No.
I consider it very toned. I don't consider it "monster toned", nor, at that grade and look, a "monster" morgan.
I like the greens but I don't like the color on the hose and that arc.
Green is a money color and I don't recall ever seeing so much of a Morgan's surface covered by it, so in that regard I think it is remarkable and NT. like others, I don't put much stock in using the word "Monster" and that includes the thread stuck to the top of page one. taken as a whole our opinions really don't matter. PCGS graded it, CAC agreed and a buyer thought it was worth almost $1k.
The term 'monster' is a hype term denoting color, and is freely bandied about in auctions. People pay premiums for environmental damage (tarnish) when it manifests in various colors... green being desirable from my observations. Paying these monster premiums always amazes me.... save your money and do it yourself...just as many of these coins have been produced. Cheers, RickO
I've said for years that toned coins are simply environmental damaged (ED) , or have altered surfaces (AT) and their grades should be reduced just like a circulated coin or one that has a bad scratch, lots of bag marks, rim ding, etc. They didn't come from the mint that way.
Not a monster, but pretty decent toning. The photos shown put the color all over the map. If the toned area is dull or has minimal luster, then it's not all that great.
I don't think that hole has to do with anything on the toning.
@kbbpll said:
The toning appears to radiate from a hole/defect in the holder. Not sure what that means but figured I'd point it out.
That's the light reflection off the side of the prong holding the coin in place.
The coin is natural, the green is very nice. I like it more than an average toned dollar, but it would need to be much brighter (lots more lustre and/or more reflective fields, and well as bolder and brighter color) at the very least to be a monster.
I suspect that the coin is nice or very nice, but would need to have the coin in hand to say for sure. With that said, probably not in the monster category.
I used to own a coin just like this.
Could be same one. I called it exorcist lady. It was over 10 years ago.
I didn’t call it monster, never do.
I always have to wonder if the folks that say no monster, If they were selling if it would all of a sudden change and turn monster. 😊
Not necessarily this thread but all the threads on this subject through the years.
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
@stman said:
I used to own a coin just like this.
Could be same one. I called it exorcist lady. It was over 10 years ago.
I didn’t call it monster, never do.
I always have to wonder if the folks that say no monster, If they were selling if it would all of a sudden change and turn monster. 😊
Not necessarily this thread but all the threads on this subject through the years.
I try to avoid using monster in general as I think only a few coins qualify for the term. I’d probably call it a “high-end” toner if selling (above average toner just wouldn’t work too well from a marketing perspective ).
@airplanenut - you're probably right. The little bit above the prong is what I was seeing, it looks shattered on first glance but probably just lighting. a coincidence that the bands of toning radiate from that spot I guess.
Doesn't look at all like Godzilla. As for the rest of the seller's claims, would have to see a good photo first.
PS: The tarnish cannot have come from the holder defect. If that were the the case, the color would be darker at the defect and fade away with increasing distance.
Comments
I would agree to Monster obverse status.
I can imagine John Albanese saying it like a monster truck radio commercial from twenty years ago as he slaps the green bean on it.
Edit to add about $800 too much.
I don't like it. It reeks of AT. IMO.
BST: endeavor1967, synchr, kliao, Outhaul, Donttellthewife, U1Chicago, ajaan, mCarney1173, SurfinHi, MWallace, Sandman70gt, mustanggt, Pittstate03, Lazybones, Walkerguy21D, coinandcurrency242 , thebigeng, Collectorcoins, JimTyler, USMarine6, Elkevvo, Coll3ctor, Yorkshireman, CUKevin, ranshdow, CoinHunter4, bennybravo, Centsearcher, braddick, Windycity, ZoidMeister, mirabela, JJM, RichURich, Bullsitter, jmski52, LukeMarshall, coinsarefun, MichaelDixon, NickPatton, ProfLiz, Twobitcollector,Jesbroken oih82w8, DCW
No.
I consider it very toned. I don't consider it "monster toned", nor, at that grade and look, a "monster" morgan.
