Guess: Did it cross? 1896-O AU PL Morgan CAC - - UPDATE 4/5/2023

ProofCollection

Just got this crossover submission back. Do you think it crossed? I'll post the result in a few days. I hope these pics are good enough, I know it can be hard to judge PL in photos. I submitted it in the NGC holder, not a crackout. If not, any reason why?

LanceNewmanOCC

ya. it went 61pl

alaura22

no

lilolme

I didn't know pcgs designated the PL for circulated grades. The current RCMR page with the PL definition still states that the prooflike designation is for coins that grade MS60 or better. However, when I checked the pcgs population report for Morgans it now has 4 prooflike in the 58 grade (+1 dmpl) and 1 in 55. So something new to me. Did this start when pcgs started the PL for most all other series?

As far as the coin here, I can not tell. More difficult when one does not know the lighting used for the photo. It definitely does give the impression that it could be.

humanssuck

didn't cross

blaircountycoin

Who knows anymore. I had a newer PCGS coin that I sent to ANACS for a variety PCGS didn't recognize. It wouldn't cross at the same grade!

ricko

Based on the picture of the obverse, I would say no cross (at 58PL). Way too much chatter on the obverse. Cheers, RickO

oih82w8

No, not in my opinion. I have been wrong before.

telephoto1

I don't think op would have created the thread if it didn't cross so I will say yes. But did it cross at the same grade? No, imo.

Cougar1978

My wager:

Not at AU58. AU50 more like it. So many marks and scuffs. Just not at the attractiveness level I would expect in a 58. Is that a green CAC sticker?

CPG MV for 58 is $2250. Have you tried shop around the bourse? What they offer?

johnny9434

No 👎

dcarr

Maybe it did cross, although possibly at a different grade. I will guess AU55 PL.

Pumpkinhead

Is that coin net graded? It looks UNC (and PL) to me. On the other hand, how does a coin with an (obverse) surface like that straight grade, and with a sticker to boot?

Cougar1978

Unless sending in to roll dice on higher grade (marking minimum grade on form) would not send in. Frankly I would leave as is (my prior comment).

If he sent it in and it crossed at lower grade plus loss of sticker what does one call that? Fumble?

cameonut2011

58 shot 61

Crypto

MS60 PL

Mr_Spud

No, didn’t cross at the same grade due to the obverse scratches

jesbroken

no pl
Jim

al410

My guess, yes and I assume those pics are not flattering to the actual coin
Al

Soldi

Scritchy scratchy frosty obverse, but no wear. A case of market grading would hold it back. So, no.

ChrisH821

I'm going to say yes, it did cross. I think the reason all the marks are so apparent is that it's a PL coin.

sweetwilliet

I’m definitely interested to see the results. PCGS does not currently designate any Morgan under 60 as prooflike. I think the few examples out there are mechanical errors. I believe there was a 58pl in the pop reports that had 58 on the holder posted here years back. I cannot judge the reverse at all from the picture, obverse looks 60pl to me. The fact that it got stickered as a pl means the mirrors are likely there. My WAG is 60pl.

lilolme

@sweetwilliet

Above I noted the same thing about pcgs and 60 and better for PL.
But as I noted when I checked the Morgan $ pop report it is showing some. Has a couple for 96 O (PL and dmpl).
So I wondered if it has changed.
Interesting thought on mechanical error(s).

cameonut2011

@ChrisH821 said:
I'm going to say yes, it did cross. I think the reason all the marks are so apparent is that it's a PL coin.

100%. If it was badly scarred, I don’t think it would have stickered. And John tends to be much tougher on Morgan Dollars (in terms of preservation of surfaces) than the services.

cameonut2011

@Crypto said:
MS60 PL

I think that is a reasonable possibility as well although the services rarely use the 60 grade at all. I like it better as a 58 PL, but would in no way be surprised with a low grade MS grade (I used 61 rather than 60).

HighRelief

AU58 but no PL

TPRC

I say no

FlyingAl

I'll say no.

steveben

no

ProofCollection

Thanks for all of the feedback. And the result is....

DNC with minimum 58PL grade. I really wish if something DNC'd PCGS would provide the grade it would cross at because it could be either the designation or the grade. With the CAC sticker I was confident in my assessment here but that's how it goes.

Any ideas on if I should resubmit? Or crackout? I think I can easily get NGC to regrade it 58PL and get CAC again.
1896-O is really tough to find in PL and DMPL.

Luxor

<<< Any ideas on if I should resubmit? Or crackout? I think I can easily get NGC to regrade it 58PL and get CAC again >>>

If cracked out, I would not bet my life on it being re-holdered at the same grade/designation.

slider23

I would keep it and go on the hunt for one in a PCGS holder. If you find one, then you can sell it Do not crack out as PCGS has only graded one in AU58 PL.

