Options
Does anyone find this coin attractive? And does it deserve a CAC sticker
Walkerlover
Posts: 1,075 ✭✭✭✭
So I saw this coin advertised for sale and just wondered how this coin would be considered market acceptable by CAC. Was CAC generous in granting this coin its approval? Especially at a MS 65 rating
0
Comments
Ugly.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Looks like it spent a few months folded in carbon paper. (Only those of us of advanced age even remember carbon paper).
Now listen boy, I'm tryin' to teach you sumthin' . . . . that ain't an optical illusion, it only looks like an optical illusion.
My mind reader refuses to charge me. . . . . . .
no
As much as I hate the coin, I can see the sticker. Solid for the grade doesn’t mean it is pretty. And not every CACed coin is the cat’s meow despite the way sellers try to portray it. A CAC green sticker means it is an A or B quality for the grade and nothing more.
market acceptable color speaks to qt.
ugly toning is a different thing
Walkerlover Posts: 1,073 ✭✭✭✭ October 20, 2026 6:41PM edited October 20, 2026 6:42PM in U.S. Coin Forum
“…Especially at a MS 65 rating”
MS65 isn’t a particularly high grade for a mint state Franklin half.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
CAC sometimes likes the crusty original look even if many don't find it attractive.
Way fugly and heck no 👎
"Does anyone find this coin attractive?"
I don't but I've never had any trouble selling ones that look like it, so somebody must think so.
"And does it deserve a CAC sticker"
CAC thinks it does and I'm in no position to tell them that they're wrong.
THIS^
Mike
My Indians
Dansco Set
Luster is probably all there, I dont like the toning either, booming luster would forgive some, but cac sure does sticker some ugly's. I dont want to name names, but one of the big auction firms I use, told me that cac has cut down on stickering ugly crap as of late, not only did the coin have to be all there, but appealing as well going forward??
eye appeal-flation
Is there a coin underneath that toning??
You have difficulty seeing the date. I thought that would be an issue
They look at the coins in-hand, not in a picture on their computer screen. I bet that makes it easier.
Mottled and not in a good way.
AI Overview........
Mottled coin toning refers to an uneven, patchy, or spotted surface discoloration caused by chemical reactions between the metal and environmental elements like sulfur, oxygen, or moisture. While smooth or rainbow toning can increase a coin's value, dark or splotchy mottled toning often lowers eye appeal and market price.
I prefer Copilot.
I’ve seen ugly stickered coins in hand. I’ve also seen enough toned Franklins to have a really good idea of what it will look like in hand.
Price guides at $110. Somebody must have really loved this coin and thought it would get a Gold.
I wouldn’t assume that..
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
It appears to be from an original US Mint Set and the image is terrible. I suspect the coin is speckled and/or mottled and not many would like it, but I have no issue with giving a coin like that the grade it received or having a coin like that at that grade receive a CAC sticker.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
I'm not a Franklin collector but it looks to have pretty good luster and interesting (not to say attractive) toning. I wouldn't buy it as a type coin but for $100 or whatever, I don't despise it.
chopmarkedtradedollars.com
That's your classic toilet bowl toning. Some 1950's Washington quarters often come this way, too. Believe it or not, this one is 67 CAC. Some are much worse looking.
Superb collections are built more by omission than by addition.
I suspect the image is not helping the cause. This one needs to be seen in hand before dismissing or second guessing the TPG and CAC status. I think we can all agree that some coins have a look that simply is not for everyone.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Umm, no.
Fugly
It’s a very unattractive coin. I have no idea what CAC saw in it. For coins up to 1958, the old cardboard mint set packaging resulted in dark toning. In 1960, mint sets were in flat packs.
This is what gets me about the people who are slaves to CAC. Let’s say you have an MS-65 FBL half without the sticker. To CAC people it’s a “C coin” without it. Yet the OP coin is acceptable.
CAC painted itself in a box by claiming to based it solely on whether the coin was A or B for the grade and not consider eye appeal like some of the other services (e.g. CMQ, PQ, etc.). I agree with you that it is very unattractive and a coin I wouldn't not be enthused to own. I can still understand the grade.
One of the objectives of CAC was to help inexperienced graders to avoid “trap purchasers.” If you pay the MS-65 FBL price for this piece, it’s a trap.
Eye appeal is an inherent component of grading. CAC may lean towards the technicals, but they do not ignore eye appeal and have explicitly rejected coins for it.
Superb collections are built more by omission than by addition.
So ugly only Ben's mother could love it.
You are right. It was meant to be humorous.
It does not meet my standards or taste. As far as CAC or somebody else get with them.
There are players that will make an offer for just about anything but what they see as low end they will low ball the heck out of any offer for those.
Eye appeal can be subjective. A guy offered me a MS 64 coin (TPG) with a rather prominent black spot (reverse) - I passed on it.
"Bongo hurtles along the rain soaked highway of life on underinflated bald retread tires."
~Wayne
Not at all. Especially for a coin where over 20M were minted. You can find a better example.
Not attractive but we're basing the sticker on a picture. Maybe the coin is a solid technical 66 that PCGS netted down due to its toning. As a 65, it is better then average, but as noted, most find it unattractive and would not purchase. As Mark mentioned above, for common date Franklins, an MS65 is not that high a grade. Its a $60 coin per greysheet. As much money was spent on the grading. If I purchased for what its worth, I would conserve and it probably would look great as the luster appears above average.
Not really, but do you think it turned like that after it was CAC'd?
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
No.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
No, not at all would I suspect that.
Mottled toning is pretty common on Franklins. It is natural toning, just really ugly in many cases.
While I do not love the image (I might feel differently about the coin in hand) I have no issue with the grade or the bean. Appears to be classic mint set toning and very original.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.