@BillJones said:
The initial eye appeal is good with the luster and the toning, but there are too many little marks in the field to qualify as a coin in that grade IMO.
@TwoSides2aCoin said:
I can assure you of only one thing...... There are millions of collectors out there who don't care. They like the coin.
I can assure you that you can't accurately assure anyone that millions of collectors like the coin.
I can and I will. Do you like it , outside of the holder ?
Yes, and inside too 🤪
Well it was directed at Mark and since you were the one to answer, I'll tell you what I had reserved for him: "You are one in a million ", and I stand by my claim. At the end of the day, it's been liked by the original submitter and the buyer and I like it. That makes 3.
Practice makes perfect & nobody is perfect. So, practice being nobody.
Comments
Agree, the right field rules on walkers.
Me too! LOL The devil is in the details..
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
The marks are tiny in hand unmagnified.
Coin is a solid or better 65, I knew it was the label or a surface issue.
If there had been a “surface issue”, the coin wouldn’t have been a “solid or better 65”.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Yes I stand corrected. I meant if it failed CAC it wasn’t due to a issue with contact marks being to numerous
Well it was directed at Mark and since you were the one to answer, I'll tell you what I had reserved for him: "You are one in a million ", and I stand by my claim. At the end of the day, it's been liked by the original submitter and the buyer and I like it. That makes 3.
Practice makes perfect & nobody is perfect. So, practice being nobody.
I swear sometimes we just don’t see the forest for the trees.
Having fun while switching things up and focusing on a next level PCGS slabbed 1950+ type set, while still looking for great examples for the 7070.