To me, I think it is a nice coin. Not a moose, due to the toning. That said, technical merits are it is a shocker of a coin and high grade.
I am with the crowd that shakes their head at people TRYING to accurately grade from a picture as if they had it inhand. Not the same at all and should be admitted as such. Take the photo down to real size. Compare it to the pics of coins you have that are graded at the grade you think it is. STOP trying to justify your downgrading of a coin you haven't seen in person against those who have.
For those whining that the "pedigree" lends a point.....sheesh. Come on now. PCGS has it's butt on the line if this ended up being a grade guarantee at some point. I don't think they would compromise against that. May, or may not, have happened in the past, but I don't think it is an issue. I would bet that HRH and/or DW have seen the coin, before it was finished, and agreed with all 3 graders/finalizers/etc on the grade due to the value.
So, if you don't agree with the grading, you must have a lot of problem with other coins they have slabbed......
<< <i>For those whining that the "pedigree" lends a point.....sheesh. Come on now. >>
Seems that many Eliasberg coins are graded at levels higher than indicated in the sale catalog. Stranger things have happened. >>
For years upon years, the auction houses would tend to undergrade the common date coins so they could point to the price realized and say they brought multiples of book value.
I like the dollar, but not the price. I see nothing wrong with the grade assigned. These threads take a course based on the way they are worded and then split into 2 camps depending on who replies first. The more a coin is worth the more the camps split.
Mark NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!! working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
<< <i>For those whining that the "pedigree" lends a point.....sheesh. Come on now. >>
Seems that many Eliasberg coins are graded at levels higher than indicated in the sale catalog. Stranger things have happened. >>
For years upon years, the auction houses would tend to undergrade the common date coins so they could point to the price realized and say they brought multiples of book value. >>
Is that true of 1804 dollars as well?
Edit to add: The Stickney/Eliasberg 1804 was cataloged as PR63. Resides today in a PCGS PR65 holder.
In my opinion, a Morgan in MS68+ or higher shouldn't be able to be picked apart as much as the coin in the OP has been in this thread (spot on neck, marks near UNUM, weak strike, reeding hits on reverse, etc.), even from a blown-up photo...
For this kind of money, I'd much rather own the NGC MS69 Morgan that's on eBay. Much cleaner looking coin from the photos and much more appealing overall to me. I had the coin consigned with me and in my case for sale at one of the recent Long Beach shows and nearly all who viewed that MS69 were wowed by it and the minor imperfections are very minor as you would expect from a Morgan at the very top of the grading scale. I tried to have that NGC MS69 crossed to PCGS at one time and they obviously did not. I knew it was a long shot as it's tough to grade through the holder, especially since it was in an older NGC holder at the time where you couldn't fully see the rims. That said, I do wish the coin was in the grading room the same day as this MS68+
<< <i>For those whining that the "pedigree" lends a point.....sheesh. Come on now. >>
Seems that many Eliasberg coins are graded at levels higher than indicated in the sale catalog. Stranger things have happened. >>
A fair point. But, I would say at least 1/2 of that goes to the auction house being very strict in their grading of those coins. I'll be the first to admit that the Pittman and Eliasberg coins got a lot of grade bumps because of where/who they came from. One can never assume a sale of raw coins are the accurate grades. In fact in the early days of slabdom when most auction houses were still selling mostly raw coins, their assigned grades were often way off. There were a lot of 2 point grade bumps vs. catalog in Eliasberg. And that wasn't due to the auction house being accurate in their grades.
<< <i>I like the dollar, but not the price. I see nothing wrong with the grade assigned. These threads take a course based on the way they are worded and then split into 2 camps depending on who replies first. The more a coin is worth the more the camps split. >>
Coins like this are always going to be lightning rods. Two camps are better than one or none.
The criticism about grading from photos grinds me.
OF COURSE it's not ideal but it's all we've got to work with AND it's what we do here.
It's a healthy debate and I enjoy it immensely.
"If I say something in the woods and my wife isn't there to hear it.....am I still wrong?"
