Was it worth it?

U1chicago

What do you all think? Is there (market) value added in the new holder?
It started as an NGC MS 64 Star and became a PCGS MS 64.
Would you have sent it in to PCGS?

https://www.pcgs.com/cert/39810152

AlanSki

I would have left it since people collect the stars. You just eliminated all of those potential buyers.

You at least have a TV though. Pretty coin. I'd buy it if I had funds.

oih82w8

I would think that the dollar should bring a better price based on the TrueViews versus the NGC images...then again some folks like the STAR designation.

U1chicago

@AlanSki said:
I would have left it since people collect the stars. You just eliminated all of those potential buyers.

That is one thing to consider.
On the other hand, what about the PCGS buyers that don't buy coins in any other holder?
Are there more people that strictly buy NGC stars or are there more that strictly buy PCGS holders? Or is it about the same amount of each?

AlanSki

@U1chicago said:

@AlanSki said:
I would have left it since people collect the stars. You just eliminated all of those potential buyers.

That is one thing to consider.
On the other hand, what about the PCGS buyers that don't buy coins in any other holder?
Are there more people that strictly buy NGC stars or are there more that strictly buy PCGS holders? Or is it about the same amount of each?

I think it's about the same. I think the main difference now is the truviews to go with the coin. The pattern and colors are much better than a standard photo you posted.

AlanSki

One other thing I forget to mention is you lost the single line fatty in the process too.

291fifth

I wish people would get back to just collecting coins and not holders.

Walkerfan

No (the coin would bring less on the market now)

I like older holder and I like STARS, too.

I would have left it alone.

TurtleCat

Toss-up (there is little to no difference)

I’ve always wondered if the + designation would also be used for coins with very nice color. I guess not. I’ve only sent a handful of coins to PCGS since the designation began and the only one that got it was one with a very nice cyan color on the reverse.

ctf_error_coins

No (the coin would bring less on the market now)

Star worth more for sure

Answer these questions .....

How many PCGS MS64 1885 O $ are there?

vs

How many NGC M64 Star 1885 O $ are there?

cameonut2011

Yes (the coin would bring more on the market now)

@ErrorsOnCoins said:
How many NGC M64 Star 1885 O $ are there?

601

cameonut2011

Yes (the coin would bring more on the market now)

I do not understand the argument that its value would be lower. You have the NGC insert and pictures of the NGC holder. It is still a "NGC star" albeit in a new holder. IMHO you've lost nothing. And in the toned market, my perception is that there is a PCGS market bias/favor for the better/best toned examples. I would have crossed without reservation.

cameonut2011

Yes (the coin would bring more on the market now)

Had the coin only had a sliver of toning or was not as colorful, I might have a different opinion.

U1chicago

@cameonut2011 said:

@ErrorsOnCoins said:
How many NGC M64 Star 1885 O $ are there?

601

Yep 590 with a star and 11 with a plus/star combo for a toal of 601 (for those wanting all the details).

messydesk

Toss-up (there is little to no difference)

@ErrorsOnCoins said:
Star worth more for sure

Answer these questions .....

How many PCGS MS64 1885 O $ are there?

With the toning shown? 1

vs

How many NGC M64 Star 1885 O $ are there?

With the toning shown? 0

Colorfully toned coins are unique and hard to pin down as far as pricing is concerned. Is there sufficient data to show that a nice toner with an NGC star consistently sells for more than the same coin in the same grade in a PCGS holder?

I imagine if there were, our hosts would be working on adding that to their grades, and maybe they are.

Jimnight

No (the coin would bring less on the market now)

ricko

Toss-up (there is little to no difference)

Anything gained by the crossover will likely be negated by the cost.... Unless you get a couple of 'color collectors' in a bidding war.... Good luck, Cheers, RickO

ifthevamzarockin

Toss-up (there is little to no difference)

I would not have cracked it and for the most part would advise others to not crack a star holder.

