickers on your slabs?
No confusion, I pick coins with super luster and good strikes with no spotting or other issues and top eye appeal as you can see from my previous posts. I want the assurance that the coins pass as solid or high for the grade. And that I didn’t miss pvc, hairlines or high point friction. I feel it also makes the coins more prestigious and saleable even if doesn’t add too much monetary value in case I decide one day to upgrade or sell the coin or collection
Based on your last few posts, it doesn't sound like you trust CAC to do that.
I have trust and respect for CAC consistency and overall strictness. I just don’t understand coins with apparent negative eye appeal getting stickers and coins with great luster and eye appeal failing for a slight amount more of contact marks.
Er... because you have to count EVERYTHING. Luster and eye appeal are a boost but they don't eliminate the contact marks. And negative eye appeal is a negative but doesn't create contact marks.
If you take two identical coins with identical marks, the eye appeal difference will create a grade difference. But if you have two different coins with very different marks, they could well send up with the same grade despite the eye appeal difference.
Respectfully, you're making a rookie mistake. We see it all the time. Someone will post a coin with booming luster and suggest it should be a 66 or 67 when contact marks limit it to 64 or 65. They are blinded by the shiny object. You will even see people make similar posts about obviously AU coins.
There are plenty of 67s I wouldn't want to own and 58s that I would want to own. That doesn't mean the grades should be reversed.
And it is worth noting that MY PREFERENCES are just that. They are not generalizable to all market participants nor binding on grading companies.
You want someone to sticker eye appeal alone. That is impossible. The people that like bright white would never like toned coins and the people who liked toned coins wouldn't accept bright white. That's why, regardless of grade or sticker, you have to look at the actual coin and decide for yourself.
Thank you JM for providing that perspective to me as it was really informative.
I have decided to keep my Washington Quarter for my CAC set even though it doesn’t have a sticker and is probably a 66 at the C level. It does have amazing luster with a nice strike and eye appeal, an older holder with a 66 grade. Even though people put down GSC they do have some attractive certified coins at fair auction prices.
Now if I can buy a super looking CAC coin in the market that meets my criteria I may upgrade it in the future. I will never sacrifice eye appeal over a sticker or certain holder. As always the coin is first before other considerations.
Comments
Dan, I hope your extremely thoughtful and excellent post doesn’t fall on deaf ears. However, unfortunately, based on past history, that wouldn’t surprise me.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Wow, I woke up this morning and my moral compass lead me to this point.
I was going to let this thread die but while I was looking for CAC Washington Quarters I came across this coin. Dark toned with black ugly spotting. Worse than the other coin I posted even though the reverse isn’t that bad.
How on earth does a coin like this earn a green sticker with these issues. Even if it would have graded 68 if attractive. As I am far from an expert like Mark Feld or some other senior board members I would love to learn from you guys. This is a sincere request for enlightenment. It further enforces my own opinion that CAC does not care too much about eye appeal.
My estimation is that something happened to the obverse of that coin after CAC reviewed it.
(edit to add) I'd wager that JA would take that off the market if he was aware of it.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
I'm confused. Why do you want CAC stickers on your slabs?
No confusion, I pick coins with super luster and good strikes with no spotting or other issues and top eye appeal as you can see from my previous posts. I want the assurance that the coins pass as solid or high for the grade. And that I didn’t miss pvc, hairlines or high point friction. I feel it also makes the coins more prestigious and saleable even if doesn’t add too much monetary value in case I decide one day to upgrade or sell the coin or collection
Based on your last few posts, it doesn't sound like you trust CAC to do that.
I would like to add that the concept of a fairly strict grading service that would incorporate eye appeal as well for a sticker I think makes sense.
CMQ tried to fill this space but was too inconsistent to gain acceptance from mainstream collectors and thus seems to be a failure
As @Catbert hypothesized, perhaps the coin deteriorated after CAC stickered it.
Another possibility is that the coin looks very different/much better in hand. I’ve seen many coins that looked undesirable in images and wonderful in person. I’ve also seen large numbers of the opposite.
That and the fact that the grading companies have assessed the coins in hand is why I give them the strong benefit of the doubt over images.
Often, I think coins look over-graded or under-graded in pictures. But I try not to be critical of the grading or jump to conclusions, based just on images.
You seem to have it in your head that CAC places very little emphasis on eye appeal. Based on all of the coins I see, I have a different opinion.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I have trust and respect for CAC consistency and overall strictness. I just don’t understand coins with apparent negative eye appeal getting stickers and coins with great luster and eye appeal failing for a slight amount more of contact marks.
Okay I can agree with that as I am trying to be more open minded to this possibility you are explaining.
@Walkerlover You should start your own company called Certified Return Corporation. If the coin meets your standards, it gets a "CRC" sticker. If not, you just return the coin to the seller.
There was enough excellent information and logic within Dan's statement that others- such as myself- are able to take-away seasoned advice and incorporate it into our collecting goals, even if the OP didn't read it thoughtfully.
peacockcoins
It truly was a thoughtful and extremely well written post that could benefit all, even very seasoned collectors/dealers. Easily post of the week.
...and the one line that made me laugh is post of the month all by itself.
Chopmarked Trade Dollar Registry Set --- US & World Gold Showcase --- World Chopmark Showcase
did you cackle?
May I guess?
peacockcoins
Nonsense.
You are focusing on only one factor. The overall grade has to balance ALL factors. So an excellent strike with good luster and no contact marks can still grade highly overall even with negative eye appeal.
Er... because you have to count EVERYTHING. Luster and eye appeal are a boost but they don't eliminate the contact marks. And negative eye appeal is a negative but doesn't create contact marks.
If you take two identical coins with identical marks, the eye appeal difference will create a grade difference. But if you have two different coins with very different marks, they could well send up with the same grade despite the eye appeal difference.
Respectfully, you're making a rookie mistake. We see it all the time. Someone will post a coin with booming luster and suggest it should be a 66 or 67 when contact marks limit it to 64 or 65. They are blinded by the shiny object. You will even see people make similar posts about obviously AU coins.
There are plenty of 67s I wouldn't want to own and 58s that I would want to own. That doesn't mean the grades should be reversed.
And it is worth noting that MY PREFERENCES are just that. They are not generalizable to all market participants nor binding on grading companies.
You want someone to sticker eye appeal alone. That is impossible. The people that like bright white would never like toned coins and the people who liked toned coins wouldn't accept bright white. That's why, regardless of grade or sticker, you have to look at the actual coin and decide for yourself.
If you have contact malls on your coins, you're in trouble.
Maybe I can help with an example. The photo of this coin when I bought it featured a solid black, drab reverse. You would have called it dark and ugly.
Love love that Washie @airplanenut
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Don't get me started about those pesky context marks...
I think you might have taken his comment out of context.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I have to warn you that it's not CAC. I bought it 10 or 15 years before CAC came into existence, and, well, it already has enough green for me.
It's his new hobby.
No, he was talking about contact malls.
Don't get me started about that pesky context, Mark...
Thank you JM for providing that perspective to me as it was really informative.
I have decided to keep my Washington Quarter for my CAC set even though it doesn’t have a sticker and is probably a 66 at the C level. It does have amazing luster with a nice strike and eye appeal, an older holder with a 66 grade. Even though people put down GSC they do have some attractive certified coins at fair auction prices.
Now if I can buy a super looking CAC coin in the market that meets my criteria I may upgrade it in the future. I will never sacrifice eye appeal over a sticker or certain holder. As always the coin is first before other considerations.