<< <i>In my opinion, a Morgan in MS68+ or higher shouldn't be able to be picked apart as much as the coin in the OP has been in this thread (spot on neck, marks near UNUM, weak strike, reeding hits on reverse, etc.), even from a blown-up photo...
For this kind of money, I'd much rather own the NGC MS69 Morgan that's on eBay. Much cleaner looking coin from the photos and much more appealing overall to me. I had the coin consigned with me and in my case for sale at one of the recent Long Beach shows and nearly all who viewed that MS69 were wowed by it and the minor imperfections are very minor as you would expect from a Morgan at the very top of the grading scale. I tried to have that NGC MS69 crossed to PCGS at one time and they obviously did not. I knew it was a long shot as it's tough to grade through the holder, especially since it was in an older NGC holder at the time where you couldn't fully see the rims. That said, I do wish the coin was in the grading room the same day as this MS68+ >>
<< <i>In my opinion, a Morgan in MS68+ or higher shouldn't be able to be picked apart as much as the coin in the OP has been in this thread (spot on neck, marks near UNUM, weak strike, reeding hits on reverse, etc.), even from a blown-up photo...
For this kind of money, I'd much rather own the NGC MS69 Morgan that's on eBay. Much cleaner looking coin from the photos and much more appealing overall to me. I had the coin consigned with me and in my case for sale at one of the recent Long Beach shows and nearly all who viewed that MS69 were wowed by it and the minor imperfections are very minor as you would expect from a Morgan at the very top of the grading scale. I tried to have that NGC MS69 crossed to PCGS at one time and they obviously did not. I knew it was a long shot as it's tough to grade through the holder, especially since it was in an older NGC holder at the time where you couldn't fully see the rims. That said, I do wish the coin was in the grading room the same day as this MS68+ >>
Conveniently hawked/ shilled on behalf of your buddy you know who...
Follow me on Twitter @wtcgroup Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
For all those that say this coin is not 68+ let's see your pictures of better ones. How many coin of this date and mint mark can even be compared to this super gem???
I thought this was 68 all day long. The + from a photo - well,...it doesn't look like it shouldn't get one! Really - this coin is awesome clean and I love the color and pattern. Those gentle teal and aqua tones with touches of flake and russet, the striated Rev. tone as well just scream virgin. Maybe not the strongest strike but well compensated in terms of...simple lushness. I have seen very few with this sort of glow and this presence - superb gem territory.
<< <i>For all those that say this coin is not 68+ let's see your pictures of better ones. How many coin of this date and mint mark can even be compared to this super gem??? >>
<< <i>For all those that say this coin is not 68+ let's see your pictures of better ones. How many coin of this date and mint mark can even be compared to this super gem??? >>
>>
"...simple lushness. I have seen very few with this sort of glow and this presence - superb gem territory." That is a great example of that lush glow...
Here is an MS68 Trade Dollar ...one of three for the series. Note the mark or two in the reverse field and the reeding mark on Liberty's wrist. These are big, heavy coins and even MS68s have marks. The 1880-S that I pictured above is essentially perfect to the naked eye - I can only imagine that the small cut on the eagle's breast is what's keeping it from 69.
<<<< For all those that say this coin is not 68+ let's see your pictures of better ones. How many coin of this date and mint mark can even be compared to this super gem??? >>
>>
Really somewhat unfair to post an undergraded MS69 to make your point....... The 1880-S is far superior to the 1885-CC. Wouldn't it be fun to submit both for reconsideration together?
<< <i><<<< For all those that say this coin is not 68+ let's see your pictures of better ones. How many coin of this date and mint mark can even be compared to this super gem??? >>
>>
Really somewhat unfair to post an undergraded MS69 to make your point....... The 1880-S is far superior to the 1885-CC. Wouldn't it be fun to submit both for reconsideration together? >>
Exactly, if that 85-CC is accurately graded at 68+, then from the photos it looks like that 80-S is a 71 minimum
This has been a very informative thread for someone who doesn't collect MS68+ morgans. I would love to see a thread that outlines the grading differences for an MS60 to 68 Morgan including number of hits, strike luster etc....... It is honestly something I am not very good at. I can look at pictures all day long but still can't see the difference. That would be a great and informative thread for someone like me. Not just pictures, but an explanation of why each coin is graded one point higher in your opinion.
