Fred Weinberg's 1880-S Off-Center Morgan Dollar Error Coin

Zoins

Anyone know who bought @FredWeinberg's 1880-S Off-Center Morgan Error coin?

It sold for $72,000 and has already been recertified!

Unfortunately this means the TrueView is no longer available but I was able to snag the CoinFacts photo. Anyone have the TrueView background photo?

• Heritage: https://coins.ha.com/itm/errors/1880-s-1-morgan-dollar-struck-40-off-center-ms63-pcgs/a/1344-3834.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515

OAKSTAR

Zoins

It would be great to try and identify the VAM!

Heritage wrote:
Given the hundreds of die pairs used to coin 1880-dated silver dollars, it would be a great challenge to identify the VAM variety, which would confirm the facility of origin.

Byers

Fred’s is an amazing off-center with a perfect position of K-12 and a full date.

The only other one that comes close (but still does not compare to Fred’s) is a 45% off-center that I sold years ago. Basically same percentage off center and the same grade, but without the date.

Zoins

@Byers said:
Fred’s is an amazing off-center with a perfect position of K-12 and a full date.

The only other one that comes close (but still does not compare to Fred’s) is a 45% off-center that I sold years ago. Basically same percentage off center and the same grade, but without the date.

Great coin Mike! Thanks for posting it

It's good to see these huge off center coins!

Bigbuck1975

Why the regrade? Does it matter on this error?

Zoins

@Bigbuck1975 said:
Why the regrade? Does it matter on this error?

Of course it does!

From the photos, it looks much better than a 63.

ctf_error_coins

@Bigbuck1975 said:
Why the regrade? Does it matter on this error?

Personally I would rather have the "Fred" holder in MS63 than a switch to NGC MS64

messydesk

I would love the chance to study it and try to identify the VAM and conclusively identify the mint. 80-S is a difficult date to attribute because of ejection doubling, and this would be made more difficult by the lack of a mint mark and the fact that the date is even more distorted than normal.

OAKSTAR

@ErrorsOnCoins said:

@Bigbuck1975 said:
Why the regrade? Does it matter on this error?

Personally I would rather have the "Fred" holder in MS63 than a switch to NGC MS64

Absolutely!

Zoins

@ErrorsOnCoins said:

@Bigbuck1975 said:
Why the regrade? Does it matter on this error?

Personally I would rather have the "Fred" holder in MS63 than a switch to NGC MS64

It can still have Fred's name on it, even if not his label. Labels are fun but name provenance is what's important to me.

I can't wait to see it resurface.

Mr Lindy

I'll guess it reslabs as 66 or 67.

It is seriously flawless for a 63.

And obverse is cameo.

@ErrorsOnCoins said:

@Bigbuck1975 said:
Why the regrade? Does it matter on this error?

Personally I would rather have the "Fred" holder in MS63 than a switch to NGC MS64

Bigbuck1975

Anyone know the new grade?

P0CKETCHANGE

How much of an impact does the grade even have on the value of a unique coin like this? My guess is not very much.

Zoins

@P0CKETCHANGE said:
How much of an impact does the grade even have on the value of a unique coin like this? My guess is not very much.

I think it could impact the price as MS63 seems low relative to the quality shown in the photos so people may be thinking what are they missing when looking at the coin.

P0CKETCHANGE

@Zoins said:

@P0CKETCHANGE said:
How much of an impact does the grade even have on the value of a unique coin like this? My guess is not very much.

I think it could impact the price as MS63 seems low relative to the quality shown in the photos so people may be thinking what are they missing when looking at the coin.

If you’re seriously in the market for this coin, I doubt it matters much whether it’s a 63, 65, 62, etc. But I do not buy errors and don’t really follow that market, so I’m open to being wrong.

Zoins

@P0CKETCHANGE said:

@Zoins said:

@P0CKETCHANGE said:
How much of an impact does the grade even have on the value of a unique coin like this? My guess is not very much.

I think it could impact the price as MS63 seems low relative to the quality shown in the photos so people may be thinking what are they missing when looking at the coin.

