Changes to Prooflike Morgan Set Registry

sweetwilliet

Kudos to PCGS, they have changed the Prooflike Morgan Set Registry to only allow pl/dmpl coins to be registered except for the really rare dates. This has knocked out a lot of coins out of a lot of sets, but the purpose of a pl set is to build a set of prooflikes, at least IMO. Opinions?

Stuart

Will: I agree with you and with PCGS' action today.

I'd also like to recommend that PCGS now reconsider designating deserving AU Morgans as either PL or DMPL, if they meet the reflectivity criteria for those designations.

dizzlecc

I'm glad to see the change and shake out some of those that had less than 10% prooflike.

I wish they would have communicated their actions. I looked at the listing and saw my set was updated and it wasn't by me.

Good start to the set Sweetwilliet

sweetwilliet

Dizzlecc,

Looks like our sets are going to be pretty similar once we finish. I have never seen an au pl, could you post a pic of your 1892 au53pl morgan? Like Stuart said above, maybe one day they will designate au coins as pl again.

Will

DennisH

The changes are long overdue. A PL/DMPL set should not allow non-PL/DMPLs except for years where those coins are virtually non-existent.

sonoranmonsoon

I like the changes also.

Yale68

I agree with Dennis. But PCGS still allows several non-PL coins that are somewhat obtainable (e.g. 79-s Rev 78, 21, 21-D, etc.), so, in my view, they did not go far enough.

In addition, at present they have an implementation error regarding the 1902-P. That date is supposedly NOT allowed in non-PL condition, but it still appears in several sets.

sweetwilliet

I just now noticed that you can add comments to other people's sets (anyone else know this, maybe I'm slow). Of course if you don't like what they say, you can delete it. I think it's pretty cool.