For example, I have looked at PCGS photo grade on its website. This is a GREAT service but it doesn't explain the difference between grades. I have also bought all the grading books but I still don't think they do a very good job explaining the intricacies and differences on mint state morgan dollars. Is anyone up to the challenge?
P.S. I know I should go to the ANA summer seminar for grading but it is on my bucket list
<< <i>. I would love to see a thread that outlines the grading differences for an MS60 to 68 Morgan including number of hits, strike luster etc....... It is honestly something I am not very good at. >>
Early in the game, I put together a grading set of Morgans MS60 to 67 in PCGS holders. Not perfect of course, but very helpful.
The pluses though are a fine split which other numismatists can probably better appreciate.
<< I would love to see a thread that outlines the grading differences for an MS60 to 68 Morgan including number of hits>>
The ANA Grading Standards, page 31 describe a PR68 as follows:
"Has an attractive sharp strike, and full mirror (or other style Proof) surface for the variety, with no more than four light scattered contact marks or flaws. No hairlines or scuff marks show. Eye appeal is exceptional. If copper.....n/a. Contact Marks: 3 or 4 miniscule None in focal areas. Hairlines: None visible Fields: Attractive. Fully original. Appeal: Exceptional."
PR69 same as above but only one or two miniscule contact marks, none in prime focal areas.
PCGS and NGC criteria may differ somewhat based upon previously graded specimens, perhaps.
So, graders, draw your own conclusions. Actual TPG grade will be market acceptable, and the market for these coins is very small. TDN is the market, so I trust his opinion.
<< <i>. I would love to see a thread that outlines the grading differences for an MS60 to 68 Morgan including number of hits, strike luster etc....... It is honestly something I am not very good at. >>
Early in the game, I put together a grading set of Morgans MS60 to 67 in PCGS holders. Not perfect of course, but very helpful.
The pluses though are a fine split which other numismatists can probably better appreciate. >>
<< <i>. I would love to see a thread that outlines the grading differences for an MS60 to 68 Morgan including number of hits, strike luster etc....... It is honestly something I am not very good at. >>
Early in the game, I put together a grading set of Morgans MS60 to 67 in PCGS holders. Not perfect of course, but very helpful.
The pluses though are a fine split which other numismatists can probably better appreciate. >>
<< <i> Paul, with all due respect, I quickly counted at least 15 marks on the obverse and reverse combined. …..These are just the most visible marks. >>
Please allow me to fix that last sentence for you. Here you go:
<< <i>These are just the most visible marks when the image is blown up to the size of a dinner plate >>
.
You are grading under a microscope. There are only two marks on the coin for grading purposes: the complex mark on the obverse below the M in UNUM and the reeding mark below the wing on the reverse. Still, I can understand how some might be shy to call it a 68+ in light of those marks.
The toning may not be everybody’s cup of tea, not everyone may agree with the grade, and some might not see the value in the grade compared to a 67 but grading is not based on personal preferences.
What I find interesting is that the coin went from being the only PCGS 68 to being a 68+. So when given another shot PCGS upgraded it.
<< <i> You'd think after seeing 20,000 or so 85-cc's over the years that PCGS would be quite capable of determining what single coin was heads and tails better than all the rest. JA didn't disagree either. >>
It was graded a long time ago. It's the Highfill book plate coin/'World's Finest' Tour coin. Original cert # 6271763 >>
Not much difference. After 20,000 coins they still haven't graded one higher than this one. Sort of suggests that they still think this is the best one and standard bearer for the date/mint. And as mentioned above, even plused it when seen in recent times. They didn't have to do that. They could have certainly downgraded it if they felt it was no longer worthy of a 68 grade. And achieving a 68 back in the early days would be even more astounding as very few better date Morgans ever got above a 67 grade.