If you’re seriously in the market for this coin, I doubt it matters much whether it’s a 63, 65, 62, etc. But I do not buy errors and don’t really follow that market, so I’m open to being wrong.

The exact grade doesn't matter, but the quality of the coin does, especially at the upper end for bragging rights. Think of toners. Toners can be unique like errors, and generally sell for premiums, but the premiums for high grade are very strong vs. lower grade.

LanceNewmanOCC

it is an amazing error, no question. the surfaces of the struck area surely look around gem status......

the unstruck portion looks like someone at the mint was gnawing on the edges, a lot and lets not forget what looks like a respectable scratch on the obv.

i'd be hard-pressed to dump the label on a coin like that unless there was some "guaranteed" $$$ back end to do so, ESPECIALLY if it has been off the market for a considerable time.

NumisOxide

On off-center errors, do they grade just the die struck part or whole coin? If it's just the struck part, looks better than a 63. If it's the whole coin I can see it as a 63 because the unstruck part is baggy.

Mr Lindy

Planchet is supposed to not be factored in the struck coin area's grade.

Personally, I found a few Fred errors housed in PCGS were under graded or grossly under graded. I bought 2 or 3 flawless 62 and 63 which were fun to buy from Fred's website. Had the 80S Morgan been in a 66 or 67 holder I assume it would have attracted much more interest, thus Money, from high grade Morgan Collectors. Other than being grossly under graded, why would someone re slab this 1880S ? I thought it would hammer 100k + due to being so perfect condition, preservation wise. Its been off the market for decades, thus minimal multi owner handling over time.

@LanceNewmanOCC said:
it is an amazing error, no question. the surfaces of the struck area surely look around gem status......

the unstruck portion looks like someone at the mint was gnawing on the edges, a lot and lets not forget what looks like a respectable scratch on the obv.

i'd be hard-pressed to dump the label on a coin like that unless there was some "guaranteed" $$$ back end to do so, ESPECIALLY if it has been off the market for a considerable time.

LanceNewmanOCC

@LindyS said:

Planchet is supposed to not be factored in the struck coin area's grade.

Personally, I found a few Fred errors housed in PCGS were under graded or grossly under graded. I bought 2 or 3 flawless 62 and 63 which were fun to buy from Fred's website. Had the 80S Morgan been in a 66 or 67 holder I assume it would have attracted much more interest, thus Money, from high grade Morgan Collectors. Other than being grossly under graded, why would someone re slab this 1880S ? I thought it would hammer 100k + due to being so perfect condition, preservation wise. Its been off the market for decades, thus minimal multi owner handling over time.

@LanceNewmanOCC said:
it is an amazing error, no question. the surfaces of the struck area surely look around gem status......

the unstruck portion looks like someone at the mint was gnawing on the edges, a lot and lets not forget what looks like a respectable scratch on the obv.

i'd be hard-pressed to dump the label on a coin like that unless there was some "guaranteed" $$$ back end to do so, ESPECIALLY if it has been off the market for a considerable time.

sound like you are enjoying some really nice errors! (do we get a thread(s) of your beauts?)

i don't know the exact nuances around grading errors these days but i do wonder if the o/c coins don't get as high grades because them being out of collar actually helps the condition, so long as they don't get beat up post-mint.

it is like the 45 p 10c o/c and other error types that give it a very nice full bands but no one really wants to pay the huge premium because the only reason it has the FSB is because of the error striking.

i'm not picking on this coin in this particular post. it is just about error grading.

for anyone that read that thread where EOC posted that d/s quarter, you can see the first strike with the collar in place was kinda mediocre (grade-wise) but the 2nd strike sans collar, looked gem status AND had a much better strike.

i also started a thread of a coin on byer's website or the error maganize of a WLH that had AMAZING hand/head etc detail only because of the error striking.

fwiw, the coin (again, it is amazing) but also appears to have a LARGE edge ding in the obv field but i don't have the desire to pick on the grade or coin. everyone here can look at the blown-up images and decide their own opinions.

lilolme

@coinJP said:
On off-center errors, do they grade just the die struck part or whole coin? If it's just the struck part, looks better than a 63. If it's the whole coin I can see it as a 63 because the unstruck part is baggy.

