Nice example of market grading, where do you think this coin should grade at?
goldrealmoney79
Posts: 417 ✭✭✭
I know the 84S morgan is rare in unc but an ms60 grade seems too harsh for this coin. I think a 62 is where its at. What do you think is an appropriate grade for it?
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1884-S-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-PCGS-MS60-1-39237567-KEY-DATE-VERY-PQ/353023417913?hash=item5231d5de39:g:pyUAAOSwjLxefP0X
0
Comments
Looks AU
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
I would not argue with that grade.... Yes, it could go up or down a slot....but since grades are trained opinions, if we really question it, it should go in for reconsideration....Let those who judged it, reconsider. Cheers, RickO
AU 55-58 but I'm not really a Morgan guy so there is that.
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
I'd have to see that in-hand, I'll assume there's something not evident in the TV that is clear to the naked eye.
Agree. I assume there are numerous hairlines that are only visible in hand while rotating the coin under good lighting.
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
To me the slab shots of the coin tell the entire story the best, although you can see it in the true views as well. MS60 was the best this coin could get and AU58 would have been what I would have called it. Too much rub in the fields and on the high points to grade better.
It’s prettier than a lot of Morgan’s I’ve seen at 62, but it is quite marked up all over the place. I don’t really know what market grading is exactly supposed to mean (and we don’t need to debate it now)...I think it probably is a good looking 60, to me.
From looking at the TrueView ... I like it at 60.
I think MS60 split the hairs perfectly. It probably grades from 58 to 61. And could shift on any day at the TPG. Looks technically graded at the 60 level. To me, too nice for an AU58. These days, a 58/60 grade on a Morgan is almost the same thing. And in Everyman sets the 58 is probably worth more money. Is there an Everyman set for Morgan dollars?
High AU. Edit, I am ok with it market graded as it is.
Not the look of a Morgan I typically associate with the grade of 60. I probably would have assigned it 58+, FWIW.
Wow, I don't at all see the estimates of 55 on this (I would be a buyer all day long even from just the pictures at that grade). Look again at the cheek, brow, chin, eagle breast - these are pretty clean and I see no major marks as opposed to some of what has been posted here. A very nice strike. There may or may not be field hairlines, but I certainly don't see anything serious. Based on what is seen in the pictures I am at 62 comfortably - HOWEVER, I agree there must be in-hand issues.
But those are only rationalizations as to how the grade was determined and not based on what is seen.
Maybe we should see some other 1884-S coins graded in the 58-62 range, and people may post.
As a footnote, I really don't care for opinions that are not substantiated such as "I see this as an AU58". Specifics are always best.
Well, just Love coins, period.
Nobody has commented on luster which should be easier to assess from a photo on a Morgan than almost any other coin series. This one has virtually none that I can see. At the same time, I’m not really seeing wear. There’s a fine line between luster breaks and wear, and for me, this coin falls on the side of uncirculated. Plenty of marks & dead, dull luster = MS60.
The coin has a semi-PL appearance. Not sure I'd call it dead or dull. YMMV.
Looks to be some cartwheel luster on TV...
Well, just Love coins, period.
Here are TVs from PCGS for a PL 61(and I know it is PL which highlights defects a bit more, but still look at how much hairlines, nicks and scratches) crap SHOWS in the photos, again let's see posts from readers if they will:
Well, just Love coins, period.
I know I'm old fashioned and likely out of touch with today's "market grading" or whatever. But, I've always believed that a coin with an uncountable number of hits (albeit a judgement call) could only get that way by circulating. Just look at the 61 above and apply a little common sense. "Uncirculated" to me is an unambiguous term.
@oldabeintx I might be as out of touch as you when it comes to market grading, but have always thought the bag marks could come from transfers and not necessarily “circulation,” which I’ve always thought of as transactions by individuals. Kind of a “wear comes from fingers and pockets” vs “bag marks come from being dropped into bags to move with other coins for storage or haulage” thing...I certainly don’t know what We’re supposed to define anything as. Just how I’ve thought of it.
Well, having lots of hits is never how wear has been defined. By the same logic an AU coin should always have hits, but clearly many don’t. Toss several hundred Morgans in a bag and toss them around with a forklift for a few decades and it’s amazing there are any nice ones. Certainly on the OP’s coin I don’t see hits that are inconsistent in number or quality with bagmarks.
Edited to add..... after looking again, the TV shows more luster than I remember. Certainly the other shots look dull. I dunno.
Edited again...... I take back my first comments about luster being the reason for the 60 grade. It might be part of it, but I’m guessing hairlines account for the rest. There might be some above the eagle, but these are almost always hard to see in photos.
Could be seen as a "slider".Personally,if raw,I would call it 58 with a shot at 60...but leaning towards the 58.That said,I certainly can live with the 60.
Yeah I guess I was reacting more to the 61 (looking at the even distribution of apparent minute marks in all the fields), and to other coins that I have seen that weren't moved around in bags for decades. The TV of the OP coin does have an unc look to me,
People seem to be forgetting that this is an 1884-S. There is a huge price spread between AU58 and MS60 and these are not (in my experience) ever net graded up. Every MS 84-S I’ve seen is all there for the grade. However, there are a lot of AU58s that for another date might make it into a 62 holder. They hold the line on the 84-S (and 1901 and 1892-S and a few others with massive spreads). I imagine there are some hidden issues with this but it certainly does look clean for a 60.
Bag marks do not constitute wear. Unless you can see rub on the coin, it’s ms.
Looks like it’s graded correctly to me.
If a Trade Dollar can have a counter stamp and still be uncirculated, I have no problem with the OP's coin receiving the same grade.
Agree of course that bag marks don't constitute wear. However, when a coin shows what appears to be a veritable haze of tiny hits and scratches in the fields all over the coin, to me those are not bag marks and it it isn't MS, regardless of the absence of apparent wear. I may be a minority of 1 on this but that's how I make purchase decisions anyway. My money, my grade.
I think that attempts to strictly define and adhere to the terms Uncirculated and Mint State cause a lot of confusion in coin grading.
Often we see GTG threads about coins like this 84S dollar, and many respondents say, "either 58 or 62"... well, that sounds like a Net 60 to me!
There are a lot of ways a coin with a touch of rub or other evidence of handling "grades at" 60 or above, just as there are an infinite number of ways (cuts, scratches, stains, etc) a coin with absolutely no wear can net to less than 60.
Not saying it "should" be that way, and recognizing that there are
many "Strict MSers" among us..
Just saying, that's how it is.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Agreed, morgans are notorious for their bag marks due to their storage method. Although this coin is quite baggy, but not the worst I have seen.
BTW I have a 1912 $10 in my dad's year set. Graded 62 and I paid 62 money for it, but I don't think for a moment that it has never seen circulation. I can live with it as I bought the coin, not the grade.
Nearly all AU58 and lower 1884-s dollars look like they aren't UNC....definite wear and scruffiness. This coin doesn't seen to fall into that category to me. It "looks" UNC. And that's saying a LOT for an 1884-s.
i'm in a different boat than most on this coin. w/o seeing it in-hand, i'll say i couldn't give this an ms60, ever. either 58+ or ms62 it.
i may be biased based on some ms65/66/67 coins i've seen recently that were plainly over-graded.