<< <i>If it were ungraded in the GSA holder and walked through the FUN show, doubtful that any dealer in the house would offer more than $3000. >>
Serious? So this coin is worth less than GSA 66 wholesale? This thread is getting out of control. >>
You think dealers would freely pay in the mid 5 figure range for this coin, raw? Perhaps it is the valuations on perceived pop tops that is getting out of control.
<< <i>If it were ungraded in the GSA holder and walked through the FUN show, doubtful that any dealer in the house would offer more than $3000. >>
Serious? So this coin is worth less than GSA 66 wholesale? This thread is getting out of control. >>
You think dealers would freely pay in the mid 5 figure range for this coin, raw? Perhaps it is the valuations on perceived pop tops that is getting out of control. >>
The dealers that know their *%#* will pay up for a coin like this but most dealers don't really know what stuff is worth unless it is already in a pcgs slab then they want to offer you two grades below what the gray sheet is- another words if you don't know who to take it to you won't get a good offer.
<< <i>If it were ungraded in the GSA holder and walked through the FUN show, doubtful that any dealer in the house would offer more than $3000. >>
Serious? So this coin is worth less than GSA 66 wholesale? This thread is getting out of control. >>
You think dealers would freely pay in the mid 5 figure range for this coin, raw? Perhaps it is the valuations on perceived pop tops that is getting out of control. >>
Who said mid five figures? You said $3000 was doubtful. I was just responding to that statement being off the mark.
<< <i>If it were ungraded in the GSA holder and walked through the FUN show, doubtful that any dealer in the house would offer more than $3000. >>
If if if if. It's all IFs.
How many coins, that aren't rare and are really only condition rarity coins of non-key coins, do you think would go for $3000+ raw? Seriously, how many? I think you know better than you are letting on and you are just upping your post count with more BS about this.
I wouldn't be a buyer of this coin, as I don't play in the top pops and their pricing, but I also am not going to say that the professional graders, who have seen it in hand and aren't using a HUGE picture to grade from, are off base IN THEIR PROFESSIONAL OPINIONs.
Lotta backseat drivers on this one, with some of the usual characters.
<< <i>All I have to say is the coin is very clean looking. I'm looking at this on a 40inch monitor and well I think its got the look! >>
I agree with you. What's the real issue, anyway? For what would appear to be most of the posters in this thread, the coin would at least be a 67. I think most would agree that it probably doesn't belong in a 69 holder. What's left? 67, 67+, 68 and 68+. If you owned the coin in the original GSA holder, cracked it out and it came back as anything less than 68+, wouldn't you at least try to get it upgraded? The fact that there is a huge $ difference at these levels is just a factor for this date/mm. It is what it is. Just look at some of the registry sets- to me this coin has the look of a coin that would fit in some of the better moose sets.
That said, if I owned it I'd give it a dip.
Collector since adolescent days in the early 1960's. Mostly inactive now, but I enjoy coin periodicals and books and coin shows as health permits.
Yes PCGS could downgrade this coin if resubmitted in the holder. That's how downgrades occur. PCGS "owns" that holder and grading insert. If they no longer agree they will downgrade, even if the owner disagrees. They would get the coin back downgraded + compensation for the grade change. That's how downgrades work. It doesn't matter what the submitter wants. It's PCGS's job to police their product and rectify mistakes.
In the old days of raw coins something like this would start its journey being sold as MS63 or MS64 but some one who knew very little. It would be flipped from dealer to dealer boosting the grade and price at each step of the way. 65. 65+ 66 66+ and finally superb gem 67. No doubt in my mind that in the pre-1986 market this coin would have traded for superb gem money after a number of smarter dealers moved it back and forth between them. If the coin showed up raw in a GSA holder today? I suspect it would end up bringing some type of MS67 money w/o being slabbed. These days, most dealers and collectors know it's to their advantage to submit coins to max their price. My local dealer would have bought this coin as a MS64-MS66 from the public and then submitted it figuring it would come back a higher slabbed grade than they bought it for. If the coin were placed in a prominent auction in the GSA holder and raw, it would have fetched strong-strong 67 money with the bidder and under-bidder being guys who figured it was a good 68 candidate. No doubt most people would view this coin as a 65-67. But the TPG's and top dealer graders in the world are not "most people." TPG grading is not a democracy, it's a republic where your representatives at the grading service determine the grades for us.
