Point taken. As a matter of fact, I can only speak to my own purchasing proclivities, and those of a couple of my friends who also collect toners. I wouldn't touch the coin in a 64 holder, simply because I do not buy any Morgan grading less than PCGS MS65. That is a choice that I have each made for my own reasons (which others may agree or disagree with as they choose). Therefore, the coin is worth approximately $0 to me in the MS64 holder. However, in the MS65 holder it might have been worth more than $1500 to me. So, using me as your market data, you are in fact right. But who knows what other buyers there may be out there.
(Yes, I "buy the coin, not the holder" but I only "buy the coin" if it ALSO is in an acceptable holder. Why not have my cake and eat it too ???)
In an NGC MS66* holder, I would have ignored the coin. That's another choice that I make from time to time (although my Sunnywood Collection of Cherrypicker Variety shield nickels is all NGC, as was my complete 1877 gold proof set). I hate crossover politics. Period. SO unless a coin is a pop 1 rarity, I DO care what holder it's in. However, a friend of mine who also collects these coins would have paid at least $5000 for the coin in an NGC MS66* holder. Go figure. Now I he has bought another PCGS MS65 for just under $2000, so he's no longer a buyer either.
Thank you Sunnywood, this is something I should have pointed out.
A lot of the serious toned Morgan collectors don't buy coins grading 64 or lower. That is a big factor here, along with the fact that according to the greysheet, a white or neutrally toned 82-O goes for 57/62 in 64, and 600/660 in 65. That is the big question here, and as I have said many times, as a 64 it is not in my opinion worth $1500 or more.
I think the post NCS reverse only has been posted. Previously there was some faint perimeter light brown toning. As someone posted earlier, the cleaning may have or maybe just photo, brought out the upper right field hit.
<< <i>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'm not quite sure where the line between obfuscation and lying is drawn, but you're getting pretty close. I joined with nobody on anything. I'll repeat it again, since you either missed it or are having a comprehension problem. I have no idea what the coin is worth now. Unlike you, though, I've actually seen it in person.
<< <i>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. >>
My position is really very simple, surprising that you're having such a difficult time grasping it. The coin sold for nearly $1500 when it was holdered as an MS65. It may, or may not be worth that now even in an MS64 holder - unless all one cares about is the grade on the label. Since you, and nobody else in this discussion - other than TBT - has seen the coin since NCS had it, there is no way to conclusively decide anything about value.
Is that simple enough for you to understand? I hope so, because I'm done chewing on this rancid meat.
Russ, you still seem to be missing the point. The base value of this coin was dramatically reduced when it was downgraded to a 64. I don't need to see the coin Russ, because now we are talking about paying 25 times the sheet price for a 64, as compared to paying 2.5 times the price for a 65.
And I don't want to hear how it is a 65 in a 64 holder, just like every seller on eBay, "this 64 really should be in a 65 holder". The fact is it is in a 64 holder. Try going to your local coin shop with the best looking, undergraded 64 you can find, and see if you can even get 65 bluesheet money out of them.
Geez, guys, it's Saturday night. I think we should all give this one a rest. I for one don't really support threads going too far south of the Mason-Dixon Line of Civil Discourse. Of course, that never stopped anyone here !!!!!!! To quote Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along?"
Funny..... if I were offered the coin with the following history:
Purchased raw, graded MS65 first time thru at PCGS, conserved by NCS and upgraded to MS66* then cracked out and sent one time thru to PCGS and graded MS64
the first and only thing I'd say is "I have to see the coin".
Sure, you're entitled to your opinion. Just like those that are concluding PCGS downgraded the coin because of NCS are entitled to theirs. But I'd respect both those opinions a whole lot more if you'd have seen the coin!
Again, in case you missed my earlier post, the only toned common Morgans worth the kind of money we are talking about are true banded rainbows and exceptionally colored end rolls. This coin doesn't fit into either category. And this is my personal preference and opinion, I sold all my high dollar toned Morgans a few years ago, and now rarely deal with any worth more than $200. The high end toned market is too thin, as was pointed out by Barney's experience with the PCGS MS64 1886 he paid $2800 for, and it wound up hammering in a Goldberg auction for $800.
Again, in case you missed my earlier post, the only toned common Morgans worth the kind of money we are talking about are true banded rainbows and exceptionally colored end rolls. This coin doesn't fit into either category.
That's a rather absolute statement of value for a coin that's been in three different holders...and that you haven't seen in person.
And this is my personal preference and opinion, I sold all my high dollar toned Morgans a few years ago, and now rarely deal with any worth more than $200.
So... you no longer deal in this arena but you are an expert on the values. Hmmm.
I have absolutely no idea what it's worth. But I do know that Greysheet bid is irrelevant. Quoting shocking multiples of Greysheet bid is simply using irrelevant statistics to try to make a point. Bid has nothing to do with a colored coin's value. Grade even is somewhat irrelevant to a colored coin's value. Color is personal preference and there are plenty of people that wouldn't think twice about dropping $1500 on an MS64 Morgan if they loved the color - especially one that comes with a PCGS MS65 insert and an NGC MS66* insert.
Here's a stunning thought - let's let the market decide what it's worth!
