Home› U.S. Coin Forum

Does this coin look MS 68?

davewang202davewang202 Posts: 246
in U.S. Coin Forum
Superior Galleries is running an auction, and one of the coins is an 1879s Rev 78 Morgan.

Supposedly "MS 68" and in PCGS holder.

auction link

Does this coin look MS 68?

imageimage

Then the descriptions section mentions this interesting tid bit.

"Reverse of 1878. PCGS graded Mint State 64".

PCGS MS grade 64, Superior Galleries grade MS68?

Typo?

Split grade 64/68

Comments

  • RussRuss Posts: 48,514 ✭✭✭
    I'm going to beat Stman and Dog97 to the punch. Nice fingerprint!

    Russ, NCNE
    eBay consignment sales | | Collectibles from Resco CCC
  • ddbirdddbird Posts: 3,168 ✭✭✭
    Why does it say only 64 below?

    <<Reverse of 1878. PCGS graded Mint State 64.>>
    image
    ">"    http://www.cashcrate.com/5663377"
  • DHeathDHeath Posts: 8,472 ✭✭✭
    The prints are in a terrible place. It looks like intentional thumbing, whether or not it is. image Obverse cheek, and center of the reverse.
    Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers
    and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
  • GonfunkoGonfunko Posts: 1,481 ✭✭✭
    No. It looks like MS65 max on a really good day.
  • byergobyergo Posts: 586 ✭
    That is a fugly 68! Feel sorry for whoever buys it if they pay 68 money.
    Buy/Sell/Trade Rainbow Morgans
  • prooflikeprooflike Posts: 3,879 ✭✭
    No it looks like a 65!
    image
  • cladkingcladking Posts: 28,649 ✭✭✭✭✭
    It looks like a blazing gem with some surface problems. If it were another date
    than one might be justified in emphasizing its gemmyness, but the '79-S comes nice.
    Tempus fugit.
  • davewang202davewang202 Posts: 246
    FWIW, I think it's just a typo. The coin looks no more than the MS64 grade that is listed in the descriptions section.

    What I can't quite figure out is that if what I suspect is true (coin is MS64 rather than MS68), why is it that no one at Superior has noticed.

    The minimum bid for the coin is listed as $32K, and the coin is valued between $75K and $100K (as listed on ebay).

    AFAIK, there is no 1879s Rev 78 Morgan at the MS 68 grade level.
  • dan1ecudan1ecu Posts: 1,573
    The 68 is a typo. Nice looking coin, though.

    Dan
    Dan McInnes

    mcinnes@mailclerk.ecok.edu">dmcinnes@mailclerk.ecok.edu
  • coinguy89coinguy89 Posts: 2,151
    If thats MS-68 someone would be a sucker buying it at that grade, I was thinking a MS-65 or MS-64 coin. I don't know if that black coloring on the reverse at 7 o' clock affects grade, but is defiently not appealing to me, not to mention the obvious fingerprint.
    Scott Hopkins
    -YN Currently Collecting & Researching Colonial World Coins, Especially Spanish Coins, With a Great Interest in WWII Militaria.

    My Ebay!
  • RussRuss Posts: 48,514 ✭✭✭


    << <i>AFAIK, there is no 1879s Rev 78 Morgan at the MS 68 grade level. >>



    According to the pop report, there aren't even any at MS67. Highest grade listed is MS66.

    Russ, NCNE
    eBay consignment sales | | Collectibles from Resco CCC
  • davewang202davewang202 Posts: 246
    Yes, the finest 1879s Rev 78 Morgan known is the Eliasberg specimen. A fairly nice coin that Northeast Numismatics is selling for $40K. That one is a rarer VAM 51, and didn't come from the Redfield Hoard. There are two 1879s Rev 78 Morgans at the MS 66 level. I saw one at the March Baltimore auction It was put up for auction, minimum bid was $25K and it didn't sell.

    This "MS 68" thing was out of the left field... I was hoping that it was a fresh coin that just came on the market, perhaps so recently graded and hadn't made it in the population.... Apparently not.

