@LeeBone said:
I think yours has a little more detail than my XF45. Hence my AU50/53 guess.
Showing my 45 for comparison..
The OP's coin has AU details and looks to have been cleaned. So it appears to me that rather than awarding a straight AU grade or details AU grade, PCGS compromised and netted it down to a straight grade XF 45. Others may disagree.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
There is simply no way to know the history behind how this 89-cc was stored- but I am curious if the coin spent significant time in a leather type pouch or something that over time might explain the color and the overall appearance
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Too much detail e.g. hair, breast feathers, etc; not much wear so it's taking a huge hit for luster? I wonder what a conservation would do for it and the grade? I've seen AU's look worse.
I understand the argument for silently netgrading the coin to EF45 given the muted luster, but I still think it looks silly in an EF holder. I stick by AU details. That doesn’t mean I’m throwing off on the piece - I’m not. As you know this is a very tough issue and most Morgan collectors that even have one have pieces in much lower grades.
@cameonut2011 said:
I understand the argument for silently netgrading the coin to EF45 given the muted luster, but I still think it looks silly in an EF holder. I stick by AU details. That doesn’t mean I’m throwing off on the piece - I’m not. As you know this is a very tough issue and most Morgan collectors that even have one have pieces in much lower grades.
It looks a lot better than the example I have in hand.
@cameonut2011 said:
I understand the argument for silently netgrading the coin to EF45 given the muted luster, but I still think it looks silly in an EF holder. I stick by AU details. That doesn’t mean I’m throwing off on the piece - I’m not. As you know this is a very tough issue and most Morgan collectors that even have one have pieces in much lower grades.
Just to be clear, I think that’s what was done, but if so, i don’t advocate it.
This coin aside, when coins are silently net graded, it opens a big can of worms.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@cameonut2011 said:
I understand the argument for silently netgrading the coin to EF45 given the muted luster, but I still think it looks silly in an EF holder. I stick by AU details. That doesn’t mean I’m throwing off on the piece - I’m not. As you know this is a very tough issue and most Morgan collectors that even have one have pieces in much lower grades.
Just to be clear, I think that’s what was done, but if so, i don’t advocate it.
This coin aside, when coins are silently net graded, it opens a big can of worms.
I agree fully. There’s probably a newer collector out there thinking it is worthy of a gold bean and paying a premium for it.
Drawing conclusions on photos is always difficult. I did not see the cleaning on the obverse but did think maybe environmental damage on the right side of obverse. Agree it has the surface of an AU coin but not the luster. Now the move from XF45 to even AU50 is almost doubling the value. Maybe grading at XF is just the safe bet to make with that surface. Don't think there is anyway to lose value with that grade. I like the coin personally as haze and skin don't bother me. Was it cleaned or a definite details coin, maybe, but a very nice XF45.
No offense to the above posters but the other CCs were unfortunately dipped to better reveal their luster. Could this coin be preserved and grade higher, maybe. Would need to examine in hand and get opinions from others before sending in for conservation.
@coastaljerseyguy said:
Drawing conclusions on photos is always difficult. I did not see the cleaning on the obverse but did think maybe environmental damage on the right side of obverse. Agree it has the surface of an AU coin but not the luster. Now the move from XF45 to even AU50 is almost doubling the value. Maybe grading at XF is just the safe bet to make with that surface. Don't think there is anyway to lose value with that grade. I like the coin personally as haze and skin don't bother me. Was it cleaned or a definite details coin, maybe, but a very nice XF45.
No offense to the above posters but the other CCs were unfortunately dipped to better reveal their luster. Could this coin be preserved and grade higher, maybe. Would need to examine in hand and get opinions from others before sending in for conservation.
Conservation is very risky, and there is a good chance it would reveal hairlines and worsen the appearance. Dipping a thickly toned coin like this can be an absolute disaster as a fresh dip job will make it look even worse if there isn’t enough luster. I also don’t see a lot of upside as dipping cannot fix the grainy/ irregular surface texture. In short, I think conservation would be a lot of risk with limited, if any, upside potential.
@coastaljerseyguy said:
Drawing conclusions on photos is always difficult. I did not see the cleaning on the obverse but did think maybe environmental damage on the right side of obverse. Agree it has the surface of an AU coin but not the luster. Now the move from XF45 to even AU50 is almost doubling the value. Maybe grading at XF is just the safe bet to make with that surface. Don't think there is anyway to lose value with that grade. I like the coin personally as haze and skin don't bother me. Was it cleaned or a definite details coin, maybe, but a very nice XF45.
No offense to the above posters but the other CCs were unfortunately dipped to better reveal their luster. Could this coin be preserved and grade higher, maybe. Would need to examine in hand and get opinions from others before sending in for conservation.
Conservation is very risky, and there is a good chance it would reveal hairlines and worsen the appearance. Dipping a thickly toned coin like this can be an absolute disaster as a fresh dip job will make it look even worse if there isn’t enough luster. I also don’t see a lot of upside as dipping cannot fix the grainy/ irregular surface texture. In short, I think conservation would be a lot of risk with limited, if any, upside potential.
If, as I believe, the coin has been cleaned, conserving it would be highly likely to make it look worse.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I would have guessed AU53, possibly improperly cleaned.