Comments
That said, technical merits are it is a shocker of a coin and high grade.
I am with the crowd that shakes their head at people TRYING to accurately grade from a picture as if they had it inhand. Not the same at all and should be admitted as such. Take the photo down to real size. Compare it to the pics of coins you have that are graded at the grade you think it is. STOP trying to justify your downgrading of a coin you haven't seen in person against those who have.
For those whining that the "pedigree" lends a point.....sheesh. Come on now. PCGS has it's butt on the line if this ended up being a grade guarantee at some point. I don't think they would compromise against that. May, or may not, have happened in the past, but I don't think it is an issue. I would bet that HRH and/or DW have seen the coin, before it was finished, and agreed with all 3 graders/finalizers/etc on the grade due to the value.
So, if you don't agree with the grading, you must have a lot of problem with other coins they have slabbed......
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
<< <i>For those whining that the "pedigree" lends a point.....sheesh. Come on now. >>
Seems that many Eliasberg coins are graded at levels higher than indicated in the sale catalog. Stranger things have happened.
<< <i>
<< <i>For those whining that the "pedigree" lends a point.....sheesh. Come on now. >>
Seems that many Eliasberg coins are graded at levels higher than indicated in the sale catalog. Stranger things have happened. >>
For years upon years, the auction houses would tend to undergrade the common date coins so they could point to the price realized and say they brought multiples of book value.
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>For those whining that the "pedigree" lends a point.....sheesh. Come on now. >>
Seems that many Eliasberg coins are graded at levels higher than indicated in the sale catalog. Stranger things have happened. >>
For years upon years, the auction houses would tend to undergrade the common date coins so they could point to the price realized and say they brought multiples of book value. >>
Is that true of 1804 dollars as well?
Edit to add: The Stickney/Eliasberg 1804 was cataloged as PR63. Resides today in a PCGS PR65 holder.
For this kind of money, I'd much rather own the NGC MS69 Morgan that's on eBay. Much cleaner looking coin from the photos and much more appealing overall to me. I had the coin consigned with me and in my case for sale at one of the recent Long Beach shows and nearly all who viewed that MS69 were wowed by it and the minor imperfections are very minor as you would expect from a Morgan at the very top of the grading scale. I tried to have that NGC MS69 crossed to PCGS at one time and they obviously did not. I knew it was a long shot as it's tough to grade through the holder, especially since it was in an older NGC holder at the time where you couldn't fully see the rims. That said, I do wish the coin was in the grading room the same day as this MS68+
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 700
<< <i>
<< <i>For those whining that the "pedigree" lends a point.....sheesh. Come on now. >>
Seems that many Eliasberg coins are graded at levels higher than indicated in the sale catalog. Stranger things have happened. >>
A fair point. But, I would say at least 1/2 of that goes to the auction house being very strict in their grading of those coins. I'll be the first to admit that the Pittman and Eliasberg coins got a lot of grade bumps because of
where/who they came from. One can never assume a sale of raw coins are the accurate grades. In fact in the early days of slabdom when most auction houses were still selling mostly raw coins, their assigned grades were
often way off. There were a lot of 2 point grade bumps vs. catalog in Eliasberg. And that wasn't due to the auction house being accurate in their grades.
<< <i>I like the dollar, but not the price. I see nothing wrong with the grade assigned. These threads take a course based on the way they are worded and then split into 2 camps depending on who replies first. The more a coin is worth the more the camps split. >>
Coins like this are always going to be lightning rods. Two camps are better than one or none.
The criticism about grading from photos grinds me.
OF COURSE it's not ideal but it's all we've got to work with AND it's what we do here.
It's a healthy debate and I enjoy it immensely.
"If I say something in the woods and my wife isn't there to hear it.....am I still wrong?"