  • MyqqyMyqqy Posts: 9,777 ✭
    The prints are in a terrible place. It looks like intentional thumbing, whether or not it is

    That's the first thought that crossed my mind- which leads me to wonder- how does one differentiate between "accidental" thumbing, and "intentional" thumbing? Just a judgement call, but I guess if a print is visible, then it would be considered accidental....
    image
    My style is impetuous, my defense is impregnable !
  • eagle7eagle7 Posts: 1,441
    They plainly state that the coin is a PCGS MS64. It is just inserted in the description in a confusing manner, made even more so by the ms68 comment. It makes one think that there is a deliberate attempt to gain more money for the coin in auction, although it is confusing enough to be deniable. JMHO.
    In an insane society, a sane person will appear to be insane.
  • davewang202davewang202 Posts: 246


    << <i>They plainly state that the coin is a PCGS MS64. It is just inserted in the description in a confusing manner, made even more so by the ms68 comment. It makes one think that there is a deliberate attempt to gain more money for the coin in auction, although it is confusing enough to be deniable. JMHO. >>



    This isn't just a case of "minor confusion" or minor obfuscation in an effort to gain more bids.

    The coin goes to a very steep ramp from AU all the way up to MS 66, with MS 60 being about $70 to MS63 trading around $350~400, MS 64 around $1K, MS 66's are supposedly around $40K, although the last time one came up for auction, there was no nibble at $25K.

    This same coin is linked through ebay's live auction, and the description there clearly state MS68, not just in the title, but in the description as well.

    Ebay Auction

    Moreover, the starting bid is $32K, with expected bid range from $50K to $75K.

    In looking at the Ebay site, and not grading off of the pictures, then there's no reason to believe that this coin isn't a PCGS MS68 as stated.

    There's no mention of the MS 64 grade on eBay live auction. I had to dig to find the little note about "MS64" on Superior's web site.
  • magikbillymagikbilly Posts: 6,780 ✭
    Hi,
    I too thought it looked thumbed. The cheek scrape, the prints, spot on the reverse..MS64 at best. Way too much going on for 68 IMHO.

    Best,
    Billy
  • GregTheGreatGregTheGreat Posts: 649


    << <i>Hi,
    I too thought it looked thumbed. The cheek scrape, the prints, spot on the reverse..MS64 at best. Way too much going on for 68 IMHO.

    Best,
    Billy >>



    I concur... 64 at best.... I would prolly say 63 but 68 is a laugh..... If PCGS said thats a 68 then they should call them selves ANACS wanna-bes.
    GOD BLESS AMERICA!

    E-mail GRU Coins
  • earlwbollingerearlwbollinger Posts: 1,304
    Looks MS64 to me.
    image
  • darktonedarktone Posts: 8,437 ✭✭✭
    I agree thumbed and now it shows the signs of it being done.
  • BAJJERFANBAJJERFAN Posts: 31,082 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Anyone think to use the ask the seller a question? If anyone thinks its a deliberate attempt to sucker more $$$ out of a buyer or mislead a buyer report it to eBay.
    theknowitalltroll;
  • 19Lyds19Lyds Posts: 26,490 ✭✭✭✭
    A little off topic but I was just wondering if anybody has ever tried to figure out exactly who the mysterious PCGS fingerprints belong to? After all, the government agencies do keep records and it might be nice to find the grading culprit for at least some historical perspective. Just imagine, "And in ought four, this Morgan was graded by (fill in the name) who actually touched the coin while pressing it into the slab!"

    Just an early morning thought.......... back to sleep now...
    I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.



    The name is LEE!
  • eagle7eagle7 Posts: 1,441
    Well, only one thing is sure about this whole affair. When the bidding stops for this misrepresented "ms68" in a PCGS MS64 holder, the person who bids whatever bid above 32K and then pays and recieves this coin in the mail, is going to be pretty mad when they open up the box and look at it. Wow! Im just glad it wont be me! image
    In an insane society, a sane person will appear to be insane.
  • davewang202davewang202 Posts: 246
    I don't think anyone would bid for the coin at that price level, and even if someone was foolish enough to bid $32k+ for this coin sight unseen, I'd imagine that they wouldn't have to keep it, since the coin wouldn't arrive in a "PCGS MS68" holder as described.

    OTOH, Superior is conducting an auction for an 1879s Third reverse Morgan that looks a lot more like MS68 as it is described to be.

    link to Superior Galleries

    imageimage

    Perhaps there's some confusion in looking at the two different 1879s Morgans, and some how it was transcribed that both coins are MS68.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Format
SpoilerCodeQuote
Heading 2Heading 1
Emoji
:):D:(;):/:o:s:p:'(:|B):#:*<3o:)>:)
Url
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Home • U.S. Coin ForumComment As ...