I would be willing to bet that we'll see this coin in a PCGS MS65 holder again. As TDN has said, a number of times in this thread I believe, there are thousands of coins that can and do skip back and forth betweem 64-65-64-65, even an occasional 64-66. I friend of mine bought a PCGS 66 and got it bumped to a 68! With the previous grades on this coin, it's just a matter of time before it is submitted again. While I'm not a crackout artist and only crack to cross, not yet to upgrade, I would have this coin raw in a flip and sent to PCGS so fast your head would spin.
Tom
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
Eric - If this coin showed up raw in a major auction, and assuming none of the bidders recognized it as THE coin, what do you think the coin would sell for?
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>Eric - If this coin showed up raw in a major auction, and assuming none of the bidders recognized it as THE coin, what do you think the coin would sell for? >>
Depends on whether it is a 64 or a 65. But as long as that coin is in a 64 holder, it isn't going anywhere near the prices mentioned. My whole basis for what I have been saying about this coin is presuming PCGS is grading it correctly as a 64. If it is a 65, that would be different.
This thread started in regards to TBT offering it on eBay as a 64, and I will tell you all again, sight unseen over eBay in a 64 holder, it ain't worth $1500. If it is truly a 65, either bust it out and sell it raw at auction, or try to get it back in the 65 holder.
It may have been, but I didn't see it in a NGC 66 holder. All I know is the coin right now is in a 64 holder. So since TBT is with us now, maybe he can explain.
My Opinion - From the pics, and in a 64 holder, I would not pay more than $250 for it on the high side. (In hand could be a different story but I am doubtful from what I can glean).
If in a 65 or 66 holder, I would not pay more than the same $200 premium above grey sheet for those particular colors.
So I guess I agree with Eric!
Doug
P.S. This is opinion is certainly not a reflection of the seller or his pricing. I am fully aware many of my coins are priced on what many would call the high end as well.
Actually Doug, in my opinion this coin in a 64 holder should fetch somewhere between $500-800. In 65, what Russ got for it is about right. $250? Got any like it for that price? I'll buy all you have!
Actually Doug, in my opinion this coin in a 64 holder should fetch somewhere between $500-800. In 65, what Russ got for it is about right. $250? Got any like it for that price? I'll buy all you have! >>
In my (newbie) opinion, those colors sell all day long all over ebay for $200 to $300 so have at 'em!
Doug, what coins go for on eBay has no bearing on the real market. Truth be told, with the onslaught of photo manipulators on eBay, honest toned coins are impossible to sell there, and when put up with no reserve don't bring anywhere near what they are worth. I haven't put up any of my really good toned stuff on eBay for over a year, it has all been going to regional shows.
<< <i>Doug, what coins go for on eBay has no bearing on the real market. Truth be told, with the onslaught of photo manipulators on eBay, honest toned coins are impossible to sell there, and when put up with no reserve don't bring anywhere near what they are worth. I haven't put up any of my really good toned stuff on eBay for over a year, it has all been going to regional shows. >>
Eric, the scary part about that for me is that I have NEVER been to a coin show outside of my little rural southern state!.........eBay IS my market - eek!
Well, if you can't make it to any shows you can always consign to a live auction ahead of time. If you have nice material, it is very hard to get a fair price on eBay. (Talking toned coins here)
Please note that sunnywood has said he will not touch a coin in a holder that has a number less than 65.
also note the handle gemtone65.
also note that these fellows KNOW of what they speak.
the grade 65 signifies, to me, and apparently to others, the "gem" grade designation.
the seller may believe that the coin is worth only a fraction, more or less, from 64 to 65, but there are extremely knowledgable people basically saying that the difference from 64 to 65 is in fact 100% (i.e., those who do purchase this type of coin, at this type of markup will not even consider a coin that has not graded out as a gem).
i still contend that gemtone65's theory that it is reasonable to conclude, sight unseen, that conservation has had an effect on the grade of the coin is absolutely valid.
I have no doubt, also, that the coin could, and very well may, be submitted any number of times and return with different grades every time, since grades are merely opinions.
The important opinion, however, is the current grade of 64 and there are a lot of collectors who will not even look at the coin in it's current slab.
This particular date there is a big price jump from 64 to 65. Unlike many of the other common date Morgans. It's a tougher coin in Gem. Add attractive toning and it gets tougher.
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
I do not agree with your assessment of this coin's value in either a 65 or a 66 holder. If we used the prices in your Ebay store as a guideline, this coin would be worth more than $200 premium over sheet. And if you would not pay more than that for an 1882-O with these colors in a 65 or 66 holder, I don't think you will be owning one anytime soon. As for MS64, it's not a grade I buy, so I can't offer any comment on the market pricing for that grade (but that doesn't mean the coin is totally worthless in a 64 holder !!!).
I certainly do not agree with your comment that "these coins sell all over ebay for $200." Most of the coins that sell on Ebay for $200 to $300 - although they may be called "Monster" and "Rainbow" - are neither. If you really sift through the Ebay auctions, weed out everything in illegitimate holders (NTC, etc), weed out all the coins that are lower grades, weed out all the coins that have modest color, weed out all the coins that are colored on the reverse, and not the obverse, there is precious little left. When you then weed out the most common dates, such as 1879-S, 1880-S, 1881-S, 1882-S, 1885-O, 1886 ... there is virtually nothing left at all.