Rampage

PCGS has only ever designated 4 AU58 Morgan dollars as PL and only 1 as DMPL, and these numbers are across the entire series. Your coin is hard to tell from the images because the contrast is different on both, so it is not representative. I am willing to bet PCGS did not feel your coin warranted the PL designation. I would not resubmit it and I would not crack it out. Like it for what it is, or sell it and buy one that meets your desires. JMHO.

cameonut2011

Don’t be too disappointed. I don’t think a PCGS holder would make much of a difference if you market it well when it comes time to sell, especially with the CAC sticker. I wouldn’t recommend a no reserve auction as you would likely net more selling it directly to a collector or to CAC if and when the time comes anyway.

lilolme

@Rampage said:
PCGS has only ever designated 4 AU58 Morgan dollars as PL and only 1 as DMPL, and these numbers are across the entire series. Your coin is hard to tell from the images because the contrast is different on both, so it is not representative. I am willing to bet PCGS did not feel your coin warranted the PL designation. I would not resubmit it and I would not crack it out. Like it for what it is, or sell it and buy one that meets your desires. JMHO.

Anyone know how long pcgs has been assigning the PL to grades below MS60?
PCGS information still indicates they assign the PL designation to grades MS60 and better.
Reference the current RCMR magazine and pc video.
Did it change when they started doing PL for most all series or....?

ProofCollection

@cameonut2011 said:
Don’t be too disappointed. I don’t think a PCGS holder would make much of a difference if you market it well when it comes time to sell, especially with the CAC sticker. I wouldn’t recommend a no reserve auction as you would likely net more selling it directly to a collector or to CAC if and when the time comes anyway.

CAC buys coins? Please elaborate.

cameonut2011

@ProofCollection said:
Thanks for all of the feedback. And the result is....

DNC with minimum 58PL grade. I really wish if something DNC'd PCGS would provide the grade it would cross at because it could be either the designation or the grade. With the CAC sticker I was confident in my assessment here but that's how it goes.

Any ideas on if I should resubmit? Or crackout? I think I can easily get NGC to regrade it 58PL and get CAC again.
1896-O is really tough to find in PL and DMPL.

I think a crack out is high risk, low reward and needlessly so. While much of the “CAC only” crowd is PCGS CAC only, a smaller subset actively seek out NGC stickered coins too.

cameonut2011

@ProofCollection said:

@cameonut2011 said:
Don’t be too disappointed. I don’t think a PCGS holder would make much of a difference if you market it well when it comes time to sell, especially with the CAC sticker. I wouldn’t recommend a no reserve auction as you would likely net more selling it directly to a collector or to CAC if and when the time comes anyway.

CAC buys coins? Please elaborate.

Yes. There will be no pre published value on something like this, but contact CAC by phone or by email and it will make you an offer based on the AU58 PL grade.

ProofCollection

@lilolme said:

@Rampage said:
PCGS has only ever designated 4 AU58 Morgan dollars as PL and only 1 as DMPL, and these numbers are across the entire series. Your coin is hard to tell from the images because the contrast is different on both, so it is not representative. I am willing to bet PCGS did not feel your coin warranted the PL designation. I would not resubmit it and I would not crack it out. Like it for what it is, or sell it and buy one that meets your desires. JMHO.

Anyone know how long pcgs has been assigning the PL to grades below MS60?
PCGS information still indicates they assign the PL designation to grades MS60 and better.
Reference the current RCMR magazine and pc video.
Did it change when they started doing PL for most all series or....?

This page says "all qualifying Mint State..." but I thought since there were other AU PL or DMPL Morgans this could qualify. I don't see why not. The fields are super nice and reflective. https://www.pcgs.com/news/differences-between-proof-and-prooflike-coins

Rampage

@ProofCollection said:

@lilolme said:

@Rampage said:
PCGS has only ever designated 4 AU58 Morgan dollars as PL and only 1 as DMPL, and these numbers are across the entire series. Your coin is hard to tell from the images because the contrast is different on both, so it is not representative. I am willing to bet PCGS did not feel your coin warranted the PL designation. I would not resubmit it and I would not crack it out. Like it for what it is, or sell it and buy one that meets your desires. JMHO.

Anyone know how long pcgs has been assigning the PL to grades below MS60?
PCGS information still indicates they assign the PL designation to grades MS60 and better.
Reference the current RCMR magazine and pc video.
Did it change when they started doing PL for most all series or....?

This page says "all qualifying Mint State..." but I thought since there were other AU PL or DMPL Morgans this could qualify. I don't see why not. The fields are super nice and reflective. https://www.pcgs.com/news/differences-between-proof-and-prooflike-coins

I still do not feel yours is PL. Even still, until I looked, I would have sworn that PCGS did not designate PL/DMPL to grades lower than MS. They could be mechanical errors I suppose, or maybe there was/is an exception. Don't know...

Luxor

Many times PCGS will also not cross a coin because the holder is scuffed to the point they can't really get an ideal view of the coin in question and they will err on the side of caution and not cross.........just FYI.

sweetwilliet

To slightly change but restate in a different way what has been said above, cross at any grade at PCGS would have actually been an upgrade. It would have had to grade 60pl to cross, as PCGS does not designate non mint state Morgans as prooflike. I am aware of the pop reports. Those 4 or 5 pls (yes, 1 dmpl) have been in the pop reports for quite some time, as far as I can remember.

