Home› U.S. Coin Forum

would like advice on a morgan

arthurlegandarthurlegand Posts: 314
in U.S. Coin Forum
have a 1880/79 s morgan pcgs ms 64 but it looks pl 2 me but wanted 2 know if it was worth resubmittiong for possible pl listing not sure on price on on theses so would like adice and prices on 64 grades and possible 64 pls please ty

Comments

  • stinkinlincolnstinkinlincoln Posts: 2,733 ✭
    Not sure, you try PCGS price guide?


    If it does look PL, why not just resubmit it?


    Also, the run on sentences are not very reader friendly.image A period here and there goes along way.
  • arthurlegandarthurlegand Posts: 314
    ty for advice did not think about that ss
  • DorkGirlDorkGirl Posts: 9,994 ✭✭✭
    If you can post a pic, we'll tell you whether or not to resubmit it.image
    Becky
  • arthurlegandarthurlegand Posts: 314
    i would but scanner is down but very compareable 2 other the pls i have
  • cinman14cinman14 Posts: 2,489 ✭
    From what I have been told. As well as what I have read. The standards are getting tougher to get a
    PL and DMPL from PCGS....

    If it looks like others you have, resubmit it and see....

    There is about a 200 dollar difference on the price guide for a PL...
  • arthurlegandarthurlegand Posts: 314
    ty for advice going 2 try then
  • Cam40Cam40 Posts: 8,146 ✭
    sounds like it may be since you say it looks pretty much like your other pee ales.
    i wonder how they make that call anyway.
    do they use some sort of measuring device to determine reflectivity
    or is it just a judgment call...

    image
  • Kdog08Kdog08 Posts: 771
    PCGS may be tougher on the 80/79-S.....I have one that I thought for sure was PL on both sides, but they did not think so!
  • ObiwancanoliObiwancanoli Posts: 1,065 ✭✭✭


    << <i>i would but scanner is down but very compareable 2 other the pls i have >>



    Really... this is soooooo hard to read...can you clean it up a bit?
    UBERCOINER

    A Truth That's Told With Bad Intent
    Beats All The Lies You Can Invent
  • coindeucecoindeuce Posts: 13,474 ✭✭✭✭✭
    For an early date S Mint morgan to attain a PL designation, the coin would have to demonstrate sharp, uninterrupted (no haze) reflectivity of an object (fingertip) at a minimum of 4 inches from the plane of BOTH obverse and reverse fields. Otherwise, fuggedaboudit.

    "Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
    http://www.americanlegacycoins.com

  • BlindedByEgoBlindedByEgo Posts: 10,754 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>i would but scanner is down but very compareable 2 other the pls i have >>



    Scanners kinda suck at getting good coin images anyway, so it's probably OK if it is down. Photos would be a treat.

    We aren't really "texting" on this forum; using complete and grammatically correct sentences is held in high regard.

    I can easily forgive the shorthand, if you are dashing quick posts out between brain surgeries, or you are physically impaired such as you cannot type except with your left big toe...

    If time and ability ARE on your side, however, would you honor us by making your posts a bit more reader friendly?

    Just sayin'.

    TIA (Thanks in advance).

    Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1

  • tmoneyeaglestmoneyeagles Posts: 442
    PL = Prooflike
    NGC - reflectivity at 2-4 inches
    PCGS - reflectivity at 2 inches

    DMPL = Deep Mirror Prooflike
    NGC - reflectivity at 6-8 inches
    PCGS - reflectivity at 4-6 inches

    I think re submitting the coin is PCGS would be a good idea, before you do if you could get pictures of the coin, there is no sense in re submitting if it is no where close to there.
    Get your finger about 2 inches away, if it reflects good, then you should get the PL designation.
  • golfer72golfer72 Posts: 3,588
    "For an early date S Mint morgan to attain a PL designation, the coin would have to demonstrate sharp, uninterrupted (no haze) reflectivity of an object (fingertip) at a minimum of 4 inches from the plane of BOTH obverse and reverse fields. Otherwise, fuggedaboudit" .

    image Are you saying the PL criteria changes based on the date?
  • coindeucecoindeuce Posts: 13,474 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I'm not suggesting that the criteria change for certain dates or points of origin. I just recommended the four inch rule as a way to be absolutely certain of the clarity of the reflectivity. It is easier to overlook a small patch of haze in the fields with an object at two inches than it is with an object at four inches. For many dates in the Morgan series, the difference in true market valuation between a non PL and a PL example is minimal, but it has been my experience that PCGS is always very consistently cautious in their assignment of the PL designation. Note that my above comments here are not inclusive of the even more rigid standard for DMPL designation.

    "Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
    http://www.americanlegacycoins.com

  • leothelyonleothelyon Posts: 8,469 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>i would but scanner is down but very compareable 2 other the pls i have >>



    Scanners kinda suck at getting good coin images anyway, so it's probably OK if it is down. Photos would be a treat.

    We aren't really "texting" on this forum; using complete and grammatically correct sentences is held in high regard.

    I can easily forgive the shorthand, if you are dashing quick posts out between brain surgeries, or you are physically impaired such as you cannot type except with your left big toe...

    If time and ability ARE on your side, however, would you honor us by making your posts a bit more reader friendly?

    Just sayin'.

    TIA (Thanks in advance). >>



    B sure 2 keep postg Artherlegend, soem folks undies are a bit 2 tight around here. Text all U want.

    Cheers, Leo

    The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!

    My Jefferson Nickel Collection

  • DennisHDennisH Posts: 13,996 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>B sure 2 keep postg Artherlegend, soem folks undies are a bit 2 tight around here. Text all U want.
    Cheers, Leo >>

    Leo speaks for himself on this, but not me. Please don't continue the texting format.
    When in doubt, don't.
  • stinkinlincolnstinkinlincoln Posts: 2,733 ✭
    <<Leo speaks for himself on this, but not me. Please don't continue the texting format. >>


    image
  • gripgrip Posts: 9,962 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i><<Leo speaks for himself on this, but not me. Please don't continue the texting format. >>


    image >>



    Also agree...dont answer him till then!
  • arthurlegandarthurlegand Posts: 314
    sorry for the texting format did not mean to rub any one the wrong way but i did take the chance and supmitted it hopeing for the best
  • HighReliefHighRelief Posts: 3,675 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>sorry for the texting format did not mean to rub any one the wrong way but i did take the chance and supmitted it hopeing for the best >>



    Good luck with it image
  • DennisHDennisH Posts: 13,996 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Good luck with your results! Please let us know how it turns out.
    When in doubt, don't.

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 ...