If you are looking for better date PCGS MS65+ with vibrant multi-colored obverse toning, GOOD LUCK !!
CASE IN POINT: There is an 1888-O PCGS MS65 in the upcoming ANR Sale. Off the top of my head, I think that date is $350 bid in the sheet. The coin appears to have dramatic obverse color. It has already been bid up to $1650 with several bidders participating. Just watch this one go .... If the coin were an 1882-O, which sheets at $600 bid in MS65, I imagine the bid would be at least as high. However, if the coin were less than MS65, or not PCGS, or less dramatically colored, or not obverse-toned, or if the coin were an 1881-S or 1882-S, then the bids would be much lower. But you still might not get to buy the coin for $200 over bid.
<< <i>also note that these fellows KNOW of what they speak. >>
This is true and I agree. But even they don't agree on certain coins. Earlier in the thread, a coin they both viewed in person. Gemtone65 said the coins reverse was dull, and had hairlines on the obverse. Sunnywood thought the reverse was fine for the 66 grade and the current owner sees no hairlines. So while I respect both of their opinions and have had conversations with Gemtone.... I don't feel they are the ultimate authority on value and quality of toned coins out there. They both seen the same coin and saw different things on the coin. So if your point was that they know what they speak of and we don't.... I respectfully disagree.
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
Eye appeal is always in the eye of the beholder !! And quality is often subjective (if it weren't, the services would always be perfectly consistent). I won't claim to be an expert on anything, although I have been around the game enough to offer some sage advice now and again.
But, I am definitely human and I love a compliment as much as the next guy, so "Thanks Zenny !!!" LOL
My goodness I ought toget to sleep ... you know, I'm not even on the west coast ...
I do not agree with your assessment of this coin's value in either a 64 or a 65 holder. If we used the prices in your Ebay store as a guideline, this coin would be worth more than $200 premium over sheet. And if you would not pay more than that for an 1882-O with these colors in a 65 or 66 holder, I don't think you will be owning one anytime soon.
I certainly do not agree with your comment that "these coins sell all over ebay for $200." Most of the coins that sell on Ebay for $200 to $300 - although they may be called "Monster" and "Rainbow" - are neither. If you really sift through the Ebay auctions, weed out everything in illegitimate holders (NTC, etc), weed out all the coins that are lower grades, weed out all the coins that have modest color, weed out all the coins that are colored on the reverse, and not the obverse, there is precious little left. When you then weed out the most common dates, such as 1879-S, 1880-S, 1881-S, 1882-S, 1885-O, 1886 ... there is virtually nothing left at all.
CASE IN POINT: There is an 1888-O PCGS MS65 in the upcoming ANR Sale. Off the top of my head, I think that date is $350 bid in the sheet. The coin appears to have dramatic obverse color. It has already been bid up to $1650 with several bidders participating. Just watch this one go .... If the coin were an 1882-O, which sheets at $600 bid in MS65, I imagine the bid would be at least as high. However, if the coin were less than MS65, or not PCGS, or less dramatically colored, or not obverse-toned, or if the coin were an 1881-S or 1882-S, then the bids would be much lower. But you still might not get to buy the coin for $200 over bid.
Best, Sunnywood >>
As I stated earlier, the colors to me are not worth $200 over sheet in 64, 65, 66 or 76 for that matter. I really don't care about the date. I don't buy dates, I buy color. So I do not want to own this coin or any other date that it looks like beyond the pricing I listed above.
"These coins" was a term that was obviously meant to imply similar colors (nice but not monster) in similar holders (big 2) and similar grades (common). In my eBay experience, they are a common place for $200 to $300. I spend 2 hours a day on eBay searching for color so I feel confident I am correct on this statement.
Finally, anyone with toned collecting experience understands the date and grade do not substantially affect the premium over sheet of a toned coin...the TONING does. Period.
Hence, my argument that I would only pay a $200 premium over sheet in any grade is consistent with my point of view stated earlier.
UOFA, you raise an interesting point. You say that you buy color, and you don't really care about the date. And I agree that premium above sheet is about color, although for some of us it is also about the difficulty of finding that particular date with nice color .... So here's a question for anyone out there:
Do you (or people you know) collect toned Morgans by date & mintmark, with the intention of building a partial or complete set ?? Or do you /they collect color, and don't care if they are all the same two or three dates?
UOFA, you raise an interesting point. You say that you buy color, and you don't really care about the date. And I agree that premium above sheet is about color, although for some of us it is also about the difficulty of finding that particular date with nice color .... So here's a question for anyone out there:
Do you (or people you know) collect toned Morgans by date & mintmark, with the intention of building a partial or complete set ?? Or do you /they collect color, and don't care if they are all the same two or three dates?
Best, Sunnywood >>
You make an interesting point as well...folks that collect by date and mintmark could pay more for lesser colors, especially when the date and mintmark are relatively rare with such.
I have heard of a few trying to put together an entire collection of attractively toned Morgans but I can't image how one could complete such a challenge!