ProofCollection

@Luxor said:
Many times PCGS will also not cross a coin because the holder is scuffed to the point they can't really get an ideal view of the coin in question and they will err on the side of caution and not cross.........just FYI.

That was a concern as all holders can present a little problem with judging reflectivity. I have a lot of PL & DMPL Morgans, almost all PCGS, and the coin IMO truly is PL. I think there is definitely wear which prevents it from getting MS.

lilolme

@sweetwilliet said:
To slightly change but restate in a different way what has been said above, cross at any grade at PCGS would have actually been an upgrade. It would have had to grade 60pl to cross, as PCGS does not designate non mint state Morgans as prooflike. I am aware of the pop reports. Those 4 or 5 pls (yes, 1 dmpl) have been in the pop reports for quite some time, as far as I can remember.

Agree and as noted before interesting theory on the mechanical error. If you know that they have been there for sometime then it becomes more likely. So far all pcgs info is stating MS60 or better, but then....

sweetwilliet

@lilolme said:

@sweetwilliet said:
To slightly change but restate in a different way what has been said above, cross at any grade at PCGS would have actually been an upgrade. It would have had to grade 60pl to cross, as PCGS does not designate non mint state Morgans as prooflike. I am aware of the pop reports. Those 4 or 5 pls (yes, 1 dmpl) have been in the pop reports for quite some time, as far as I can remember.

Agree and as noted before interesting theory on the mechanical error. If you know that they have been there for sometime then it becomes more likely. So far all pcgs info is stating MS60 or better, but then....

There was actually a thread 10-15 years ago discussing this very thing, with a few non MS coins graded pl in the pop reports. I have never seen a non MS Morgan graded pl at PCGS that actually had PL on the holder. As stated, there was one graded 58 that came up as 58pl in the pop reports. I actually have a theory on how what I consider to be mechanical errors happened, but it is merely speculation on my part.

cameonut2011

@sweetwilliet said:
To slightly change but restate in a different way what has been said above, cross at any grade at PCGS would have actually been an upgrade. It would have had to grade 60pl to cross, as PCGS does not designate non mint state Morgans as prooflike. I am aware of the pop reports. Those 4 or 5 pls (yes, 1 dmpl) have been in the pop reports for quite some time, as far as I can remember.

Cross as “any” means any non-details grade. The coin could downgrade, lose a designation, or both.

lilolme

@ProofCollection said:

@Luxor said:
Many times PCGS will also not cross a coin because the holder is scuffed to the point they can't really get an ideal view of the coin in question and they will err on the side of caution and not cross.........just FYI.

That was a concern as all holders can present a little problem with judging reflectivity. I have a lot of PL & DMPL Morgans, almost all PCGS, and the coin IMO truly is PL. I think there is definitely wear which prevents it from getting MS.

My experience and with others is that cac is fairly strict on the dmpl and so I will assume PL. I would then think you most likely do have a PL based off of that.

sweetwilliet

@cameonut2011 said:

@sweetwilliet said:
To slightly change but restate in a different way what has been said above, cross at any grade at PCGS would have actually been an upgrade. It would have had to grade 60pl to cross, as PCGS does not designate non mint state Morgans as prooflike. I am aware of the pop reports. Those 4 or 5 pls (yes, 1 dmpl) have been in the pop reports for quite some time, as far as I can remember.

Cross as “any” means any non-details grade. The coin could downgrade, lose a designation, or both.

Sorry, I meant to say cross at any pl grade.

Stingray63

Sorry it didn't go as you had hoped.
I do not keep stats or have been a member long enough to see how crossovers typically go on here. I only have one crossover under my belt. Being there is definitely some great feedback on here along with experience, I myself would seek out opinions prior to doing it again. Here at home among acquaintances I run into at the small local monthly coin shows I see the risk with crossing over and more often hear of disappointing stories. Aside from being confident of what we believe a coin may be (right or wrong) the ultimate outcome is in someone else's hands in the end and always something to take into consideration.
Good luck with whatever you decide to do with this coin now but weigh the additional costs vs potential value before sending it off somewhere again.

logger7

As others said, PCGS does not designate AUs for whatever reason as PL, not sure why, so it was a foreordained conclusion. There are PLs that are phenomenally pronounced and others that are subtle.

One example of an AU PL that I submitted to NGC. 1829 Capped bust 50c, one year that has more PLs than some others. Coin looked a little "cleaned" but PLs tend to show everything. NGC called it 58PL, and increased the market value by $1K.

slider23

There is a PCGS article written by Joshua McMorrow-Hernandez - March 16, 2022

"Prooflike (PL) – PCGS designates Prooflike for coins that grade MS60 or better and show clear reflectivity, i.e. mirrored surfaces at a distance of two to four inches. If the cartwheel effect or striations cause an area to lose clarity, the designation will not apply.

Deep Mirror Prooflike (DMPL) – PCGS designates Deep Mirror Prooflike for Morgan Dollars that grade MS60 or better and show deep reflectivity, i.e. deeply mirrored surfaces. The differences between PL and DMPL is one of degree."

Based on this information there is no value or point in sending a AU PL Morgan to PCGS.