K6AZ strongly implies that a toned coin in a PCGS65 will often bring more than the same coin in an NGC66 holder. My experience is that this is not accurate. In fact, my impression is that at auction an NGC65* coin will bring as much if not more than the same coin in a PCGS65 holder.
Now, Now Gemtone65 quit trying to confuse people with reality instead of perception, you act like you have been buying these type of coins for years (oh wait you have but) many posters here prefer to believe the perception they derive from reading message board instead of the reality of having been an active member of this type of market for many years attending some of the biggest sales held for these coins.
Sunnywood points out that an MS66 1882-s toned dollar brought $2400 at auction recently. Actually, the hammer price was $2200, and the gross price was $2530. Either way, I can only imagine the emotions of the high mail bidders when he received the coin and initially noticed that the reverse was dull. And, after being pleased at seeing the beautiful obverse colors, his joy would be short lived after he gave the coin a little tilt, observed 3 prominent hairlines on the face, and then realized he had no return privilege.
his joy would be short lived after he gave the coin a little tilt, observed 3 prominent hairlines on the face, and then realized he had no return privilege.
Most likely someone with the skills required to see those hairlines would be smart enough not to pay $2530 for any MS 66 common date Morgan, especially sight unseen.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Andy: One would think so, but nevertheless, this is the way it went down.
Back on topic: this is a fascinating story, yet even after 100+ posts, there remain issues to explore. Perhaps Russ and Bryan can comment further on these questions:
1. How come, both before and after he sold the coin, Russ's extensive comments on this forum never mentioned film on the coin?
2. If Bryan wanted to simply get an NGC66* coin in a PCGS65 holder or better, why not simply submit the coin in its NGC holder to PCGS, with instructions to return the coin in its NGC holder if PCGS could not grade it at least MS65?
3. Bryan says the coin has more eye appeal now. PCGS indicates that a previously graded NGC66* coin, which PCGS formerly graded as 65, is now only a MS64. Isn't it reasonable to conclude that PCGS thinks that NCS has had a deleterious effect on the coin's eye appeal?
Isn't it reasonable to conclude that PCGS thinks that NCS has had a deleterious effect on the coin's eye appeal?
No. I don't think you can positively conclude a thing about various grades given after twice thru the service. There are literally millions of coins that would grade MS65 one time and MS64 another at a grading service.
<< <i>1. How come, both before and after he sold the coin, Russ's extensive comments on this forum never mentioned film on the coin? >>
Because, frankly, there was no "film". There was a natural surface skin that was of no detraction at all. I felt the coin was beautiful just as it was, and needed no conservation. I use NCS extensively and had I felt their services were necessary, I'd have sent it to them.
Of course, I'm just a newbie who doesn't know dick, so I could be wrong.
Tradedollarnut: I asked whether my conjecture was reasonable, not whether it could be proved with certainty. The coin was originally graded PCGS65, got conserved, and is eventually returned to PCGS where it is now graded MS64. I would say that with these facts not in dispute, there is almost no chance PCGS thought that the NCS service enhanced the coin's appearance, and it is not unreasonable to conclude that PCGS thought the eye appeal was less the second time around. Is there a chance that PCGS thought the coin was now more attractive and downgraded it anyway? I suppose, but I wouldn't think that is a very logical inference.
and it is not unreasonable to conclude that PCGS thought the eye appeal was less the second time around
Sorry, but I think it is unreasonable to conclude that. On any given day, there are millions of coins that would get different grades on different trips thru the grading services. While what you allude is not out of the realm of possibility, and might possibly be the reason it got a lower grade, to conclude that it is the reason for the lower grade is not reasonable [especially if you haven't even seen the coin in person!].
Hi folks. When I started this thread it was meant with no ill will. I just thought it was funny the much publicized flea market Morgan appeared to be down graded. Many good discussions have resulted in this thread, and a few heated barbs. I'm also glad TBT doesn't appear upset with me that I did this thread.
But now he might. I've sat back off and on through this thread watching K6AZ get pounced on a bit. Some of it deserved perhaps and some of it was the usual dealers sticking together and that's fine.
Now this thread is starting to point fingers at others as well. For the record (if there is one) I believe TBT has the right to do what he pleases with the coin and set a asking price where he chooses. Whether any person including myself agrees is irrelevant.
But now it appears some folks have jumped in making the seller of this coin look like a saint. So I have this question and this question only. I'm asking this just to put this whole thing to rest. And very surprised no one has caught this, or if they have why they don't have the guts to speak up. So as usual I'll be the fool to look bad and ask my question.