Sunnywood, actually I am a bit like you and have refined looking for toned Morgans in Gem grade. I mainly go by the "look" but if I find a tough date that usually doesn't come with attractive toning I'm usually interested. I'd like to find a nice 78cc with nice obverse toning. I see very few.
I believe we have a board member that's putting together a set of toned Morgans by date. If I'm correct I believe it is Tonedollars.
I have more interest in early halves and early dollars lately.
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
I love early type, and the halves are among the best, as they are the largest denomination that did not have a long hiatus in mintage. Thus, the series of halves from flowing hair through capped bust is quite a challenge !! It is fun to rotate through different collecting regimens. I have spent equal efforts at different times, for example, studying 1793 and 1794 large cents, and studying shield nickels. Go figure !! I had a complete date run of colorfully toned proof seated dollars from 1855 through 1873, but also obsessed over Indian $2.50 and Barber quarters. At another time, it was early silver type that I fancied, but at the same time I am plunking state quarters into a Whitman folder LOLOL. And who among us hasn't collected Morgans at one time or another !!!
<< <i>also note that these fellows KNOW of what they speak. >>
This is true and I agree. But even they don't agree on certain coins. .... I don't feel they are the ultimate authority on value and quality of toned coins out there... >>
stman
my point was only that there are a fair number of toned morgan specialists that will have nothing to do with coins that are graded less than 65 (you apparently may even be one of them), which is where this particular coin is at this point in time.
For many this coin is simply not even on the radar now....
Thanks for the kind words from Zenny and Stman, and to Sunnywood for the pleasant conversations I've had them him via PM so as not to get too far off topic here. That said, I'd like to make two important clarifications in my earlier debate with Sunnywood. First, despite the fact that lot #2751 was less than perfect, and a marginal MS66 IMO, I really liked the coin. And, I would have paid a price for it consistent with what the other beautiful coins sold for in the Superior sale. But, it went for almost twice those prices, and the high bidder apparently was willing to go much higher in his bid, so he owns it and I'm happy he likes it.
Second, Sunnywood said that the new owner did not see any distracting hairlines. He did not say there weren't any hairlines, nor that that owner didn't see them. My observation that the coin had 3 hailines across the face was not an opinion. It was a fact. I know sometimes scatches on the holder can be mistaken for hairlines, or even die marks as well. I checked as carefully as I could, and I concluded the hairlines were on the coin. So, I assume the new owner at least by now has seen the hairlines but simply doesn't find them distracting, as I did.
The relationship of my comments above to the subject of this thread is that different people with experience in these matters apparently place very different importance on the same characteristic of given coin. For example, you could not see the hairlines on this coin unless you titled the coin just so, and perhaps the new owner (and the dealer who viewed the coin for him) discounts the importance of hairlines in those cases. Moreover, the graders at NGC could easily have missed those hairlines, or more likely bumped the coin a grade because of the undisputably spectacular colors. Thus, to me the coin is closer a technical MS65; perhaps the new owner and the dealer feel the coin is technically MS66 because that's what the holder says.
The 1882-o in queston here was a very beautiful and valuable coin, based on the pictures we've been shown. I think we'd all like to see a picture of the coin in its present state. Further, I'll be at the Baltimore show on Friday, and TBT has promised to have the coin to show me person. Of course, I did not see it pre NCS, so I can't make a very accurate comparison, but I should be able to determine whether I can detect that the coin doesn't look original, and then make a somewhat mor einformed judgment about whether this could likely account for the PCGS downgrade.
<<"Depends on whether it is a 64 or a 65. But as long as that coin is in a 64 holder, it isn't going anywhere near the prices mentioned. My whole basis for what I have been saying about this coin is presuming PCGS is grading it correctly as a 64. If it is a 65, that would be different.">>
Well if it was a common ol 85-O it wouldn't much matter if it was a 63 a64 a 65 or a 66, the eye appeal or colors would be the overriding factor. PCGS stands to lose a lot in grade guarantee if they overgrade this one. Maybe they feel that in the marketplace that the color will be a more important barometer of desirability than price will.
I think you and I are pretty much in total agreement. The interesting part of this discussion is that some people (for example UOFA, and presumably his customers) are really buying color and only color. For these buyers, the coin is merely a vehicle or canvas. I never really thought of it that way, because I always placed more emphasis on the underlying coin. But if you do the math, you quickly realize that there are buyers for whom the underlying coin is less important.
First, if we look at sheet vs. selling prices for common dates, we are talking about a $100 coin in MS65 or $280 in MS66 (and that's ask, not bid). Yet the 1882-S NGC MS66 from the Superior sale went for $2640. The buyer may have been thinking: $280 for the coin, plus $2320 for the color. In other words, the buyer was willing to pay eight times as much for the color component as he would likely be for the underlying coin. If that is true, then I can understand why the buyer may even have seen the hairlines and thought they were irrelevant. After all, the hairlines perhaps do nothing other than reduce the coin from an MS66 to an MS65. That reduces the "coin component" from $280 to $100, a reduciton of $180 in value. But the buyer was apparently spending $2300+ for the color, so the $180 probably didn't matter to him. Perhaps the hairlines weren't visually distracting enough to detract from his assessment of the independent value of the color. I must say, when I saw this coin, I didn't notice the hairlines, because I was too busy gawking at the toning.
