Received this coin today. Obverse and reverse have a cameo appearance but maybe not strong enough for the designation. No hairlines are visible with the naked eye, however under 16x magnification some can be made out in the fields. The toning is as attractive as the photos lead you to believe and the reverse is even more striking in-hand. There are no slide marks on Miss Liberty's cheek from old National or similar albums (which, from my understanding, if visible make PF64 the highest assignable grade).
I'm not sure what kept this coin from a 65 or possibly a low 66. PF66 can be given if the hairlines require magnification to be seen (barring other issues, of course). PF67 should have NO hairlines, even under magnification, so that is out of the question. So I have a coin with NO slide marks, few hairlines that do require magnification, almost strong cameo appearance, great strike and wonderful eye appeal. I know they (PCGS) don't factor in some of those things when grading, however the only issue I could imagine would be the old remnants of fingerprints that have toned and are visible on the obverse from about 9 to 12. Even these you have to work semi-hard to see in-hand.
I'm of the opinion now for sure that this should go back. If anyone with more proof Barber experience than I thinks otherwise please let me know. Or if anyone has an opinion on if it should go back in or out of the holder I'd like to hear it!
By the way; I, like most of you, do not need PCGS or CAC to tell me I have a beautiful coin. BUT, when these coins go to my girls someday (hopefully long from now), if they choose to sell them, I'd like for them to get the maximum return. And unfortunately, a lot of people pay for the holder and not the coin and I'm not sure that will change anytime soon.
Edited by mitchhailey
01/09/2015 6:24 pm