TBT.... the obverse image of this Morgan you have on your sight appears to ME (and I can't be for certain) that it is the obverse image that RUSS took when it was in a PCGS MS65 holder. OK, you have informed everybody in this thread it went to NCS to get "fixed, oh sorry conserved" and also mentioned it was holdered by NGC as a 66* then PCGS as MS64.
So if it has been "Conserved" and if I'm correct that this is indeed the image from Russ, I would think the coin might look different now and your image of the coin updated. You take great images so I'm at a loss why you would use his.
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
sight unseen i've gotta agree with the very reasonable conclusion that the conservation was not particularly helpful.
Granting the fact that there are many, perhaps millions, of coins which would grade differently on a regular basis, we know the recent history of this coin much better than many, and it seems very likely that the coin was not helped and could very possibly have been hurt by the bodywork.
sight unseen i've gotta agree with the very reasonable conclusion that the conservation was not particularly helpful.
Granting the fact that there are many, perhaps millions, of coins which would grade differently on a regular basis, we know the recent history of this coin much better than many, and it seems very likely that the coin was not helped and could very possibly have been hurt by the bodywork.
I'm not a fan of NCS. While I'm certain that many coins are improved thru their services, my results have been poor. Even the coin that went up a grade I had to sell for less money.
BUT.... the fact that people are willing to jump to conclusions with very little evidence to support them is a downfall of this board. What evidence is there that PCGS doesn't like the results of the NCS work? Only the fact that it graded MS64 on resubmission. Got news for ya, folks, that happens all the time - even to coins not NCS'd! When something happens all the time for other reasons, siezing upon that event as conclusive evidence is unreasonable.
As usual, I agree 100% with TDN. I don't know whether the coin had any film or black flakes, or not. I don't know whether the NCS conservation did any good or any harm. I don't know whether PCGS could even detect the conservation. But I do know this - almost everyone else here also does NOT know the answers to those questions !! So why do we all jump to conclusions and make such comments !!!
Gemtone, as to the NGC MS66 that I was referring to, that was Lot #2751 in the Superior Sale. You are correct, it hammered at $2200. However, I was there when the coin sold ... it went to a bidder on Ebay Live, therefore the buyer's premium was 20%, and the price realized was in fact $2640. As to the appearance of the coin, I can assure you that the buyer was absolutely THRILLED with the coin, both obverse & reverse, and would NEVER have any desire to return the coin. (Yes, I know the buyer quite well.) When I saw the coin myself, I thought it was truly outrageous on the obverse, and perfectly acceptable as MS66 on the untoned reverse. Some people think rainbow-toned Morgans are overpriced, while other people climb over each other to bid on the wildly colored ones !!
As far as PCGS grading something MS64, I remember a certain drop-dead gorgeous rainbow-toned proof seated dollar that Stack's auctioned raw out of an original match-toned proof set. There was a lot of competition for this stunning coin, and Jesse Lipka, one of the great crackout guys of all time was sitting behind me, pushing his client to bid the coin well past PR66 money. Everyone graded it 66+ and it sold for $24000+ raw ... then later on, PCGS put the coin in a PR64 holder !!! I mean, REALLY, you had to see this coin !!!! NOBODY IN THEIR RIGHT MIND would call that coin PR64. (It quickly got into a very different holder.) We all know stories like this. So, no, it didn't have anything to do with NCS !!!
My short attention span only allowed me to read 3 pages.....
Here's something to ponder.... if it hasn't been already.... doesn't NCS charge in conjuction with the VALUE of the coin.... no wonder they thought it was a 66....
This is going to be my last post on this thread, even I get tired of bickering.
The bottom line here is Russ bought the coin raw, submitted it, and it got a 65. Russ did as I do, I sell the coins when they come back, I don't crack them out and resubmit them.
This thread is a glowing example of what is wrong in the coin business today. I have had a reputation of being pro-slab, but only as far as authenticity and problem coins go. There are way too many people in the hobby today that have no idea how to grade, and basically buy the numbers on the slab. The fact is NGC is very liberal with supergrade Morgans (here I am talking about 66 and higher) and this is well known in the marketplace. Just go and look at the price list of any of the dealers who have a large inventory of Morgans, and compare say a MS67 1880-S, you will see the NGC coin is significantly less.
There are way too many people maxing out coins, and that is why I won't buy the last better date Morgans I need sight unseen.