I don't know and am not an error type. But from what I have read, mostly on this forum, they do grade the whole coin. Both the struck and un-struck. However, need to remember that the unstuck planchet will have its original surfaces which are not like a struck coin. So that does not count against the grade but other post mint marks would. Some marks would appear obvious and others would be more difficult to determine but then that is their job.

Again the above is what I have read and don't know the official position.

However, I can state that the do grade blank planchets. Here is a thread on it.

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1067773/pcgs-blank-planchet-grading-set

messydesk

@lilolme said:
...
However, I can state that the do grade blank planchets. Here is a thread on it.

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1067773/pcgs-blank-planchet-grading-set

Huh. I'd have though deficiency of strike would preclude 65.

Zoins

@messydesk said:

@lilolme said:
...
However, I can state that the do grade blank planchets. Here is a thread on it.

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1067773/pcgs-blank-planchet-grading-set

Huh. I'd have though deficiency of strike would preclude 65.

There are 34 in 69 but the highest TrueView is a 65. Would let to get some TrueViews of the higher grades for the grading set.

keyman64

That's a fantastic error and the cheek is fan-freaking-tastic!!! I can't imagine anyone not being a proud owner of that. I'm not a Morgan person by any stretch of the imagination but that one is amazing!

Mr Lindy

Is blank portion baggy due to annealing ? All annealed planchets are baggy pre strike. If they are not baggy then they are most likely unannealed like some Type ones are. Most type ones get baggy due to being annealed, some skip that step too and can be flawless and perfect. They are just as they emerged when freshly punched from strip. Grading planchets is a more recent activity. Originally planchets received no numerical grades as strike was required in judging grade. No strike, no grade. Originally PCGS and NGC did not encapsulate errors, just ANACS. As time passes criteria changes. I wish all slabs received a printed date when processed. I assume this data is known internally, I feel it should be public knowledge, printed on slab.

I> @coinJP said:

On off-center errors, do they grade just the die struck part or whole coin? If it's just the struck part, looks better than a 63. If it's the whole coin I can see it as a 63 because the unstruck part is baggy.

DCW

$72k will seem like a steal in 10 years. (If it doesn't already.)
A beautiful coin

golden

Incredibly cool!

NumisOxide

@lilolme said:

@coinJP said:
On off-center errors, do they grade just the die struck part or whole coin? If it's just the struck part, looks better than a 63. If it's the whole coin I can see it as a 63 because the unstruck part is baggy.

I don't know and am not an error type. But from what I have read, mostly on this forum, they do grade the whole coin. Both the struck and un-struck. However, need to remember that the unstuck planchet will have its original surfaces which are not like a struck coin. So that does not count against the grade but other post mint marks would. Some marks would appear obvious and others would be more difficult to determine but then that is their job.

Again the above is what I have read and don't know the official position.

However, I can state that the do grade blank planchets. Here is a thread on it.

Thanks will take a look at that thread.

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1067773/pcgs-blank-planchet-grading-set
@LindyS said:
Is blank portion baggy due to annealing ? All annealed planchets are baggy pre strike. If they are not baggy then they are most likely unannealed like some Type ones are. Most type ones get baggy due to being annealed, some skip that step too and can be flawless and perfect. They are just as they emerged when freshly punched from strip. Grading planchets is a more recent activity. Originally planchets received no numerical grades as strike was required in judging grade. No strike, no grade. Originally PCGS and NGC did not encapsulate errors, just ANACS. As time passes criteria changes. I wish all slabs received a printed date when processed. I assume this data is known internally, I feel it should be public knowledge, printed on slab.

I> @coinJP said:

On off-center errors, do they grade just the die struck part or whole coin? If it's just the struck part, looks better than a 63. If it's the whole coin I can see it as a 63 because the unstruck part is baggy.

Good to know. Thank you.

Mr Lindy

You know all this, aren't you JPM ?