In the case of this coin I think the coin is able to stand on its own.
There are plenty of collectors that will buy the coin not the holder.
I would pay the same amount in either plastic.

With your grading costs you may have lost a little that you didn't need to lose.

amwldcoin

Now just compare the POP's of this rare,desirable Morgan Dollar to the POP's of any Barber Half! It exceeds more than the total POP in all grades of many dates of Barber Halves!

coinbuf

Toss-up (there is little to no difference)

Just to add an extra thought, what about the buyers that might want to use the coin in the upcoming ANA registry where the star would have been worth more points to the new owner. Too late now but something to consider in the future maybe as once the coin was crossed the old NGC is no longer valid for use in the registry. I think the coin would have sold for the same in the NGC holder as now, maybe a touch more if someone really wanted the star. So with your added costs I think you have left money on the table, perhaps you were hoping for an MS65 grade?

Edited to add: It would have cost far less to have Mark Goodman or one of the other great coin photographers here on the forum provide stellar photos vs the cost of a TV.

abcde12345

Yes (the coin would bring more on the market now)

There is added value in the PCGS slab coupled with a now better photo. Nothing says you also can't add the NGC insert with the listing for added value.
The coin should sell for more now than had it been left in the NGC holder.

U1chicago

@coinbuf said:
Just to add an extra thought, what about the buyers that might want to use the coin in the upcoming ANA registry where the star would have been worth more points to the new owner. Too late now but something to consider in the future maybe as once the coin was crossed the old NGC is no longer valid for use in the registry. I think the coin would have sold for the same in the NGC holder as now, maybe a touch more if someone really wanted the star. So with your added costs I think you have left money on the table, perhaps you were hoping for an MS65 grade?

Edited to add: It would have cost far less to have Mark Goodman or one of the other great coin photographers here on the forum provide stellar photos vs the cost of a TV.

Some people really want the TruView. We had a thread here within the last few months where a lot of people expressed a desire for having a TruView picture. I've actually run into people that would pay less for a coin without a TruView even if it was imaged by one of the many talented photographers.

Edit: as far as the registry, a common date in MS 64 doesn't equate to many points regardless of holder. The value in this coin is for the collectors of toned coins. For those wanting to fill a registry spot, there are higher graded coins (without toning) available for a lower price.

coinbuf

Toss-up (there is little to no difference)

@U1chicago said:

@coinbuf said:
Just to add an extra thought, what about the buyers that might want to use the coin in the upcoming ANA registry where the star would have been worth more points to the new owner. Too late now but something to consider in the future maybe as once the coin was crossed the old NGC is no longer valid for use in the registry. I think the coin would have sold for the same in the NGC holder as now, maybe a touch more if someone really wanted the star. So with your added costs I think you have left money on the table, perhaps you were hoping for an MS65 grade?

Edited to add: It would have cost far less to have Mark Goodman or one of the other great coin photographers here on the forum provide stellar photos vs the cost of a TV.

Some people really want the TruView. We had a thread here within the last few months where a lot of people expressed a desire for having a TruView picture. I've actually run into people that would pay less for a coin without a TruView even if it was imaged by one of the many talented photographers.

I think you are confusing the minority of posters here as representing a majority of collectors. Yes here the kool-aid flows mighty strong, but there are thousands of Morgan collectors that don't care one iota about a TV. The photo is a marketing tool to show the color which as I said could be obtained via other avenues, but beyond that... I also think that if a buyer must have a TV they will still buy and then send in for one.

U1chicago

@coinbuf said:

@U1chicago said:

@coinbuf said:
Just to add an extra thought, what about the buyers that might want to use the coin in the upcoming ANA registry where the star would have been worth more points to the new owner. Too late now but something to consider in the future maybe as once the coin was crossed the old NGC is no longer valid for use in the registry. I think the coin would have sold for the same in the NGC holder as now, maybe a touch more if someone really wanted the star. So with your added costs I think you have left money on the table, perhaps you were hoping for an MS65 grade?