Sunnywood: where were you sitting at the Superior sale when lot #2751 was sold? Because, I was there as well. And, I looked at all the toned dollars very carefully. This lot was on my watch list, but because of the distractions I noted earlier, I had about 9 toned dollars that I can think of off the top of my head that I liked better, 7 of which I was able to buy.
I guess it all comes down to how much importance you place on things like 1) an attractive reverse, and 2) hairlines in prominent places. I acknowledge this piece has spectacular colors, but I wasn't willing to shell out $2530 (or even $1500) to get it. (By the way, the prices realized list has the final price as $2530. I knew it did not sell on the floor, but I didn't distinguish between a mail bid and Ebay. You must have been very alert to notice that subtlety.) Did you bid on or buy any of the toned dollars?
Hi Gemtone, well it's good not everyone goes after the same coins sometimes, otherwise those coins would go through the roof, and everything else would languish !! Besides, different bidders have different objectives. Some buy color, some buy the grade, some are type buyers, some are date & mintmark collectors, etc. As far as where I was sitting, I prefer to keep a low profile !! But I will say, I did like that 1882-S.
$1,400 for that? hahahhahahahahahahahaha Other than the price what's all the fuss about? Maybe if TBT didn't have all edited blank posts I would understand. Coins are always getting cracked out and resubmitted; I've done it quite a few times myself and it's no big deal. It interesting & a learning experience to see what this coin has been through at the different grading service like PCGS, NGC, & NCS.
Change that we can believe in is that change which is 90% silver.
Well Dave, I'm not going to try to put a price on your coin, mainly because I haven't seen it in person. I'll just show you my coin, which has similar toning but a little more of it. This is a PCGS MS63. I paid $79 for it.
Davewang: The toning on the reverse is rather ordinary. The obverse colors are very attractive, but they cover an extremely small area which is not the focal point of the coin. I would therefore expect this otherwise $40 coin to be worth perhaps $45 or $50 retail.
K6aZ: You're right, that's what I get for cancelling my gray sheet subscrpition. I stand corrected, Davewang: your 1883 MS64 toned dollar is probably worrth $48-58 retail, not the $45-50 I estimated initially. Anyway, my point was that whatever is the current price for an equivalently graded white coin, this one is worth only slightly more.
Isn't the one that's the subject of this thread rather ordinary looking too? Just a little blue on the periph with some red in the center with the right side being light gold. PCGS lists that @ $80 and the seller is asking a $1,320 prem for a ½ done coin? If I'm missing something please feel free to enlighten me.
Change that we can believe in is that change which is 90% silver.
I'm obviously not a connoisseur of colorfully toned Morgans, but I'm trying to understand some of the rationale behind the relative pricing premiums being asked/paid for different types of toned Morgans.
It seems that you're saying coverage and rainbow, and I do like some of the attactively toned coins, such as the one that Eric is showing, but frankly, I don't understand why insanely large premiums would be paid for wildly colored coins that look "splotchy". It seems at that point, the "toning effects" are being valued much much more than the coin. The coin then is simply a canvas, and the wilder the color, the better?
I do like this coin of mine, and I do agree that if there is any premium at all, it would be for the obverse. The reverse is only so-so. I like this coin because of the subtlety and symmetry. It looks like that Miss liberty is basking gently in a pool of color.
A lot of people selling toned coins on eBay buy them at fair market value, then shoot images, and then manipulate the out of the images, and decide their nicely toned coin is now a $2000 coin. The only toned coins worth that much in my opinion are true rainbows, or fantastic end rollers.
You can easily spot the guys on eBay who pull this racket, they usually have 10-20% "restocking" fees so that when the buyer gets the coin and realizes it looks nothing like the image, the shady seller still makes money.
Here is the 1882-S that Gemtone & I have been talking about. The new owner has now seen this thread (although he does not post here at all). He says he does not agree at all that there are distracting hairlines on the face. The color is wild neon. He says he was prepared to go to $3200 bid on the coin, and that he had a highly respected dealer check it out in person for him before he bid on it. So, anyway, here is the coin ....
Based on the exceptional hues and vibrancy of the colors, and their location being primarily in the coin's focal point, the coin that is the subject of this thread was previously worth a substntial premium. When Russ first put this coin up for auction, a forum member PM'ed me and asked what I thought it was worth. In that pre-NCS state, I recall telling him $1200-1500. I believe the coin sold in that range. What it's worth today reamins to be seen -- hopefully I'll see it Friday.
