I am tempted to say PL also, but my experience with PL on that "common" date and PL have not been good. They just come so nice anyway, I think the standard is a little higher for PL on 80s and 81-s Morgans.
@Tramp said:
Over graded with those marks all over the cheek.
This^^
No offense to OP intended... it is a nice coin; I like the look, but there is NO way this is a 67 coin, especially for an 80-S. To say nothing of the plus and star.
I'm willing to bet money that this won't cross at grade with our hosts.
Comments
65
Mr_Spud
Pretty coin. Fully GEM.
peacockcoins
65+ or 66
65
Ms66+PL
MS65 would be likely,...I think the lighting is accentuating a 'rough' appearance. Cheers, RickO
65.
K
64PL
64, pretty coin
Tom
65, maybe 65+
65, I like the toning and how it's proof like.
I like the toning and call it a 65. These tend to come nice- but it's in an NGC slab so they called it 66
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
MS62
65
MS 64 PL
65 to me, nice piece~~
65
66
Very nice, the perfect look IMO.
Type collector, mainly into Seated. -formerly Ownerofawheatiehorde. Good BST transactions with: mirabela, OKCC, MICHAELDIXON, Gerard
This one looks familiar
.
The grade is fully deserved.
Coin Photographer.
MS65.
MS65
64+
Over graded with those marks all over the cheek.
USAF (Ret.) 1985 - 2005. E-4B Aircraft Maintenance Crew Chief and Contracting Officer.
My current Registry sets:
✓ Everyman Mint State Carson City Morgan Dollars (1878 – 1893)
✓ Everyman Mint State Lincoln Cents (1909 – 1958)
✓ Morgan Dollar GSA Hoard (1878 – 1891)
This^^
No offense to OP intended... it is a nice coin; I like the look, but there is NO way this is a 67 coin, especially for an 80-S. To say nothing of the plus and star.
I'm willing to bet money that this won't cross at grade with our hosts.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
Agreed, the reverse is super sweet and exhibit's gorgeous EA, but I have no clue how the obverse graded 67+ as is, not with that cheek, no way.