I like the greens but I don't like the color on the hose and that arc.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
I read that as ‘green monster’ toning...not green ‘monster’. As that, it’s pretty accurate
It’s not a monster nor is it AT.
It is stronger than the average toned Morgan.
It's got some decent color but I wouldn't call it a monster.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
I just don't like the word monster.
I would call that a Munster!
Moustious!
I think most know my position on this by now but I enjoy repeating it.
AT or NT. 🤮
Thanks for looking.
DiggerJim
BST transactions - mach1ne - Ronyahski - pitboss (x2) - Bigbuck1975 (x2) - jimineez1 - nk1nk - bidask - WaterSport - logger7 - SurfinxHI (x2) - Smittys - Bennybravo - Proofcollector
Green is a money color and I don't recall ever seeing so much of a Morgan's surface covered by it, so in that regard I think it is remarkable and NT. like others, I don't put much stock in using the word "Monster" and that includes the thread stuck to the top of page one. taken as a whole our opinions really don't matter. PCGS graded it, CAC agreed and a buyer thought it was worth almost $1k.
in the end, that's all that really matters.
The term 'monster' is a hype term denoting color, and is freely bandied about in auctions. People pay premiums for environmental damage (tarnish) when it manifests in various colors... green being desirable from my observations. Paying these monster premiums always amazes me.... save your money and do it yourself...just as many of these coins have been produced. Cheers, RickO
I've said for years that toned coins are simply environmental damaged (ED)
, or have altered surfaces (AT) and their grades should be reduced just like a circulated coin or one that has a bad scratch, lots of bag marks, rim ding, etc. They didn't come from the mint that way.
Maybe PCGS needs to start putting a "Monster" designation on the holder.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
Could be.
The toning appears to radiate from a hole/defect in the holder. Not sure what that means but figured I'd point it out.


Not a monster, but pretty decent toning. The photos shown put the color all over the map. If the toned area is dull or has minimal luster, then it's not all that great.
I don't think that hole has to do with anything on the toning.
10-4,
My Instagram picturesErik
My registry sets
Monster? Why that term for a beautifully toned coin? From where I come from “Monster” is an ugly scary thing😂. To each their own I guess.
That's the light reflection off the side of the prong holding the coin in place.
The coin is natural, the green is very nice. I like it more than an average toned dollar, but it would need to be much brighter (lots more lustre and/or more reflective fields, and well as bolder and brighter color) at the very least to be a monster.
I agree with @airplanenut.
I suspect that the coin is nice or very nice, but would need to have the coin in hand to say for sure. With that said, probably not in the monster category.
With a little Frankenstein logo!
Collector of randomness. Photographer at PCGS. Lover of Harry Potter.
I used to own a coin just like this.
Could be same one. I called it exorcist lady. It was over 10 years ago.
I didn’t call it monster, never do.
I always have to wonder if the folks that say no monster, If they were selling if it would all of a sudden change and turn monster. 😊
Not necessarily this thread but all the threads on this subject through the years.
I try to avoid using monster in general as I think only a few coins qualify for the term. I’d probably call it a “high-end” toner if selling (above average toner just wouldn’t work too well from a marketing perspective
).
@airplanenut - you're probably right. The little bit above the prong is what I was seeing, it looks shattered on first glance but probably just lighting. a coincidence that the bands of toning radiate from that spot I guess.
here's a Monster, but he seems to be restrained at the moment. I don't know what will happen if he ever frees himself.
It has all the requirements of a monster provided it's no darker in hand. Then again, there are differing levels of monster.
The price is a monster for sure....
Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value. Zero. Voltaire. Ebay coinbowlllc
Close, but not quite in my humble view
carolinacollectorcoins.com
Doesn't look at all like Godzilla. As for the rest of the seller's claims, would have to see a good photo first.
PS: The tarnish cannot have come from the holder defect. If that were the the case, the color would be darker at the defect and fade away with increasing distance.
I guess the one and only bidder thought it was. Just not my cup of tea, personally. To each his own though.
- Jim
Thanks for all the feedback. It's good to know.
It’s got a CAC sticker too
I like it!
I don't like the toning, jmo