Dog97, if you think this 1882-O looks ordinary on the obverse, please sell me all your toned Morgan dollars !!!!! No, it is not ordinary at all. First, the entire obverse is covered in colorful toning. There are multi-colored hues, and they are the type that are immediately apparent, not just at a tilted angle through old-time patina. The colors appear to be vibrant and lustrous, like fresh wet paint (as one collector here calls it ...) You don't find gem quality 1882-O dollars with a fully colorful obverse like this too often. In the PCGS MS65 holder, I thought the coin was worth up to $1800 or so. I recently saw another PCGS MS65 with colorful obverse toning that went for just under $2000 privately.
The most common dates (1879-S, 1880-S, 1881-S, 1882-S, 1885-O and 1886, for example) have PCGS pops in the thousands even at the MS66 level. The total populations of these dates in gem quality, including both certified and uncertified examples, numbers well into the tens of thousands. Yet these dates can CONSISTENTLY bring into the thousands of dollars for the most desirable examples in a NGC and PCGS holder, graded MS65 or higher, with vibrant multi-colored toning over most or all of the obverse. Reverse-toned coins also bring premiums, but not as much as obverse toned coins.
When expressed as a percentage or multiple of Greysheet bid, the premiums are most dramatic at the MS64-MS65 level. However, in dollars, the premiums can be just as adramatic at every grade level. As with any market segment, there are dealers who try to push the limit to "whatever the market will bear." Caveat emptor. A thing is only worth what someone is willing to pay you for it. However, in the case of these beautiful toned Morgans, there are quite a few people willing to pay these prices ... hence, they are WORTH that much.
Yes but aren't we looking at this in the previous PCGS MS65 holder? It has now been to NCS and been enhanced, I mean fixed, I mean "Conserved." I asked this question before but didn't seem to get an answer. It was a very valid question imo and seems to have been sidestepped by everybody.
Now the owner of this coin has went back and edited all his posts, seems like I've seen this happen plenty of times in the past.
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
Let me state this again, this coin is not worth $1500. If it was, why isn't it consigned to an auction? Do you think maybe because it would realize what it is really worth? No....
I see these multi thousand dollar coins promoted here ad naseum. These coins do not fetch these prices in the real market.
Does anyone remember the story of Barney?
Barney was talked into buying a common 64 with color for (and I may not be exactly correct here, but I know I'm close) $2800. Several of the so-called tone "experts" here told him it was a good buy, so he bought it. A while later, he decided to sell it. The dealer who sold it wouldn't do a buy-back, and he shopped it around, and I think the best offer he got for it was in the range of $1000. He wound up consigning it to one of Goldberg's auctions, and it realized near $800.
So for those of you who think this 82-O is worth $1800-2000, let's see you put your money where your mouth is. I think TBT was looking for around $1500 for it.
<< <i>And by the way Russ, we still haven't seen the coin since it was worked on by NCS. TBT was using your image. >>
True, and since that is the case - that you have seen no other image, nor have you seen the coin in hand - how can you unequivocally assert that it is not a $1500 coin? After all, it sold at auction for very close to that using the image you are viewing. Is that assertion based only on the grade on the label? Isn't it a little hard to hold that bread when it's buttered on both sides?
So are you trying to tell me that this coin, which is now a 64, and we have no idea what it looks like now, is worth $1500? Sorry Russ, with those colors, and being in a 64 holder, it isn't worth $1500. Like I said, let's see it put up for auction with current images, in the 64 holder.
Eric, I see what you are saying, but I also understand where Sunnywood is coming from. Basically the (buy/sell) market for the nicely toned coin is a very thin market. There are some buyers with lots of money that is willing to pay for the "quality" they seek, and they are willing to bid against each other for the "right" coins with eye appeal. However, once those collectors have their coins with the "right appearance" and grade/date, whatever, if another coin similar in date/grade/appearance shows up, what would be the point in paying another $3K for the otherwise common date coin again? Keep the other one company? The problem then is that if there no "now blood" willing to pour money into the "nicely toned" market, the pricing levels aren't sustainable.
Sunnywood, My concern here is that there are very intelligent people who may know how to "cook" coins for color. Even if it takes a long time (few years ?), if they can get the process down, get the right set of chemicals/equipment/mint bags to cook up spectacular colors, it may not be long before a flood of these reaches the market, and that really could kill the pricing premium or even worse, a penalty. I guess I'm just a bit uneasy that the coin doctors could get to be so good that we could have a bunch of the spectacular colors Morgans show up, and we can't tell the difference any longer.