As for the details, and given that it was straight-graded, I'm very surprised it was relegated to XF territory; that's a very, very nice XF. Maybe it was some sort of net grade, downgrading the detail for the color.
In any event, it's a much nicer example of the 1889-CC Morgan dollar than I have; congratulations!
In this discussion it is policy to knock points off for tone they don't like.
What's interesting about this idea is I have seen an MS68 Morgan that was so dark that it could be mistaken for a beer coaster!
While the toning in hand isn't that bad, the coin lacks luster for an AU.
I like the idea that my coin may have had a long stay in a leather pouch. I have no intention to preserve or dip.
@REALGATOR said: @cameonut2011 The coin hasn't been to CAC. Maybe this not so newer collector will give it a try as a test.
>
>
May be a great idea. Not much to loose and it’s no doubt that coin has really been ‘knocked down’ due to the surface(s)
The coin really fooled me as I thought it was In the AU range, but Morgan’s (silver in general) is not my thing.
Realistically, I don’t believe it will CAC though, but stranger things have happened.
Good luck!
Much stronger details than other XF45's for sure. Plus, it is straight graded. So if you paid XF45 price or less, IMO you got a really good deal because you would have to pay AU prices to get those same details. Congrats!
Comments
Grade revealed
I think yours has a little more detail than my XF45. Hence my AU50/53 guess.
Showing my 45 for comparison..
The OP's coin has AU details and looks to have been cleaned. So it appears to me that rather than awarding a straight AU grade or details AU grade, PCGS compromised and netted it down to a straight grade XF 45. Others may disagree.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Well, considering this one is a PCGS AU55, I'm more than ok with my "XF". Thanks all for your guesses.
https://pcgs.com/cert/42793772
There is simply no way to know the history behind how this 89-cc was stored- but I am curious if the coin spent significant time in a leather type pouch or something that over time might explain the color and the overall appearance
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Too much detail e.g. hair, breast feathers, etc; not much wear so it's taking a huge hit for luster? I wonder what a conservation would do for it and the grade? I've seen AU's look worse.
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)
I understand the argument for silently netgrading the coin to EF45 given the muted luster, but I still think it looks silly in an EF holder. I stick by AU details. That doesn’t mean I’m throwing off on the piece - I’m not. As you know this is a very tough issue and most Morgan collectors that even have one have pieces in much lower grades.
It looks a lot better than the example I have in hand.
Most EF silver coins have luster and with the limited wear you'd expect some.
Just to be clear, I think that’s what was done, but if so, i don’t advocate it.
This coin aside, when coins are silently net graded, it opens a big can of worms.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I agree fully. There’s probably a newer collector out there thinking it is worthy of a gold bean and paying a premium for it.
@cameonut2011 The coin hasn't been to CAC. Maybe this not so newer collector will give it a try as a test.
Drawing conclusions on photos is always difficult. I did not see the cleaning on the obverse but did think maybe environmental damage on the right side of obverse. Agree it has the surface of an AU coin but not the luster. Now the move from XF45 to even AU50 is almost doubling the value. Maybe grading at XF is just the safe bet to make with that surface. Don't think there is anyway to lose value with that grade. I like the coin personally as haze and skin don't bother me. Was it cleaned or a definite details coin, maybe, but a very nice XF45.
No offense to the above posters but the other CCs were unfortunately dipped to better reveal their luster. Could this coin be preserved and grade higher, maybe. Would need to examine in hand and get opinions from others before sending in for conservation.
@skier07
Looks to have survived several episodes of Gun Smoke
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Conservation is very risky, and there is a good chance it would reveal hairlines and worsen the appearance. Dipping a thickly toned coin like this can be an absolute disaster as a fresh dip job will make it look even worse if there isn’t enough luster. I also don’t see a lot of upside as dipping cannot fix the grainy/ irregular surface texture. In short, I think conservation would be a lot of risk with limited, if any, upside potential.
If, as I believe, the coin has been cleaned, conserving it would be highly likely to make it look worse.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I would have guessed AU53, possibly improperly cleaned.
As for the details, and given that it was straight-graded, I'm very surprised it was relegated to XF territory; that's a very, very nice XF. Maybe it was some sort of net grade, downgrading the detail for the color.
In any event, it's a much nicer example of the 1889-CC Morgan dollar than I have; congratulations!
@124Spider My guess is the 45 is due to the graders opinion of the toning as mentioned here
http://www.pcgs.com/eyeappeal.html
In this discussion it is policy to knock points off for tone they don't like.
What's interesting about this idea is I have seen an MS68 Morgan that was so dark that it could be mistaken for a beer coaster!
While the toning in hand isn't that bad, the coin lacks luster for an AU.
I like the idea that my coin may have had a long stay in a leather pouch. I have no intention to preserve or dip.
Thanks all for the input.
>
>
May be a great idea. Not much to loose and it’s no doubt that coin has really been ‘knocked down’ due to the surface(s)
The coin really fooled me as I thought it was In the AU range, but Morgan’s (silver in general) is not my thing.
Realistically, I don’t believe it will CAC though, but stranger things have happened.
Good luck!
Wow, that’s a strong 45.
Way to go!
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
Much stronger details than other XF45's for sure. Plus, it is straight graded. So if you paid XF45 price or less, IMO you got a really good deal because you would have to pay AU prices to get those same details. Congrats!
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)