Submission results, Morgans, Two Centers, Jefferson, JFKs (of course), with images of the coins.

Russ

PCGS Order Status for Invoice # 3038419

LINE # CERT # COIN DATE DENOMINATION VARIETY GRADE
1 90056576 1964 50C Accented Hair PR64 PR65
2 90056577 1964 50C Accented Hair PR66 PR66
3 90056578 1964 50C Accented Hair PR66 PR67
4 90056579 1965 50C SMS MS66CA MS66CAM
5 90056580 1968-S 50C PR67DC PR68DCAM
6 90056581 1880-S S$1 MS65 MS63
7 90056582 1888 S$1 MS64 MS63
8 90056583 1897 S$1 Artificial Color MS65
9 90056584 1942-D 5C Artificial Color MS65
10 90056585 1865 2C AU50BN AU55
11 90056586 1866 2C Enviromental Damage EF40

Date Received: 01/23/2003
Date Shipped: 03/21/2003

My grades are noted in bold next to the PCGS result.

The Morgan grades were pure WAGs on my part since I don't know diddly about grading them. The Two Cent pieces are part of my continuing education program, so I studied those pretty hard. Looking again at the 1866, I can see that PCGS is right on this one.

Now, I figured that if I added images to this report it would be more educational and less boring. So, below you'll find them by line number along with any relevant commentary. I didn't bother with the Accented Hairs since in brilliant these all pretty much look the same.

Line #4:


This one I bought as an MS66 for $17 because I thought PCGS blew the cameo designation. Cracked it out, resubmitted it and this time they got it right.

Line #5:


This one was pulled from a proof set purchased on eBay. I still think it's a 68, but I'll take a closer look when it gets back.

Line #6:


Purchased at a show. I think this one is rather pretty.

Line #7:


Purchased on eBay from a forum member, but I'll be damned if I can remember who right now!

Line #8:


Purchased at a show. When I posted this one here, opinion was split but the majority said it was artificially toned. PCGS agreed with the majority.

Line #9:


Purchased at a show. Now, this one I just don't get. When I posted it here, nobody thought it was AT, everybody LOVED it and I even got PMs offering to buy it. I still think it's real and PCGS blew it.

Line #10


Purchased at a show. I learned something new here; I didn't know PCGS used color designations on AU coins. I thought that was only for MS coins.

Line #11:


Purchased on eBay. Looking at this one again, I see that what I thought was just some grime is more likely light corrosion, so PCGS got this one right with a BB for enviro damage.

Well, that's the good, the bad and the ugly of it. Comments welcome.

Russ, NCNE

LucyBop

Hmmmm... overall, not to bad... the Jeffie is really pretty.....

barberlover

Russ, i always look when you post coin pictures. Thanks, Les

braddick

Regarding line six and seven- it looks like your grade is closer in line than PCGS's. Nice Morgans with semi PL surfaces and cool color. It appears PCGS was extra tough on those two.
(Nice catch too on the CAM 1965! Neat coin.)

eagle7

Russ, your photographs are fantastic. what type equipment and lighting do you use?

keets

hey russ

can you link the jefferson thread??

al h.

Russ

Eagle7,

Ricoh RDC-4300, GE Reveal light bulbs.

Russ, NCNE

Russ

Keets,

Here is the original thread.

And, here is what you said in that thread:



<< <i>..........PCGS MS65 PQ for the awesome tone color. that's a coin i don't think any jefferson collector would be ashamed to own. nice pick up Russ. save your grading fees and put it in your raw collection inside a rigid plastic 2x2. >>



Russ, NCNE

dragon

Russ,

Yes, that 97-P is definately not original, the other two Morgans look fine though. I think I remember commenting on that 97-P before.

Russ

Dragon,

Yep, I'm pretty sure you were one of the ones who got it right. Funny thing on the other two Morgans, though. Even though my grades were pure guesses, it still surprises me that PCGS graded them both higher than I did; one by two points.

Russ, NCNE

Russ

BTW, I still haven't gotten the notification eMail that this submission is done, and it's already shipped. So, if any of you guys are waiting on submissions that have been in a while, you might want to check on them.

Russ, NCNE

relayer

Nice job on the 1965. I don't think the 1968 would be worthy of resubmitting - maybe a presidental review?

Adding the pictures is a nice touch, but why not show the holders?

Edited: I didn't receive email notifiction on my last batch either.

dragon

My first impression on that Jefferson from your pic is that it is AT, especially the reverse, so I would agree with PCGS on their accessment on that one. From the pic, the colors don't look right on that one. I've however seen similar looking pieces in NGC holders before.

redhott

Russ
Congrats, especially on the 1965 sms - thanks for sharing the info and pictures with us!! I'm sure you'll be even happier once you finally get them back in your hands.

TheNumish

I like your 1965 half. Very nice!!!!!!!

Have you ever been able to get a 68, 69 or 70 half to grade proof-69 DCAM? I keep trying and it's impossible.

telecoin

Russ, That 1888 dollar looks familiar...Isn't that the one I sold you last August?

Russ

<< <i>Have you ever been able to get a 68, 69 or 70 half to grade proof-69 DCAM? >>



Jay,

Nope. I've scored quite a few 68DCAMs, but have yet to get a 69. They no longer give out 69s on these since Greg exhausted an entire year's quota by making 12 (that's a DOZEN) 1969s in 69DCAM on a single submission.



<< <i>Isn't that the one I sold you last August? >>



Telecoin,

Now I remember where I got that Morgan!

Russ, NCNE

Russ

Update. Just got these coins back, and I see why the 68-S only went 67DC instead of the 68DC I thought it would. I missed a small hairline in the left obverse field. So, PCGS got it right.

Russ, NCNE