My Washington Quarter Registry set...in progress
<< <i>In my opinion, a Morgan in MS68+ or higher shouldn't be able to be picked apart as much as the coin in the OP has been in this thread (spot on neck, marks near UNUM, weak strike, reeding hits on reverse, etc.), even from a blown-up photo...
For this kind of money, I'd much rather own the NGC MS69 Morgan that's on eBay. Much cleaner looking coin from the photos and much more appealing overall to me. I had the coin consigned with me and in my case for sale at one of the recent Long Beach shows and nearly all who viewed that MS69 were wowed by it and the minor imperfections are very minor as you would expect from a Morgan at the very top of the grading scale. I tried to have that NGC MS69 crossed to PCGS at one time and they obviously did not. I knew it was a long shot as it's tough to grade through the holder, especially since it was in an older NGC holder at the time where you couldn't fully see the rims. That said, I do wish the coin was in the grading room the same day as this MS68+
+1
<< <i>In my opinion, a Morgan in MS68+ or higher shouldn't be able to be picked apart as much as the coin in the OP has been in this thread (spot on neck, marks near UNUM, weak strike, reeding hits on reverse, etc.), even from a blown-up photo...
For this kind of money, I'd much rather own the NGC MS69 Morgan that's on eBay. Much cleaner looking coin from the photos and much more appealing overall to me. I had the coin consigned with me and in my case for sale at one of the recent Long Beach shows and nearly all who viewed that MS69 were wowed by it and the minor imperfections are very minor as you would expect from a Morgan at the very top of the grading scale. I tried to have that NGC MS69 crossed to PCGS at one time and they obviously did not. I knew it was a long shot as it's tough to grade through the holder, especially since it was in an older NGC holder at the time where you couldn't fully see the rims. That said, I do wish the coin was in the grading room the same day as this MS68+
Conveniently hawked/ shilled on behalf of your buddy you know who...
Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
Nevertheless thanks for posting as I'm now craving pea soup while watching the Exorcist with Linda Blair
Eric
<< <i>For all those that say this coin is not 68+ let's see your pictures of better ones. How many coin of this date and mint mark can even be compared to this super gem??? >>
"If I say something in the woods and my wife isn't there to hear it.....am I still wrong?"
My Washington Quarter Registry set...in progress
<< <i>
<< <i>For all those that say this coin is not 68+ let's see your pictures of better ones. How many coin of this date and mint mark can even be compared to this super gem??? >>
"...simple lushness. I have seen very few with this sort of glow and this presence - superb gem territory."
That is a great example of that lush glow...
Eric
>>
Really somewhat unfair to post an undergraded MS69 to make your point....... The 1880-S is far superior to the 1885-CC. Wouldn't it be fun to submit both for reconsideration together?
<< <i><<<< For all those that say this coin is not 68+ let's see your pictures of better ones. How many coin of this date and mint mark can even be compared to this super gem??? >>
>>
Really somewhat unfair to post an undergraded MS69 to make your point....... The 1880-S is far superior to the 1885-CC. Wouldn't it be fun to submit both for reconsideration together? >>
Exactly, if that 85-CC is accurately graded at 68+, then from the photos it looks like that 80-S is a 71 minimum
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 700
For example, I have looked at PCGS photo grade on its website. This is a GREAT service but it doesn't explain the difference between grades. I have also bought all the grading books but I still don't think they do a very good job explaining the intricacies and differences on mint state morgan dollars. Is anyone up to the challenge?
P.S. I know I should go to the ANA summer seminar for grading but it is on my bucket list
<< <i>. I would love to see a thread that outlines the grading differences for an MS60 to 68 Morgan including number of hits, strike luster etc....... It is honestly something I am not very good at. >>
Early in the game, I put together a grading set of Morgans MS60 to 67 in PCGS holders. Not perfect of course, but very helpful.
The pluses though are a fine split which other numismatists can probably better appreciate.
The ANA Grading Standards, page 31 describe a PR68 as follows:
"Has an attractive sharp strike, and full mirror (or other style Proof) surface for the variety, with no more than four light scattered contact marks or flaws. No hairlines or scuff marks show. Eye appeal is exceptional. If copper.....n/a.