Edited to add: It would have cost far less to have Mark Goodman or one of the other great coin photographers here on the forum provide stellar photos vs the cost of a TV.

Some people really want the TruView. We had a thread here within the last few months where a lot of people expressed a desire for having a TruView picture. I've actually run into people that would pay less for a coin without a TruView even if it was imaged by one of the many talented photographers.

I think you are confusing the minority of posters here as representing a majority of collectors. Yes here the kool-aid flows mighty strong, but there are thousands of Morgan collectors that don't care one iota about a TV. The photo is a marketing tool to show the color which as I said could be obtained via other avenues, but beyond that... I also think that if a buyer must have a TV they will still buy and then send in for one.

I agree that many people don't care but we also have to look at how many of those people are true market setters. If the minority represents a significant enough amount of the people that spend big money on toners, then it is important to consider them.

Elcontador

I would have sent the coin to CAC if you wanted to sell it, otherwise, leave it alone.

BryceM

Toss-up (there is little to no difference)

As a shareholder of CLCT, yes. As a hobbyist, no. If you’re selling it, perhaps -but it’s hard to predict. Grading & shipping both ways has already eroded any potential added book value.

The point about CAC, if selling is perfect. If you’re keeping it, the coin is the same either way.

coinkat

Toss-up (there is little to no difference)

The color and toning is what should drive the value. Plastic is plastic. I would have left it in the NGC star holder but I doubt that matters to those in search of color

U1chicago

@BryceM said:
As a shareholder of CLCT, yes. As a hobbyist, no. If you’re selling it, perhaps -but it’s hard to predict. Grading & shipping both ways has already eroded any potential added book value.

The point about CAC, if selling is perfect. If you’re keeping it, the coin is the same either way.

I'm skeptical about the CAC point (while it was still NGC graded) as we have seen many examples where PCGS+CAC outperforms NGC+CAC in auction settings.

In terms of the poll question, I was focusing on market value. I'm not looking to sell it now, but I like to have the option if needed. I know the coin is the same regardless of holder (and even if it was raw). I wanted to see what people would say and am a bit surprised by the results (especially based on my history of reading threads here and following auction results).

BryceM

Toss-up (there is little to no difference)

If I was looking to buy a nice Morgan with textile toning the factors that would influence my thought process would be, in order:

• price
• quality of toning
• CAC
• the TPG
• presence of a plus or star

For this coin, the quality of the toning is much more important than the assigned grade. Having it in a TPG holder is important, but which one doesn’t really mater (to me).

bsshog40

No (the coin would bring less on the market now)

I think the star would be more collectible to a lot of people. I don't see how comparing a True View pic to a mediocre pic of the NGC slab would make the coin more valuable.

david3142

Toss-up (there is little to no difference)

This is the kind of coin that I collect. I like the Trueview and think it adds value for toned coins. However, for lower graded examples I’d rather have the NGC star than the PCGS holder at the same grade. It’s about a wash between those two. For the record, inertia is enough for me that I don’t bother crossing my starred coins (until it gets into super-high grade territory and even then I have only tried a couple of coins). I also don’t cross anything to NGC even if I would expect a star.

mannie gray

No (the coin would bring less on the market now)

I would have kept the *.

joeykoins

Yes (the coin would bring more on the market now)

Nice Morgan! Now, this is my opinion. Our host, PCGS. Has that "+", on NGC. PCGS, will always have the upper hand on the guy's across the street. Unless, a total shift in protocol by PCGS? All of the hobby would have to admit, probably even NGC, that our host is the top dog. Has been for quite some time. They hold the crown, as of for now anyway.
So, in saying that, once again only my opinion, the move you made was a wise one in my book. Even though you lost the NGC +, you gained by having your beauty now adopted in the PCGS family. Lol.