Teacher of one of my fun ANA Seminar classes from 30~ish years ago ?
Please correct if I am misinformed

Lindy

@coinJP said:

@lilolme said:

@coinJP said:
On off-center errors, do they grade just the die struck part or whole coin? If it's just the struck part, looks better than a 63. If it's the whole coin I can see it as a 63 because the unstruck part is baggy.

I don't know and am not an error type. But from what I have read, mostly on this forum, they do grade the whole coin. Both the struck and un-struck. However, need to remember that the unstuck planchet will have its original surfaces which are not like a struck coin. So that does not count against the grade but other post mint marks would. Some marks would appear obvious and others would be more difficult to determine but then that is their job.

Again the above is what I have read and don't know the official position.

However, I can state that the do grade blank planchets. Here is a thread on it.

Thanks will take a look at that thread.

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1067773/pcgs-blank-planchet-grading-set
@LindyS said:
Is blank portion baggy due to annealing ? All annealed planchets are baggy pre strike. If they are not baggy then they are most likely unannealed like some Type ones are. Most type ones get baggy due to being annealed, some skip that step too and can be flawless and perfect. They are just as they emerged when freshly punched from strip. Grading planchets is a more recent activity. Originally planchets received no numerical grades as strike was required in judging grade. No strike, no grade. Originally PCGS and NGC did not encapsulate errors, just ANACS. As time passes criteria changes. I wish all slabs received a printed date when processed. I assume this data is known internally, I feel it should be public knowledge, printed on slab.

I> @coinJP said:

On off-center errors, do they grade just the die struck part or whole coin? If it's just the struck part, looks better than a 63. If it's the whole coin I can see it as a 63 because the unstruck part is baggy.

Good to know. Thank you.

NumisOxide

@LindyS said:
You know all this, aren't you JPM ?

Teacher of one of my fun ANA Seminar classes from 30~ish years ago ?
Please correct if I am misinformed

Lindy

@coinJP said:

@lilolme said:

@coinJP said:
On off-center errors, do they grade just the die struck part or whole coin? If it's just the struck part, looks better than a 63. If it's the whole coin I can see it as a 63 because the unstruck part is baggy.

I don't know and am not an error type. But from what I have read, mostly on this forum, they do grade the whole coin. Both the struck and un-struck. However, need to remember that the unstuck planchet will have its original surfaces which are not like a struck coin. So that does not count against the grade but other post mint marks would. Some marks would appear obvious and others would be more difficult to determine but then that is their job.

Again the above is what I have read and don't know the official position.

However, I can state that the do grade blank planchets. Here is a thread on it.

Thanks will take a look at that thread.

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1067773/pcgs-blank-planchet-grading-set
@LindyS said:
Is blank portion baggy due to annealing ? All annealed planchets are baggy pre strike. If they are not baggy then they are most likely unannealed like some Type ones are. Most type ones get baggy due to being annealed, some skip that step too and can be flawless and perfect. They are just as they emerged when freshly punched from strip. Grading planchets is a more recent activity. Originally planchets received no numerical grades as strike was required in judging grade. No strike, no grade. Originally PCGS and NGC did not encapsulate errors, just ANACS. As time passes criteria changes. I wish all slabs received a printed date when processed. I assume this data is known internally, I feel it should be public knowledge, printed on slab.

I> @coinJP said:

On off-center errors, do they grade just the die struck part or whole coin? If it's just the struck part, looks better than a 63. If it's the whole coin I can see it as a 63 because the unstruck part is baggy.

Good to know. Thank you.

Nope, sorry. Different JP.

ricko

So there are two 45% off center Morgans. Certainly a rarity, and I am a tad surprised it did not sell for more. Cheers, RickO

Zoins

@ricko said:
So there are two 45% off center Morgans.

The coins from @FredWeinberg and Mike @Byers are very different in that one has a date and the other doesn’t. With errors, coins that seem the same on paper often aren’t when seen.

Certainly a rarity, and I am a tad surprised it did not sell for more. Cheers, RickO

It needed your bid to bump it up more!