Contact Marks: 3 or 4 miniscule None in focal areas. Hairlines: None visible Fields: Attractive. Fully original. Appeal: Exceptional."
PR69 same as above but only one or two miniscule contact marks, none in prime focal areas.
PCGS and NGC criteria may differ somewhat based upon previously graded specimens, perhaps.
So, graders, draw your own conclusions. Actual TPG grade will be market acceptable, and the market for these coins is very small. TDN is the market, so I trust his opinion.
OINK
<< <i>
<< <i>. I would love to see a thread that outlines the grading differences for an MS60 to 68 Morgan including number of hits, strike luster etc....... It is honestly something I am not very good at. >>
Early in the game, I put together a grading set of Morgans MS60 to 67 in PCGS holders. Not perfect of course, but very helpful.
The pluses though are a fine split which other numismatists can probably better appreciate. >>
I did that for seated dollars here
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>. I would love to see a thread that outlines the grading differences for an MS60 to 68 Morgan including number of hits, strike luster etc....... It is honestly something I am not very good at. >>
Early in the game, I put together a grading set of Morgans MS60 to 67 in PCGS holders. Not perfect of course, but very helpful.
The pluses though are a fine split which other numismatists can probably better appreciate. >>
I did that for seated dollars here >>
Awesome!
I never liked this coin, but then again I never viewed the coin in person. Big Difference.
Gotta pay my respects to the coin considering PCGS triple made sure about the 68+, JA said A-OK.
<< <i> Paul, with all due respect, I quickly counted at least 15 marks on the obverse and reverse combined. …..These are just the most visible marks. >>
Please allow me to fix that last sentence for you. Here you go:
<< <i>These are just the most visible marks when the image is blown up to the size of a dinner plate >>
.
You are grading under a microscope. There are only two marks on the coin for grading purposes: the complex mark on the obverse below the M in UNUM and the reeding mark below the wing on the reverse. Still, I can understand how some might be shy to call it a 68+ in light of those marks.
The toning may not be everybody’s cup of tea, not everyone may agree with the grade, and some might not see the value in the grade compared to a 67 but grading is not based on personal preferences.
What I find interesting is that the coin went from being the only PCGS 68 to being a 68+. So when given another shot PCGS upgraded it.
CG
<< <i>
<< <i>
You'd think after seeing 20,000 or so 85-cc's over the years that PCGS would be quite capable of determining what single coin was heads and tails better than all the rest. JA didn't disagree either.
>>
It was graded a long time ago. It's the Highfill book plate coin/'World's Finest' Tour coin. Original cert # 6271763 >>
Not much difference. After 20,000 coins they still haven't graded one higher than this one. Sort of suggests that they still think this is the best one and standard bearer for the date/mint. And as mentioned above,
even plused it when seen in recent times. They didn't have to do that. They could have certainly downgraded it if they felt it was no longer worthy of a 68 grade. And achieving a 68 back in the early days would be
even more astounding as very few better date Morgans ever got above a 67 grade.
<< <i>If it were ungraded in the GSA holder and walked through the FUN show, doubtful that any dealer in the house would offer more than $3000. >>
Oh, come on ... sigh.
<< <i>
<< <i>If it were ungraded in the GSA holder and walked through the FUN show, doubtful that any dealer in the house would offer more than $3000. >>
Oh, come on ... sigh. >>
What amount would you guess under that hypothesis?
MS67 money perhaps?
<< <i>If it were ungraded in the GSA holder and walked through the FUN show, doubtful that any dealer in the house would offer more than $3000. >>
Serious? So this coin is worth less than GSA 66 wholesale? This thread is getting out of control.
