Options
1889cc PCGS 63 DMPL.... with no CAC on GC
bestday
Posts: 4,242 ✭✭✭✭
GC this week, has a 1899cc PCGS DMPL 63, on auction , without the CAC bean .. Is that a sign coin possibly not good enough to get the bean ?
0
Comments
It shouldn't have been good enough to make it past the authenticators.
Sorry, couldn't help it.
With all due respect, I think it is unfair to Great Collections and the consignor to post threads like this when the item is actively up for sale in an auction. I'm sure if you ask, Ian or Raeleen will give you an honest opinion.
I think it is a sign they are auctioning a 1889-CC PCGS 63DMPL. Aside from that you are reading way to far into the situation with very incomplete information.
There is ZERO chance a 50K+ coin was not sent to CAC before going up for sale. That said, when you compare it to the Sotheby's coin that just sold, it is easy to see why the GC coin did not get the sticker.
.
.
Sotheby's Coin:
.
.
.
.
.
.
Great Collections Coin:
.
.
.
I am not looking forward to the future of opinions here from images on coins such as this.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Anyone with enough money to buy the coin will have figured this out all by themselves. If they didn't, they need to have Laura do all their shopping.
The GC coin looks to have deeper mirrors than the Sotheby's piece.
It also looks to have a few more surface disruptions.
So, take your pick: deeper mirrors or fewer marks.
Not to mention that we only have auction photos. Lighting and angling can make the same coin obviously look drastically different.
Logically speaking yes, but one of the most difficult lessons for me to learn in life was that 99% of the population acts illogically a significant percentage of the time. Any negative attention could, in theory, affect the results.
Yes this is true. The coins may look vastly different in hand.
I think the GC coin picture has more light to it. It is hard to compare any two coins this way. Only a true in person side by side can really do what this thread asks. Price tells us alot.
I would be honored to own either one of these coins. I love Morgan dollars.
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
Me too. However, based on the pictures I would pay a lot more for the Sotheby’s coin. A lot more
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
The 1889-CC often comes P-L in when it is in Mint State. That is not unusual.
As for the coin question, it all depends upon what the final price price as to whether or not it is a good deal.
As for going 100% by photos, I've learned that you can really change the look of a coin quite a bit by moving the lighting around.
Where is the link?
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
Actually, the sticker means that John agrees with the designation too. I have known PL collectors who have received notes back that a coin was not PL enough for CAC.
https://greatcollections.com/Coin/586514/1889-CC-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-PCGS-MS-63-DMPL
Many thanks
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
I would need to see the coin to comment on the mirrors, but the Sotheby's coin is most certainly a low 64 in a 63's clothing. And yes, I agree, many old holders are not even PL, but I have found some that were right, so have you!
trueview
Collector, occasional seller
@FadeToBlack Larry, you were not impressed with the Sotheby's images. What do you have to say about that GC image above?
I do agree with the 63 grade on the GC coin. I also fully agree that it should not have a CAC sticker. Here is a section from the trueview.
.
.
.
...alls I know is i would be hella happy to own either coin...I will also add that the OGH coin looks like a high 64 CAC to me...maybe even 65 with that cheek; from that picture...now back to making $$$ so I can one day own both
DMPL's should be seen in hand. Often the better mirrors accentuate the scuffs.
?
The question was... did a pricey 50,000 coin go unsubmitted to CAC ,or was it submitted ,and then rejected by CAC ?
Coin in public ..... open to questions in public ....
Even Laura honestly states in her auction descriptions about coins that are up in current auctions..... that some coins were submitted to CAC .....and didn't make the CAC cut..
The implication is that the coin is overgraded, a problem coin, low end for the grade, or otherwise "not good enough." A private phone call or email could have clarified this. The auction house could give you a definitive answer as it has information that we do not. If the auction house doesn't know then there is a reason why they chose not to submit it. Draw your own conclusions.
Coins submitted to CAC by GC are done so at the request of the consignor. Quite possible that that individual declined to have the coin sent to CAC.
Not everyone is obsequious to the magic bean.