<< <i>My concern here is that there are very intelligent people who may know how to "cook" coins for color. Even if it takes a long time (few years ?), if they can get the process down, get the right set of chemicals/equipment/mint bags to cook up spectacular colors, it may not be long before a flood of these reaches the market, and that really could kill the pricing premium or even worse, a penalty. I guess I'm just a bit uneasy that the coin doctors could get to be so good that we could have a bunch of the spectacular colors Morgans show up, and we can't tell the difference any longer. >>
Uh oh Dave, these guys promoting multi thousand dollar common Morgans don't want to hear something like this.
<< <i>So are you trying to tell me that this coin, which is now a 64, and we have no idea what it looks like now, is worth $1500? >>
Nope, I said nothing of the kind, but that was a valiant attempt at obfuscation. What I said was - in reponse to your assertion that it wasn't a $1500 coin - that it had already sold for nearly that at competitive auction. I don't know what it's worth that now, and neither do you.
The only thing I find "absolutely incredible" is your determined belief that you know the value of this coin, when you have never seen it in its current condition. I mean no offense, as you are obviously an experienced and knowledgeable guy, but you would have to be able to "see" and value coins telepathically to justify your assertions. If you can do that, please let me know, I would love to learn that skill !!!
(I am referring, of course, to your assertion that the coin is not now worth $1500.)
I wonder, if the same coin had been consigned to a high-end auction by one of the houses that does a good job photographing toned Morgans (Superior, Goldberg, ANR), and it was still in the NGC MS66* holder, then what would it have brought ...
Sunnywood, the problem here that keeps getting looked over is that the coin is now in a 64 holder. If it was indeed in a NGC MS66* holder, TBT should have sold it as such, since a 66 even without toning is worth way over the amounts we are talking about here.
I can see the color this coin has in the images, and the fact that it is now in the 64 holder, and it is my opinion based on extensive experience with toned Morgan that this is not a $1500 coin as such. If it were resubmitted, and was in fact a 65, that would be different.
<< <i>Russ, what part of it sold at $1475 in a PCGS MS65 holder before it was "conserved" don't you understand? >>
What I understand is that every utterance you've made in this thread is based on nothing but supposition. You haven't seen the coin post conservation; none of us have. To claim you know it's true value based on such a flimsy foundation just makes you look foolish.
Sorry Russ, the fact is the coin is in a 64 holder. Now you can join in with the rest of the pro dealers and try to support the idea that this coin in a 64 holder is worth that kind of money, but in my opinion it isn't.
I don't quite understand your position in this anyhow, since you originally submitted it, got a 65, and got about what I figure a MS65 82-O with those colors would fetch.
The bottom line is this coin is currently a 64, and until I see some evidence of it being a 65, my opinion is not going to change.
Comments
Now, Now Gemtone65 quit trying to confuse people with reality instead of perception, you act like you have been buying these type of coins for years (oh wait you have but) many posters here prefer to believe the perception they derive from reading message board instead of the reality of having been an active member of this type of market for many years attending some of the biggest sales held for these coins.
Sunnywood - Excellent summary clarifying the situation. Well said.
NOTE: No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However, a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
Type collector since 1981
Current focus 1855 date type set
Most likely someone with the skills required to see those hairlines would be smart enough not to pay $2530 for any MS 66 common date Morgan, especially sight unseen.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Back on topic: this is a fascinating story, yet even after 100+ posts, there remain issues to explore. Perhaps Russ and Bryan can comment further on these questions:
1. How come, both before and after he sold the coin, Russ's extensive comments on this forum never mentioned film on the coin?
2. If Bryan wanted to simply get an NGC66* coin in a PCGS65 holder or better, why not simply submit the coin in its NGC holder to PCGS, with instructions to return the coin in its NGC holder if PCGS could not grade it at least MS65?
3. Bryan says the coin has more eye appeal now. PCGS indicates that a previously graded NGC66* coin, which PCGS formerly graded as 65, is now only a MS64. Isn't it reasonable to conclude that PCGS thinks that NCS has had a deleterious effect on the coin's eye appeal?
No. I don't think you can positively conclude a thing about various grades given after twice thru the service. There are literally millions of coins that would grade MS65 one time and MS64 another at a grading service.
<< <i>1. How come, both before and after he sold the coin, Russ's extensive comments on this forum never mentioned film on the coin? >>
Because, frankly, there was no "film". There was a natural surface skin that was of no detraction at all. I felt the coin was beautiful just as it was, and needed no conservation. I use NCS extensively and had I felt their services were necessary, I'd have sent it to them.