Second, if dates mattered to all buyers, no 1880-S, 1881-S or 1882-S in PCGS MS65 or MS66 could ever sell for more than $1000. There are way too many of them !!! The supply (even with spectacular color) would greatly outweigh the demand. In order for these coins to realize strong money at auctions, there must be people buying more than one specimen of these common dates. Indeed, I was PM'd here last night by someone who says he owns thirteen 1881-S and eighteen 1882-S, all in PCGS, NGC and ICG holders. Therefore, there are people buying these coins regardless of the dates. So the underlying numismatic value is a secondary consideration for these buyers.
Personally, I do find the underlying coin to be relevant. I prefer coins that are well-struck, lustrous, and free from major distractions. I collect by date and mintmark, and in some series by die varieties as well (although I do not collect Morgan die varieties). For any particular coin, I would love to find a high-grade example with spectacular natural color, but I would not care to own multiple examples of the common dates no matter how wildly toned. Nor would I care to own a superbly wildly monster toned coin that has nasty bagmarks, scratches, reed marks, gouges, etc. And there are lots of those, particularly in the MS63/MS64 range. That is one of the many reasons why I start at MS65. But isn't it great that everyone has a different approach? That what makes it all interesting ...
I have been reading this thread from the very beginning. A very interesting read I must say. I am trying to put together a complete set of toned Morgans by date and mint mark. Not an easy project Imight add. Some of these dates just do not come with Monster colors. I do however try to buy the nicest toned dollars of the date I need , that I can find. To date I am 22 coins short of completing this collection. I expect it to take most of the rest of my lifetime to complete. It has taken me a long time to get to where I am.
Comments
Point taken. As a matter of fact, I can only speak to my own purchasing proclivities, and those of a couple of my friends who also collect toners. I wouldn't touch the coin in a 64 holder, simply because I do not buy any Morgan grading less than PCGS MS65. That is a choice that I have each made for my own reasons (which others may agree or disagree with as they choose). Therefore, the coin is worth approximately $0 to me in the MS64 holder. However, in the MS65 holder it might have been worth more than $1500 to me. So, using me as your market data, you are in fact right. But who knows what other buyers there may be out there.
(Yes, I "buy the coin, not the holder" but I only "buy the coin" if it ALSO is in an acceptable holder. Why not have my cake and eat it too ???)
In an NGC MS66* holder, I would have ignored the coin. That's another choice that I make from time to time (although my Sunnywood Collection of Cherrypicker Variety shield nickels is all NGC, as was my complete 1877 gold proof set). I hate crossover politics. Period. SO unless a coin is a pop 1 rarity, I DO care what holder it's in. However, a friend of mine who also collects these coins would have paid at least $5000 for the coin in an NGC MS66* holder. Go figure. Now I he has bought another PCGS MS65 for just under $2000, so he's no longer a buyer either.
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
A lot of the serious toned Morgan collectors don't buy coins grading 64 or lower. That is a big factor here, along with the fact that according to the greysheet, a white or neutrally toned 82-O goes for 57/62 in 64, and 600/660 in 65. That is the big question here, and as I have said many times, as a 64 it is not in my opinion worth $1500 or more.
Anyone heard from Deadhorse lately?
<< <i>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'm not quite sure where the line between obfuscation and lying is drawn, but you're getting pretty close. I joined with nobody on anything. I'll repeat it again, since you either missed it or are having a comprehension problem. I have no idea what the coin is worth now. Unlike you, though, I've actually seen it in person.
<< <i>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. >>
My position is really very simple, surprising that you're having such a difficult time grasping it. The coin sold for nearly $1500 when it was holdered as an MS65. It may, or may not be worth that now even in an MS64 holder - unless all one cares about is the grade on the label. Since you, and nobody else in this discussion - other than TBT - has seen the coin since NCS had it, there is no way to conclusively decide anything about value.
Is that simple enough for you to understand? I hope so, because I'm done chewing on this rancid meat.
Russ, NCNE
And I don't want to hear how it is a 65 in a 64 holder, just like every seller on eBay, "this 64 really should be in a 65 holder". The fact is it is in a 64 holder. Try going to your local coin shop with the best looking, undergraded 64 you can find, and see if you can even get 65 bluesheet money out of them.
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
Just enuff to hold my intrest and read it through to the end.... BUT I wish I had not...it leaves a bad taste in my mouth...
Like eating a can of cheap sardines that have been around way past their shelf life.
and they're cold.
I don't want nobody to shoot me in the foxhole."
Mary
Best Franklin Website
<< <i>And I don't want to hear how it is a 65 in a 64 holder, >>
It's a 65 in a 64 holder.
I just couldn't resist, the
bwahahahahahaha!
Or am I not entitled to my opinion?
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Purchased raw, graded MS65 first time thru at PCGS, conserved by NCS and upgraded to MS66* then cracked out and sent one time thru to PCGS and graded MS64
the first and only thing I'd say is "I have to see the coin".