Please change your image back to BANNED after such a foolish comment!
So what is the use of a forum if we are supposed to privately call everyone?
Assume for a moment that we have this brilliantly efficient market. Forum proponents of CAC promote the thought that a coin of say $1000 or more has either received a CAC sticker or has been submitted and has not.
Based on this suspect logic, Intelligent bidders then should be bidding no more than MS62 DMPL money...and maybe 62 PL money to be on the safe side (I don't buy the "C" grade BS.)
62 DMPL money is $28,000-30,000. This coin is currently at $40k with the juice, meaning that at least 2 bidders have not read the playbook.
I don't know about the DMPL, but grade wise it is no better than 61 to me. Way too many hits and deep ones at that.
Not true--designations are considered by CAC.
Is this even a serious question? The forums are for learning and discussing coins, which can be done without compromising someone's sale. The auction ends in 2 days. Could this not have waited a week or so? If the OP wanted a real answer rather than mere speculation from actual auction images, he could have had one and talked to someone actually holding the coin in hand. A little etiquette and consideration goes a long way; what goes around comes around.
A major auction is not compromised by someone asking if they think the coin went to CAC. It most certainly did. And guess what, it is a clunker, but a rare date clunker and registry chasers with cash don't care.
Coin is a 63, but not a nice one, or has a problem that John saw. Stevie Wonder can see the difference between the Sotheby's coin and the GC coin. Even the CAC haters here have to admit the CAC coin is FAR superior.
.
.
.
I agree:
.
.
.
Cameo and Deep Cameo Proof Like are just like the Supreme Courts' ruling on pornography..."You'll know it when you see it"...
CC
You agree that the coin is a 63 or you agree that it has a problem that John saw?
Obverse of the GC looks fine for the 63 grade. Reverse is the more important image on this coin (that you failed to image.) Reverse scuff under the "o" in of, would be my concern. It is muted in the trueview but would force me to see the coin in hand before bidding aggressively.
Based on the image of the Stacks obverse, it looks solid for the grade and JA most likely got at least the numeric grade right, though it is tough to assess the mirrors from that image. I think that Kathy nailed it regarding the lighting.
(Note)...you seem to have time to put up a kibbitzy Stevie Wonder image to get a chuckle. Put up the reverse first so we can have a better discussion.
Some MS 1889 CC's can be pretty ugly and still bring strong prices.
The GC coin doesn't look that bad compared to these recent auction results.
This MS62 sold for $36,000 in March 2018
This MS63 PL sold for $42,300 in Aug 2017
Sanctimonious gets you no where... images not the issue ..... is this common ...Pricey coins in Holders without CAC stickers? .. except perhaps this CAC rejection is common and that less discussed...... is less disclosed ?
.Once again ..Why does Laura honestly reveal some auction coins were rejected from getting the Bean.. ? Are those house coins .. or consignor coins ?
OMG ... No CAC. Send it back. Where is my distress bag ?
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
Is it automatically assumed now, that if a high value coin does not have a CAC sticker, that it failed at CAC? That seems to be the consensus I see reading this thread. That would say that it becomes mandatory to submit coins of value or suffer the slings and arrows of ridicule when selling a non-stickered coin. Wow. Cheers, RickO
Neither does being inconsiderate. You know what they say about karma...
As for Legend and its consignors, they can reveal whatever they wish. That is vastly different than a third party trashing/undermining a coin publicly in a major coin forum right before the close of an auction.
You ain't seen nuthin yet.
MS DMPL 1889 CC's have a pretty low sticker rate.
The OP coin is actually not a bad looking coin for this grade and designation.
Only 11 coins have a CAC sticker in 63 DMPL vs 81 being graded by PCGS and NGC.
If you want one with a sticker you will have to pay up. Probably a minimum of 10K or more with a sticker than without.
Not everyone wants or needs a sticker on their coin to enjoy it.
When it's your 40K being spent you get to decide how you want to spend it.
At least it's in PCGS plastic
Total of all CAC 89-cc
I was hoping for a mini hoard of 89cc's to emerge. Still need that one.
100% Positive BST transactions