Of course, I'm just a newbie who doesn't know dick, so I could be wrong.
Russ, NCNE
Sorry, but I think it is unreasonable to conclude that. On any given day, there are millions of coins that would get different grades on different trips thru the grading services. While what you allude is not out of the realm of possibility, and might possibly be the reason it got a lower grade, to conclude that it is the reason for the lower grade is not reasonable [especially if you haven't even seen the coin in person!].
But now he might. I've sat back off and on through this thread watching K6AZ get pounced on a bit. Some of it deserved perhaps and some of it was the usual dealers sticking together and that's fine.
Now this thread is starting to point fingers at others as well. For the record (if there is one) I believe TBT has the right to do what he pleases with the coin and set a asking price where he chooses. Whether any person including myself agrees is irrelevant.
But now it appears some folks have jumped in making the seller of this coin look like a saint. So I have this question and this question only. I'm asking this just to put this whole thing to rest. And very surprised no one has caught this, or if they have why they don't have the guts to speak up. So as usual I'll be the fool to look bad and ask my question.
TBT.... the obverse image of this Morgan you have on your sight appears to ME (and I can't be for certain) that it is the obverse image that RUSS took when it was in a PCGS MS65 holder. OK, you have informed everybody in this thread it went to NCS to get "fixed, oh sorry conserved" and also mentioned it was holdered by NGC as a 66* then PCGS as MS64.
So if it has been "Conserved" and if I'm correct that this is indeed the image from Russ, I would think the coin might look different now and your image of the coin updated. You take great images so I'm at a loss why you would use his.
Granting the fact that there are many, perhaps millions, of coins which would grade differently on a regular basis, we know the recent history of this coin much better than many, and it seems very likely that the coin was not helped and could very possibly have been hurt by the bodywork.
Granting the fact that there are many, perhaps millions, of coins which would grade differently on a regular basis, we know the recent history of this coin much better than many, and it seems very likely that the coin was not helped and could very possibly have been hurt by the bodywork.
I'm not a fan of NCS. While I'm certain that many coins are improved thru their services, my results have been poor. Even the coin that went up a grade I had to sell for less money.
BUT.... the fact that people are willing to jump to conclusions with very little evidence to support them is a downfall of this board. What evidence is there that PCGS doesn't like the results of the NCS work? Only the fact that it graded MS64 on resubmission. Got news for ya, folks, that happens all the time - even to coins not NCS'd! When something happens all the time for other reasons, siezing upon that event as conclusive evidence is unreasonable.
Gemtone, as to the NGC MS66 that I was referring to, that was Lot #2751 in the Superior Sale. You are correct, it hammered at $2200. However, I was there when the coin sold ... it went to a bidder on Ebay Live, therefore the buyer's premium was 20%, and the price realized was in fact $2640. As to the appearance of the coin, I can assure you that the buyer was absolutely THRILLED with the coin, both obverse & reverse, and would NEVER have any desire to return the coin. (Yes, I know the buyer quite well.) When I saw the coin myself, I thought it was truly outrageous on the obverse, and perfectly acceptable as MS66 on the untoned reverse. Some people think rainbow-toned Morgans are overpriced, while other people climb over each other to bid on the wildly colored ones !!
As far as PCGS grading something MS64, I remember a certain drop-dead gorgeous rainbow-toned proof seated dollar that Stack's auctioned raw out of an original match-toned proof set. There was a lot of competition for this stunning coin, and Jesse Lipka, one of the great crackout guys of all time was sitting behind me, pushing his client to bid the coin well past PR66 money. Everyone graded it 66+ and it sold for $24000+ raw ... then later on, PCGS put the coin in a PR64 holder !!! I mean, REALLY, you had to see this coin !!!! NOBODY IN THEIR RIGHT MIND would call that coin PR64. (It quickly got into a very different holder.) We all know stories like this. So, no, it didn't have anything to do with NCS !!!
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
<< <i>Of course, I'm just a newbie who doesn't know dick, so I could be wrong.
Russ, NCNE >>
now I'm really confused are we talking about Dick's coin, or TBT's coin?
Here's something to ponder.... if it hasn't been already.... doesn't NCS charge in conjuction with the VALUE of the coin.... no wonder they thought it was a 66....
The bottom line here is Russ bought the coin raw, submitted it, and it got a 65. Russ did as I do, I sell the coins when they come back, I don't crack them out and resubmit them.