Sure, you're entitled to your opinion. Just like those that are concluding PCGS downgraded the coin because of NCS are entitled to theirs. But I'd respect both those opinions a whole lot more if you'd have seen the coin!
That's a rather absolute statement of value for a coin that's been in three different holders...and that you haven't seen in person.
And this is my personal preference and opinion, I sold all my high dollar toned Morgans a few years ago, and now rarely deal with any worth more than $200.
So... you no longer deal in this arena but you are an expert on the values. Hmmm.
I have absolutely no idea what it's worth. But I do know that Greysheet bid is irrelevant. Quoting shocking multiples of Greysheet bid is simply using irrelevant statistics to try to make a point. Bid has nothing to do with a colored coin's value. Grade even is somewhat irrelevant to a colored coin's value. Color is personal preference and there are plenty of people that wouldn't think twice about dropping $1500 on an MS64 Morgan if they loved the color - especially one that comes with a PCGS MS65 insert and an NGC MS66* insert.
Here's a stunning thought - let's let the market decide what it's worth!
And because I don't buy them doesn't mean I don't look at them and know what they are going for.
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
<< <i>While I'm not a crackout artist >>
Apparently either was the current owner.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>Eric - If this coin showed up raw in a major auction, and assuming none of the bidders recognized it as THE coin, what do you think the coin would sell for? >>
Depends on whether it is a 64 or a 65. But as long as that coin is in a 64 holder, it isn't going anywhere near the prices mentioned. My whole basis for what I have been saying about this coin is presuming PCGS is grading it correctly as a 64. If it is a 65, that would be different.
This thread started in regards to TBT offering it on eBay as a 64, and I will tell you all again, sight unseen over eBay in a 64 holder, it ain't worth $1500. If it is truly a 65, either bust it out and sell it raw at auction, or try to get it back in the 65 holder.
If in a 65 or 66 holder, I would not pay more than the same $200 premium above grey sheet for those particular colors.
So I guess I agree with Eric!
Doug
P.S. This is opinion is certainly not a reflection of the seller or his pricing. I am fully aware many of my coins are priced on what many would call the high end as well.
Actually Doug, in my opinion this coin in a 64 holder should fetch somewhere between $500-800. In 65, what Russ got for it is about right. $250? Got any like it for that price? I'll buy all you have!
<< <i>Hey look! Someone new they can argue with!
Actually Doug, in my opinion this coin in a 64 holder should fetch somewhere between $500-800. In 65, what Russ got for it is about right. $250? Got any like it for that price? I'll buy all you have! >>
In my (newbie) opinion, those colors sell all day long all over ebay for $200 to $300 so have at 'em!
Doug
<< <i>Doug, what coins go for on eBay has no bearing on the real market. Truth be told, with the onslaught of photo manipulators on eBay, honest toned coins are impossible to sell there, and when put up with no reserve don't bring anywhere near what they are worth. I haven't put up any of my really good toned stuff on eBay for over a year, it has all been going to regional shows. >>
Eric, the scary part about that for me is that I have NEVER been to a coin show outside of my little rural southern state!.........eBay IS my market - eek!
Doug
also note the handle gemtone65.
also note that these fellows KNOW of what they speak.
the grade 65 signifies, to me, and apparently to others, the "gem" grade designation.
the seller may believe that the coin is worth only a fraction, more or less, from 64 to 65, but there are extremely knowledgable people basically saying that the difference from 64 to 65 is in fact 100% (i.e., those who do purchase this type of coin, at this type of markup will not even consider a coin that has not graded out as a gem).
i still contend that gemtone65's theory that it is reasonable to conclude, sight unseen, that conservation has had an effect on the grade of the coin is absolutely valid.
I have no doubt, also, that the coin could, and very well may, be submitted any number of times and return with different grades every time, since grades are merely opinions.
The important opinion, however, is the current grade of 64 and there are a lot of collectors who will not even look at the coin in it's current slab.
I do not agree with your assessment of this coin's value in either a 65 or a 66 holder. If we used the prices in your Ebay store as a guideline, this coin would be worth more than $200 premium over sheet. And if you would not pay more than that for an 1882-O with these colors in a 65 or 66 holder, I don't think you will be owning one anytime soon. As for MS64, it's not a grade I buy, so I can't offer any comment on the market pricing for that grade (but that doesn't mean the coin is totally worthless in a 64 holder !!!).
I certainly do not agree with your comment that "these coins sell all over ebay for $200." Most of the coins that sell on Ebay for $200 to $300 - although they may be called "Monster" and "Rainbow" - are neither. If you really sift through the Ebay auctions, weed out everything in illegitimate holders (NTC, etc), weed out all the coins that are lower grades, weed out all the coins that have modest color, weed out all the coins that are colored on the reverse, and not the obverse, there is precious little left. When you then weed out the most common dates, such as 1879-S, 1880-S, 1881-S, 1882-S, 1885-O, 1886 ... there is virtually nothing left at all.
If you are looking for better date PCGS MS65+ with vibrant multi-colored obverse toning, GOOD LUCK !!
