Post a coin that did not CAC and you thought should have

Maybe more of an AU50 than 53?

So, I looked and looked for the longest time trying to figure it out, and a friend told me a while back that JA was terribly strict on Saints. I now know why it didn’t bean.
It was a impulse buy because I don’t even collect Saints but I really liked it.😂 Still do, even though it’s the only $20 I have that didn’t bean.
>

I agree with all of them not stickering except the saint but JA is notoriously hard on saints with their legs and chest being focal points so that must be what cost you, that and the +. They are hard on 65s let alone a +.

-Terminal toning /mirrors

-dipped maybe too scruffy/chop damage for 58

-Residue

-burnt / dipped effecting luster

That said they are all really nice collector coins. I would buy the 75s with my own money raw let alone without a sticker.

@johnny010 Not sure. The reverse rim roughness is typical of later die states. Here's a Goldberg's image from the Naftzger Collection, PCGS MS66BN.

If I felt strongly about a particular coin that did not earn the sticker I would send it back for a reexamination, it happens on occasion, after all its just an opinion at that moment in time, a different day and a different opinion especially if they were on the fence and made the wrong decision that day. I love CAC just for their ability to reconsider such a happenstance

@Crypto said:

@johnny010 said:
@DeplorableDan
Do you have a photo of the putty? I could learn.

>

Is it on the wing? On the big feather?

I thought I remembered a spot but looking at these it’s somewhat streaky in that open area. Think there might be some on the feather tips too.

@messydesk said:

If that slab had AU50 on it, I wouldn't have batted an eye.

p62. Obverse die severely rusted. Fields very quiet and strike is hammered. Enhanced tone?

The only coins I have ever submitted to cac have been though the great collections service prior to auction so no active pictures and I don’t want to call out other peoples coins. I was shocked with 50% of the results. A few stunning peace dollars in old holders didn’t and a few avg ones did. Most did what I thought they would as it was a hand picked set and I knew about the compromises but still couple of head scratchers for sure.

I suspect where I went wrong is they might have wanted blast white lustrous or sexy toned peace dollars where I preferred the layer of dusty /chalky matte toning/skin (don’t know how else to describe it but if you have handled enough of them you know). While it dulls the luster that comes though somewhat, I actually enjoy the pearlescent sheen of original old silver common on unmolested peace dollars and walking libs from the early 20th cen. Considering how luster plays into peace grading from the choice to gem range, I suspect it wasn’t quality but grade issues for some of them.

For the darker circulated stuff Gerry's pics are very accurate. When the coins have color and luster some of the problems arise with "sunlight photography".

I haven't bought anything from GF that I couldn't see in hand because his images are TERRIBLE. He really needs to have somebody come in and revamp his imaging setup. Somebody should show him this thread, or better yet, maybe we should collectively stop derailing this thread and make a separate thread for it.

@Moparmonster said:

Hey I remember buying that from you. Now I know why you gave me a good deal! 😅 Still a nice coin that sold for me pretty quick.

Nice. I bought it raw at Harry's for $35 a few years back...
.