This thread is a glowing example of what is wrong in the coin business today. I have had a reputation of being pro-slab, but only as far as authenticity and problem coins go. There are way too many people in the hobby today that have no idea how to grade, and basically buy the numbers on the slab. The fact is NGC is very liberal with supergrade Morgans (here I am talking about 66 and higher) and this is well known in the marketplace. Just go and look at the price list of any of the dealers who have a large inventory of Morgans, and compare say a MS67 1880-S, you will see the NGC coin is significantly less.
There are way too many people maxing out coins, and that is why I won't buy the last better date Morgans I need sight unseen.
I guess it all comes down to how much importance you place on things like 1) an attractive reverse, and 2) hairlines in prominent places. I acknowledge this piece has spectacular colors, but I wasn't willing to shell out $2530 (or even $1500) to get it. (By the way, the prices realized list has the final price as $2530. I knew it did not sell on the floor, but I didn't distinguish between a mail bid and Ebay. You must have been very alert to notice that subtlety.) Did you bid on or buy any of the toned dollars?
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
Other than the price what's all the fuss about?
Maybe if TBT didn't have all edited blank posts I would understand.
Coins are always getting cracked out and resubmitted; I've done it quite a few times myself and it's no big deal. It interesting & a learning experience to see what this coin has been through at the different grading service like PCGS, NGC, & NCS.
Is there such a thing as a "price range" or "premium range" that people pay for a nicely toned but otherwie common dollar?
For example, my 1883 Morgan.
PCGS MS64. Somewhat symmetrically banded bag toning on the obverse, and wood/paper display set toning on the reverse.
How would one even begin to place a generalized catagory on the premium (if any) that this otherwise common date Morgan dollar?
I am interested to learn the different catagorizations/premiums that the market is currently placing on "nicely toned" Morgan dollars....
(Coin is not for sale)
If I'm missing something please feel free to enlighten me.
I'm obviously not a connoisseur of colorfully toned Morgans, but I'm trying to understand some of the rationale behind the relative pricing premiums being asked/paid for different types of toned Morgans.
It seems that you're saying coverage and rainbow, and I do like some of the attactively toned coins, such as the one that Eric is showing, but frankly, I don't understand why insanely large premiums would be paid for wildly colored coins that look "splotchy". It seems at that point, the "toning effects" are being valued much much more than the coin. The coin then is simply a canvas, and the wilder the color, the better?
I do like this coin of mine, and I do agree that if there is any premium at all, it would be for the obverse. The reverse is only so-so. I like this coin because of the subtlety and symmetry. It looks like that Miss liberty is basking gently in a pool of color.
A lot of people selling toned coins on eBay buy them at fair market value, then shoot images, and then manipulate the
You can easily spot the guys on eBay who pull this racket, they usually have 10-20% "restocking" fees so that when the buyer gets the coin and realizes it looks nothing like the image, the shady seller still makes money.
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
The most common dates (1879-S, 1880-S, 1881-S, 1882-S, 1885-O and 1886, for example) have PCGS pops in the thousands even at the MS66 level. The total populations of these dates in gem quality, including both certified and uncertified examples, numbers well into the tens of thousands. Yet these dates can CONSISTENTLY bring into the thousands of dollars for the most desirable examples in a NGC and PCGS holder, graded MS65 or higher, with vibrant multi-colored toning over most or all of the obverse. Reverse-toned coins also bring premiums, but not as much as obverse toned coins.
When expressed as a percentage or multiple of Greysheet bid, the premiums are most dramatic at the MS64-MS65 level. However, in dollars, the premiums can be just as adramatic at every grade level. As with any market segment, there are dealers who try to push the limit to "whatever the market will bear." Caveat emptor. A thing is only worth what someone is willing to pay you for it. However, in the case of these beautiful toned Morgans, there are quite a few people willing to pay these prices ... hence, they are WORTH that much.
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
Now the owner of this coin has went back and edited all his posts, seems like I've seen this happen plenty of times in the past.
Let me state this again, this coin is not worth $1500. If it was, why isn't it consigned to an auction? Do you think maybe because it would realize what it is really worth? No....
I see these multi thousand dollar coins promoted here ad naseum. These coins do not fetch these prices in the real market.
Does anyone remember the story of Barney?