CASE IN POINT: There is an 1888-O PCGS MS65 in the upcoming ANR Sale. Off the top of my head, I think that date is $350 bid in the sheet. The coin appears to have dramatic obverse color. It has already been bid up to $1650 with several bidders participating. Just watch this one go .... If the coin were an 1882-O, which sheets at $600 bid in MS65, I imagine the bid would be at least as high. However, if the coin were less than MS65, or not PCGS, or less dramatically colored, or not obverse-toned, or if the coin were an 1881-S or 1882-S, then the bids would be much lower. But you still might not get to buy the coin for $200 over bid.
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
<< <i>also note that these fellows KNOW of what they speak. >>
This is true and I agree. But even they don't agree on certain coins. Earlier in the thread, a coin they both viewed in person. Gemtone65 said the coins reverse was dull, and had hairlines on the obverse. Sunnywood thought the reverse was fine for the 66 grade and the current owner sees no hairlines. So while I respect both of their opinions and have had conversations with Gemtone.... I don't feel they are the ultimate authority on value and quality of toned coins out there. They both seen the same coin and saw different things on the coin. So if your point was that they know what they speak of and we don't.... I respectfully disagree.
Eye appeal is always in the eye of the beholder !! And quality is often subjective (if it weren't, the services would always be perfectly consistent). I won't claim to be an expert on anything, although I have been around the game enough to offer some sage advice now and again.
But, I am definitely human and I love a compliment as much as the next guy, so "Thanks Zenny !!!" LOL
My goodness I ought toget to sleep ... you know, I'm not even on the west coast ...
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
I do not agree with your assessment of this coin's value in either a 64 or a 65 holder. If we used the prices in your Ebay store as a guideline, this coin would be worth more than $200 premium over sheet. And if you would not pay more than that for an 1882-O with these colors in a 65 or 66 holder, I don't think you will be owning one anytime soon.
I certainly do not agree with your comment that "these coins sell all over ebay for $200." Most of the coins that sell on Ebay for $200 to $300 - although they may be called "Monster" and "Rainbow" - are neither. If you really sift through the Ebay auctions, weed out everything in illegitimate holders (NTC, etc), weed out all the coins that are lower grades, weed out all the coins that have modest color, weed out all the coins that are colored on the reverse, and not the obverse, there is precious little left. When you then weed out the most common dates, such as 1879-S, 1880-S, 1881-S, 1882-S, 1885-O, 1886 ... there is virtually nothing left at all.
CASE IN POINT: There is an 1888-O PCGS MS65 in the upcoming ANR Sale. Off the top of my head, I think that date is $350 bid in the sheet. The coin appears to have dramatic obverse color. It has already been bid up to $1650 with several bidders participating. Just watch this one go .... If the coin were an 1882-O, which sheets at $600 bid in MS65, I imagine the bid would be at least as high. However, if the coin were less than MS65, or not PCGS, or less dramatically colored, or not obverse-toned, or if the coin were an 1881-S or 1882-S, then the bids would be much lower. But you still might not get to buy the coin for $200 over bid.
Best,
Sunnywood >>
As I stated earlier, the colors to me are not worth $200 over sheet in 64, 65, 66 or 76 for that matter. I really don't care about the date. I don't buy dates, I buy color. So I do not want to own this coin or any other date that it looks like beyond the pricing I listed above.
"These coins" was a term that was obviously meant to imply similar colors (nice but not monster) in similar holders (big 2) and similar grades (common). In my eBay experience, they are a common place for $200 to $300. I spend 2 hours a day on eBay searching for color so I feel confident I am correct on this statement.
Finally, anyone with toned collecting experience understands the date and grade do not substantially affect the premium over sheet of a toned coin...the TONING does. Period.
Hence, my argument that I would only pay a $200 premium over sheet in any grade is consistent with my point of view stated earlier.
Doug
UOFA, you raise an interesting point. You say that you buy color, and you don't really care about the date. And I agree that premium above sheet is about color, although for some of us it is also about the difficulty of finding that particular date with nice color .... So here's a question for anyone out there:
Do you (or people you know) collect toned Morgans by date & mintmark, with the intention of building a partial or complete set ?? Or do you /they collect color, and don't care if they are all the same two or three dates?
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
<< <i>Thanks stman !!
UOFA, you raise an interesting point. You say that you buy color, and you don't really care about the date. And I agree that premium above sheet is about color, although for some of us it is also about the difficulty of finding that particular date with nice color .... So here's a question for anyone out there:
Do you (or people you know) collect toned Morgans by date & mintmark, with the intention of building a partial or complete set ?? Or do you /they collect color, and don't care if they are all the same two or three dates?
Best,
Sunnywood >>
You make an interesting point as well...folks that collect by date and mintmark could pay more for lesser colors, especially when the date and mintmark are relatively rare with such.
I have heard of a few trying to put together an entire collection of attractively toned Morgans but I can't image how one could complete such a challenge!
(Nice icon coin by the way!)
Doug
I believe we have a board member that's putting together a set of toned Morgans by date. If I'm correct I believe it is Tonedollars.
I have more interest in early halves and early dollars lately.