<< <i>
<< <i>If it were ungraded in the GSA holder and walked through the FUN show, doubtful that any dealer in the house would offer more than $3000. >>
Serious? So this coin is worth less than GSA 66 wholesale? This thread is getting out of control. >>
You think dealers would freely pay in the mid 5 figure range for this coin, raw? Perhaps it is the valuations on perceived pop tops that is getting out of control.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>If it were ungraded in the GSA holder and walked through the FUN show, doubtful that any dealer in the house would offer more than $3000. >>
Serious? So this coin is worth less than GSA 66 wholesale? This thread is getting out of control. >>
You think dealers would freely pay in the mid 5 figure range for this coin, raw? Perhaps it is the valuations on perceived pop tops that is getting out of control. >>
The dealers that know their *%#* will pay up for a coin like this but most dealers don't really know what stuff is worth unless it is already in a pcgs slab then they want to offer you two grades below what the gray sheet is- another words if you don't know who to take it to you won't get a good offer.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>If it were ungraded in the GSA holder and walked through the FUN show, doubtful that any dealer in the house would offer more than $3000. >>
Serious? So this coin is worth less than GSA 66 wholesale? This thread is getting out of control. >>
You think dealers would freely pay in the mid 5 figure range for this coin, raw? Perhaps it is the valuations on perceived pop tops that is getting out of control. >>
Who said mid five figures? You said $3000 was doubtful. I was just responding to that statement being off the mark.
<< <i>Who said mid five figures? You said $3000 was doubtful. I was just responding to that statement being off the mark. >>
$3000 was not doubtful but the cap in my view. More an opinion about soaring valuations on low pop coins than this Morgan in particular.
What figure would you believe to be correct for this coin, if ungraded?
<< <i>If it were ungraded in the GSA holder and walked through the FUN show, doubtful that any dealer in the house would offer more than $3000. >>
If if if if. It's all IFs.
How many coins, that aren't rare and are really only condition rarity coins of non-key coins, do you think would go for $3000+ raw? Seriously, how many? I think you know better than you are letting on and you are just upping your post count with more BS about this.
I wouldn't be a buyer of this coin, as I don't play in the top pops and their pricing, but I also am not going to say that the professional graders, who have seen it in hand and aren't using a HUGE picture to grade from, are off base IN THEIR PROFESSIONAL OPINIONs.
Lotta backseat drivers on this one, with some of the usual characters.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
<< <i>Seriously, how many? I think you know better than you are letting on and you are just upping your post count with more BS about this. >>
Tums work well, but Mylanta is better!
type2,CCHunter.
<< <i>All I have to say is the coin is very clean looking. I'm looking at this on a 40inch monitor and well I think its got the look! >>
I agree with you. What's the real issue, anyway? For what would appear to be most of the posters in this thread, the coin would at least be a 67. I think most would agree that it probably doesn't belong in a 69 holder. What's left? 67, 67+, 68 and 68+. If you owned the coin in the original GSA holder, cracked it out and it came back as anything less than 68+, wouldn't you at least try to get it upgraded? The fact that there is a huge $ difference at these levels is just a factor for this date/mm. It is what it is. Just look at some of the registry sets- to me this coin has the look of a coin that would fit in some of the better moose sets.
That said, if I owned it I'd give it a dip.
They would get the coin back downgraded + compensation for the grade change. That's how downgrades work. It doesn't matter what the submitter wants. It's PCGS's job to police their product and rectify mistakes.
In the old days of raw coins something like this would start its journey being sold as MS63 or MS64 but some one who knew very little. It would be flipped from dealer to dealer boosting the grade and price at each step of the way.
65. 65+ 66 66+ and finally superb gem 67. No doubt in my mind that in the pre-1986 market this coin would have traded for superb gem money after a number of smarter dealers moved it back and forth between them.
If the coin showed up raw in a GSA holder today? I suspect it would end up bringing some type of MS67 money w/o being slabbed. These days, most dealers and collectors know it's to their advantage to submit coins to max
their price. My local dealer would have bought this coin as a MS64-MS66 from the public and then submitted it figuring it would come back a higher slabbed grade than they bought it for. If the coin were placed in a prominent
auction in the GSA holder and raw, it would have fetched strong-strong 67 money with the bidder and under-bidder being guys who figured it was a good 68 candidate. No doubt most people would view this coin as a 65-67.
But the TPG's and top dealer graders in the world are not "most people." TPG grading is not a democracy, it's a republic where your representatives at the grading service determine the grades for us.