Barney was talked into buying a common 64 with color for (and I may not be exactly correct here, but I know I'm close) $2800. Several of the so-called tone "experts" here told him it was a good buy, so he bought it. A while later, he decided to sell it. The dealer who sold it wouldn't do a buy-back, and he shopped it around, and I think the best offer he got for it was in the range of $1000. He wound up consigning it to one of Goldberg's auctions, and it realized near $800.
So for those of you who think this 82-O is worth $1800-2000, let's see you put your money where your mouth is. I think TBT was looking for around $1500 for it.
<< <i>Let me state this again, this coin is not worth $1500. If it was, why isn't it consigned to an auction? >>
Actually, it sold at auction - starting at $1 - for $1475, or right in the range that Gemtone65 said it would.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>And by the way Russ, we still haven't seen the coin since it was worked on by NCS. TBT was using your image. >>
True, and since that is the case - that you have seen no other image, nor have you seen the coin in hand - how can you unequivocally assert that it is not a $1500 coin? After all, it sold at auction for very close to that using the image you are viewing. Is that assertion based only on the grade on the label? Isn't it a little hard to hold that bread when it's buttered on both sides?
Russ, NCNE
I see what you are saying, but I also understand where Sunnywood is coming from. Basically the (buy/sell) market for the nicely toned coin is a very thin market. There are some buyers with lots of money that is willing to pay for the "quality" they seek, and they are willing to bid against each other for the "right" coins with eye appeal. However, once those collectors have their coins with the "right appearance" and grade/date, whatever, if another coin similar in date/grade/appearance shows up, what would be the point in paying another $3K for the otherwise common date coin again? Keep the other one company? The problem then is that if there no "now blood" willing to pour money into the "nicely toned" market, the pricing levels aren't sustainable.
Sunnywood,
My concern here is that there are very intelligent people who may know how to "cook" coins for color. Even if it takes a long time (few years ?), if they can get the process down, get the right set of chemicals/equipment/mint bags to cook up spectacular colors, it may not be long before a flood of these reaches the market, and that really could kill the pricing premium or even worse, a penalty. I guess I'm just a bit uneasy that the coin doctors could get to be so good that we could have a bunch of the spectacular colors Morgans show up, and we can't tell the difference any longer.
<< <i>My concern here is that there are very intelligent people who may know how to "cook" coins for color. Even if it takes a long time (few years ?), if they can get the process down, get the right set of chemicals/equipment/mint bags to cook up spectacular colors, it may not be long before a flood of these reaches the market, and that really could kill the pricing premium or even worse, a penalty. I guess I'm just a bit uneasy that the coin doctors could get to be so good that we could have a bunch of the spectacular colors Morgans show up, and we can't tell the difference any longer. >>
Uh oh Dave, these guys promoting multi thousand dollar common Morgans don't want to hear something like this.
<< <i>So are you trying to tell me that this coin, which is now a 64, and we have no idea what it looks like now, is worth $1500? >>
Nope, I said nothing of the kind, but that was a valiant attempt at obfuscation. What I said was - in reponse to your assertion that it wasn't a $1500 coin - that it had already sold for nearly that at competitive auction. I don't know what it's worth that now, and neither do you.
Russ, NCNE
The only thing I find "absolutely incredible" is your determined belief that you know the value of this coin, when you have never seen it in its current condition. I mean no offense, as you are obviously an experienced and knowledgeable guy, but you would have to be able to "see" and value coins telepathically to justify your assertions. If you can do that, please let me know, I would love to learn that skill !!!
(I am referring, of course, to your assertion that the coin is not now worth $1500.)
I wonder, if the same coin had been consigned to a high-end auction by one of the houses that does a good job photographing toned Morgans (Superior, Goldberg, ANR), and it was still in the NGC MS66* holder, then what would it have brought ...
Dave, yes, that is a concern of mine as well ...
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
I can see the color this coin has in the images, and the fact that it is now in the 64 holder, and it is my opinion based on extensive experience with toned Morgan that this is not a $1500 coin as such. If it were resubmitted, and was in fact a 65, that would be different.
<< <i>Russ, what part of it sold at $1475 in a PCGS MS65 holder before it was "conserved" don't you understand? >>
What I understand is that every utterance you've made in this thread is based on nothing but supposition. You haven't seen the coin post conservation; none of us have. To claim you know it's true value based on such a flimsy foundation just makes you look foolish.
Russ, NCNE
I don't quite understand your position in this anyhow, since you originally submitted it, got a 65, and got about what I figure a MS65 82-O with those colors would fetch.
The bottom line is this coin is currently a 64, and until I see some evidence of it being a 65, my opinion is not going to change.