I love early type, and the halves are among the best, as they are the largest denomination that did not have a long hiatus in mintage. Thus, the series of halves from flowing hair through capped bust is quite a challenge !! It is fun to rotate through different collecting regimens. I have spent equal efforts at different times, for example, studying 1793 and 1794 large cents, and studying shield nickels. Go figure !! I had a complete date run of colorfully toned proof seated dollars from 1855 through 1873, but also obsessed over Indian $2.50 and Barber quarters. At another time, it was early silver type that I fancied, but at the same time I am plunking state quarters into a Whitman folder LOLOL. And who among us hasn't collected Morgans at one time or another !!!
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
<< <i>
<< <i>also note that these fellows KNOW of what they speak. >>
This is true and I agree. But even they don't agree on certain coins. .... I don't feel they are the ultimate authority on value and quality of toned coins out there... >>
stman
my point was only that there are a fair number of toned morgan specialists that will have nothing to do with coins that are graded less than 65 (you apparently may even be one of them), which is where this particular coin is at this point in time.
For many this coin is simply not even on the radar now....
Second, Sunnywood said that the new owner did not see any distracting hairlines. He did not say there weren't any hairlines, nor that that owner didn't see them. My observation that the coin had 3 hailines across the face was not an opinion. It was a fact. I know sometimes scatches on the holder can be mistaken for hairlines, or even die marks as well. I checked as carefully as I could, and I concluded the hairlines were on the coin. So, I assume the new owner at least by now has seen the hairlines but simply doesn't find them distracting, as I did.
The relationship of my comments above to the subject of this thread is that different people with experience in these matters apparently place very different importance on the same characteristic of given coin. For example, you could not see the hairlines on this coin unless you titled the coin just so, and perhaps the new owner (and the dealer who viewed the coin for him) discounts the importance of hairlines in those cases. Moreover, the graders at NGC could easily have missed those hairlines, or more likely bumped the coin a grade because of the undisputably spectacular colors. Thus, to me the coin is closer a technical MS65; perhaps the new owner and the dealer feel the coin is technically MS66 because that's what the holder says.
The 1882-o in queston here was a very beautiful and valuable coin, based on the pictures we've been shown. I think we'd all like to see a picture of the coin in its present state. Further, I'll be at the Baltimore show on Friday, and TBT has promised to have the coin to show me person. Of course, I did not see it pre NCS, so I can't make a very accurate comparison, but I should be able to determine whether I can detect that the coin doesn't look original, and then make a somewhat mor einformed judgment about whether this could likely account for the PCGS downgrade.
Well if it was a common ol 85-O it wouldn't much matter if it was a 63 a64 a 65 or a 66, the eye appeal or colors would be the overriding factor. PCGS stands to lose a lot in grade guarantee if they overgrade this one. Maybe they feel that in the marketplace that the color will be a more important barometer of desirability than price will.
I think you and I are pretty much in total agreement. The interesting part of this discussion is that some people (for example UOFA, and presumably his customers) are really buying color and only color. For these buyers, the coin is merely a vehicle or canvas. I never really thought of it that way, because I always placed more emphasis on the underlying coin. But if you do the math, you quickly realize that there are buyers for whom the underlying coin is less important.
First, if we look at sheet vs. selling prices for common dates, we are talking about a $100 coin in MS65 or $280 in MS66 (and that's ask, not bid). Yet the 1882-S NGC MS66 from the Superior sale went for $2640. The buyer may have been thinking: $280 for the coin, plus $2320 for the color. In other words, the buyer was willing to pay eight times as much for the color component as he would likely be for the underlying coin. If that is true, then I can understand why the buyer may even have seen the hairlines and thought they were irrelevant. After all, the hairlines perhaps do nothing other than reduce the coin from an MS66 to an MS65. That reduces the "coin component" from $280 to $100, a reduciton of $180 in value. But the buyer was apparently spending $2300+ for the color, so the $180 probably didn't matter to him. Perhaps the hairlines weren't visually distracting enough to detract from his assessment of the independent value of the color. I must say, when I saw this coin, I didn't notice the hairlines, because I was too busy gawking at the toning.
Second, if dates mattered to all buyers, no 1880-S, 1881-S or 1882-S in PCGS MS65 or MS66 could ever sell for more than $1000. There are way too many of them !!! The supply (even with spectacular color) would greatly outweigh the demand. In order for these coins to realize strong money at auctions, there must be people buying more than one specimen of these common dates. Indeed, I was PM'd here last night by someone who says he owns thirteen 1881-S and eighteen 1882-S, all in PCGS, NGC and ICG holders. Therefore, there are people buying these coins regardless of the dates. So the underlying numismatic value is a secondary consideration for these buyers.
Personally, I do find the underlying coin to be relevant. I prefer coins that are well-struck, lustrous, and free from major distractions. I collect by date and mintmark, and in some series by die varieties as well (although I do not collect Morgan die varieties). For any particular coin, I would love to find a high-grade example with spectacular natural color, but I would not care to own multiple examples of the common dates no matter how wildly toned. Nor would I care to own a superbly wildly monster toned coin that has nasty bagmarks, scratches, reed marks, gouges, etc. And there are lots of those, particularly in the MS63/MS64 range. That is one of the many reasons why I start at MS65. But isn't it great that everyone has a different approach? That what makes it all interesting ...
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
TD
Rainbow Stars
200!