Freshly entombed Morgan. Grade from the photo

Bochiman

Go ahead, I dare you. Did it grade, or did it GEN?
If it did grade, what did it grade?

The cert # is included so you can check and see (and, hopefully not ruin it for others if they want to guess).

Now...the thought is, IF it did grade, is the grade right or should it be sticker attempted or what?

Wolf359

I guessed, then I looked and all I can say is:

Bochiman

<< <i>I guessed, then I looked and all I can say is:

>>



Join the club, bro, join the club.
It was NGC. Same label. I submitted probably thinking what you thought.

morgansforever

Right out of the gate I noticed it's well struck and somewhat PL, at least based on the image.
I guessed 65 then verified it. Nice clean piece Bochiman.

Tookybandit

65PL was my guess

coindudeonebay

Easy 65.

joebb21

probably 66

BillJones

I'd say MS-65 although the luster appears to be subdued. Sometimes coins get knocked down for that. The subdued luster + the small mark on the cheek preclude a higher grade IMO.

LeeBone

Seriously?

AMRC

Photo makes it look better than that. That Gouge is pretty deep however.

Rampage

I don't think you will find an MS65 with a mark that bad on the jaw. That mark and the subdued luster would limit it to an MS64 at best, in my opinion.

AUandAG

66+

bob

OH MY!

Stuart

<< I don't think you will find an MS65 with a mark that bad on the jaw. That mark and the subdued luster would limit it to an MS64 at best, in my opinion. >>

I totally agree with Rampage's above quoted post. The contact mark on the jaw is a grade limiting factor, and the apparent subdued mint luster IMO suggests that a few microns of the coin's original surfaces may have been removed via dipping.

It's an attractive 1898 Morgan with what appear to be semi-prooflike fields with lightly frosted contrasting devices.

metalmeister

Too nice to come back ungraded. Has a 66 look from your pics.

ricko

Probably 64....without the hit on the cheek, 66...Cheers, RickO

illini420

<< <i>Probably 64....without the hit on the cheek, 66...Cheers, RickO >>



Sorta what I was thinking about it looking MS66 but for the large mark, I'll guess MS64+

Unknown

This content has been removed.

HighRelief

I would grade it MS65 from what I can see.

TwoSides2aCoin

Looks like a bit of it's previous life was stripped away. MS 65 ish. It's a great strike. My suggestion ? Crack it out and get it into a Taco Bell napkin in a southern facing window sill for about 5 years. Turning it over twice per year. Around the times we change the clocks. In time it will get some color back and look better.


You may call me ridiculous.

DennisH

Looks like a very strong 66.

grip

65 PL.

LanceNewmanOCC

.
a nice looking coin to be sure.

there is something off though, like it has been dipped to death or tampered with.

everything, especially liberty, is way too even.

having said all that, now it's time to go peek and see how far off or on i am.

ok, post-peek commentary.

that would be interesting to see in-hand. i did view some CC morgans quite a while back that looked like solid 67s or even above but the submitter(s) could only land a 65-66.

my commentary will end here as anything further would only be mildly educational and highly inflammatory.
.

SullivanNumismatics

High end '65 or a low end '66.

asheland

Wow! I actually guessed correctly!
It sure has a clean cheek for that grade...

bolivarshagnasty

Yeah, they totally missed it based on the TV's.

roadrunner

The mark on the jaw would be grade limiting for higher than 66. I see more chatter on the reverse though. The obv luster looks fuzzy and not quite right. Could be over-dipped, lightly wiped, etc. Deficient luster and wipe marks can drive the grade down pretty quick regardless of how clean the coin looks. I could see it grading MS64 because of those factors. Could have GENed as well.

fcloud

I guessed then looked to see it is what it is.

ModCrewman

I was at 66 with a possible plus.

I'd guess the jaw hit along with the hit on the point of her nose and the rim hit in the field in front of her chin were the big factors. I think it has a 65 reverse and 67 obverse (without the hits) IMHO.

I guess "without the hits" is the duh statement of the day.

LindeDad

Well it don't look like it should be AU something in that grade.

SullivanNumismatics

.

johnny9434

ms 64 +

johnny9434

double post. my apology.

Wabbit2313

I think it is graded properly. A couple dingers are hidden in the field with those beauty shots.

Trueview, grading, shipping, ouch!

DollarAfterDollar

Looks like a nice MS 65 + to me based upon the pictures.

Nice coin I'd say.

SkyMan

Looks MS65 to me...

Bochiman

<< <i>I think it is graded properly. A couple dingers are hidden in the field with those beauty shots.

Trueview, grading, shipping, ouch! >>




No. There are no "dingers hidden in the field". It really is pretty darn clean. The ding is seen on the chin. It is what it is. A couple of other, small, marks, are also visible on the reverse. They are not hidden by the Trueview.
The picture, as shown, really is what the coin looks like inhand.

Ouch? Nah. It went in as part of an expiring voucher. I needed to send something in. Trueview added $10 and shipping was spread amongst 7 other coins. This coin wasn't an "ouch". It is what it is.

Wabbit2313

The images does really show it nice. I wonder if the 66 guesses would guess the same based on what she looks like from the max image? No reason to send a common date white 64 in for a sticker in my opinion either.

BustHalfBrian

In my opinion, the reason it didn't get the grade that you expected can be summed up with one word: Luster (or lack thereof), an often overlooked aspect of grading. No matter how mark-free the coin is, if the luster is even slightly subdued, it won't grade gem.

This does not include toned coins. That's a whole different animal.

JJM

Id say 65 maybe 65+, but the Obv fields seem muted or cloudy compared to the Rev,
did they knock it down to a 64 ???

nice coin

GeorgeKellogg

I'm going to say MS65+.