NEWP: GTG 1886-O Morgan, grade in first post.

Picked up a coin for the set today at Long Beach. 1886-O Morgan, welcome any thoughts and opinions.


Edit for grade:
The coin is graded PCGS 61PL. This is a very tough PL date with there being around 8 PCGS PL's and 10-12 PCGS DMPL's. At the show I put the coin next to a PCGS 61DMPL coin and they were night and day. This coin just has a clean look to it. As CalGold mentioned this is a tough MS coin and one that some consider tightly graded in MS. This date is not going to have a fantastic cameo PL like an 1880-S but in hand does have a good PL look to it.
This one lands in my set as the toughest coin I own along with my 1893-O PCGS 61PL.
Thanks for all your comments.


Edit for grade:
The coin is graded PCGS 61PL. This is a very tough PL date with there being around 8 PCGS PL's and 10-12 PCGS DMPL's. At the show I put the coin next to a PCGS 61DMPL coin and they were night and day. This coin just has a clean look to it. As CalGold mentioned this is a tough MS coin and one that some consider tightly graded in MS. This date is not going to have a fantastic cameo PL like an 1880-S but in hand does have a good PL look to it.
This one lands in my set as the toughest coin I own along with my 1893-O PCGS 61PL.
Thanks for all your comments.
http://www.bluccphotos.com" target="new">BluCC Photos Shows for onsite imaging: Nov Baltimore, FUN, Long Beach http://www.facebook.com/bluccphotos" target="new">BluCC on Facebook
0
Comments
65+ pl
sweet example
Click on this link to see my ebay listings.
This date is very tough to grade and it becomes even tougher from an image.
MS62
It is still a very attractive coin.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>Has anyone noticed the date for heaven's sake? A 65 is one of the mega rarities in the Morgan series... and that's non-PL. >>
good catch there dennis
not my series here
just grade guessing on a mediocre image to begin with...but
but looking up price guide and value
"YIKES"
another coin surely with it's own very tight grading standards
no way i'd still guess 65+ pl
ms63 due to value of above and beyond .....<<< such a strange part of this hobby too and yes i won't quit my day job
Seriously though, that's an 1886-O, a date with two examples known in MS65 and none in MS65PL. If that was an MS65PL I'd be almost as interested in finding a way into Blu's bank account as I would into Kate Upton's pants.
Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
There's alot of them with this date in AU holders tough to get ms anything on a 86-o
So it's either AU58 or MS62-63
32d,32s,34d,35d,36d,37,37d,37s,38,38s,39s.
Well, just Love coins, period.
Thought- I`d absolutely love to own that coin.
Opinion- That has to be one of the best examples for this date/mm out there
Nice one, WTCG.
Gotta be at least a 64 - nice coin! Congrats!!
Nice pick up Todd
Dozens of BST deals completed, including: kalshacon, cucamongacoin, blu62vette, natetrook, JGNumismatics, Coinshowman, DollarAfterDollar, timbuk3, jimdimmick & many more
This date comes as "super-slider" as much as any other in the Morgan series. With the luster and the clean fields, I
hate to say it, but I bet it is in an AU-58+ holder.
This is why some AU-58 dollars are worth more than some MS-62 examples.
Tough date in MS
Best, SH
5$ bills are WOW with the numbers - wanted:
02121809
04151865
Wanted - Flipper notes with the numbers 6-9 or 0-6-9 ON 1$ 2$ 5$ 10$ 20$
Wanted - 10$ Sereis 2013 - fancy Serial Numbers
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
DPOTD-3
'Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery'
CU #3245 B.N.A. #428
Don
<< <i>Looks great
PL MS-64 or 65
5$ bills are WOW with the numbers - wanted:
02121809
04151865
Wanted - Flipper notes with the numbers 6-9 or 0-6-9 ON 1$ 2$ 5$ 10$ 20$
Wanted - 10$ Sereis 2013 - fancy Serial Numbers
I'd go with 64 because that face is awfully clean and a good cameo. The cameo and semi-PL should over compensate for some field chatter. Very striking look in a tough date....and worth >$10K in MS64.
AU58. Nice look!
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
If it were a different date it would be graded more leniently and might be 63+ or 64. But an 86-O is going to be graded tightly, and deservedly so since if a coin is going to fetch a steep price is must look worthy of the price.
61 or 62 depends on how many scuffs/abrasions/spidery lines not seen in the photo are visible in the fields when rotated under a light, but still very nice notwithstanding that grade, and much much nicer than most Morgans at a like grade. Could be PL but also could be semi-PL. No real way to tell mirror depth from the photo
Nice find.
CG
<< <i>This date is almost nonexistent in gem, and PL and DMPL coins are very very scarce.
If it were a different date it would be graded more leniently and might be 63+ or 64. But an 86-O is going to be graded tightly, and deservedly so since if a coin is going to fetch a steep price is must look worthy of the price.
61 or 62 depends on how many scuffs/abrasions/spidery lines not seen in the photo are visible in the fields when rotated under a light, but still very nice notwithstanding that grade, and much much nicer than most Morgans at a like grade. Could be PL but also could be semi-PL. No real way to tell mirror depth from the photo
Nice find.
CG >>
This is a well thought out post. I will post the grade tomorrow. Feel free to post more guesses.
OINK
Lovely example of a tough date/mm.
Happy, humble, honored and proud recipient of the “You Suck” award 10/22/2014
<< <i>This date is almost nonexistent in gem, and PL and DMPL coins are very very scarce.
If it were a different date it would be graded more leniently and might be 63+ or 64. But an 86-O is going to be graded tightly, and deservedly so since if a coin is going to fetch a steep price is must look worthy of the price. >>
To me this is very sad that the grade is dependent on the date/rarity.
<< <i>
<< <i>This date is almost nonexistent in gem, and PL and DMPL coins are very very scarce.
If it were a different date it would be graded more leniently and might be 63+ or 64. But an 86-O is going to be graded tightly, and deservedly so since if a coin is going to fetch a steep price is must look worthy of the price. >>
To me this is very sad that the grade is dependent on the date/rarity. >>
I don't understand that either. Sure it'll be "almost nonexistent" if they take a 64 coin and grade it 62 because of the date. Sort of self-fulfilling, no?
The fact that all the guesses dropped by two grades after someone mentioned the significance of the date is telling.
Hoard the keys.
MS 62PL
Regardless, this 86-O is a nice coin.