Ditto at 63 - if this is a graded "65" I want to have that kind of luck in grading my coins!, I think the luster is very nice, but the fact that the fields are nice & rev. nicer that it accentuates the obverse device key area hits (eyebrow, deep marks on the nose, cheek and the gauging down right side of cheek as well as higher areas of cap) that are distracting enough that I would not buy except at a discount. Even without the neck hit, it would top at a "4" IMO.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
It should be graded MS-63 or 63+. The marks on the face are too numerous to grade any higher. If it's in an MS-65 holder, it's over graded. If it's called MS-64, it's maginal for the grade.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
I thought it would be a 64, or perhaps a 65 depending upon how forgiving the graders were that day for the neck bag mark, which is really not in a prime focal area.
Congrats on getting that 65. Prime focal area hits like that should never grade 65, even if the rest of the coin is ultra clean. Reverses just don't matter on Morgans if it is the higher grade side. A Morgan with a 64 obv and 66/67 reverse almost never grades higher than 64, especially on a better or key date. Flip that around to a 66/67 obv and 64 reverse and you'd at least get a 65 out of it.
This only confirms my beliefs that Morgans are going through a stage of grade inflation in the 65/66/67 grades. That's part of the reasons why the prices are dropping across the board. And you generate more grading fee revenues by loosening up the grades....not tightening them. No one would send coins in if they only received the most conservative grades possible. Might as well sell them raw in that case. I'm ok calling this one a 64+ though. I don't think there's much chance it stickers as a 65....maybe not even as a 64 either. With only a jump of +33% from 64 to 65 on this date, there's not much pricing damage. These days, low end 65 money = high end 64 money.
Once I get it in hand again I'll look it over and get back. It's been a while since I've seen it and I don't recall the cheek marks being as prominent as the pictures make them look. I agree that 65 is high though, I was thinking it would go 64. Regardless, it is an attractive coin that I will be holding onto for a while.
Or someone could say you have to see it in hand, hard to tell for sure. Strike and luster look high end, marks are an issue.
"Above average strike with minor marks or hairlines, mostly out of focal areas." http://www.pcgs.com/grades#modal
The most severe obv marks and the majority of them, appear to be mainly in the focal areas. No question the obv fields and luster are at least 66. The orig toner MS65 RE half I once owned was a 66 except for a similar 4-reed hit on the neck...and nothing else. Best I could get for it was 64+ money....or about a 40% deduction from MS65 money. CAC wouldn't sticker it. Focal hits matter.
@VanHalen said:
Congratulations! The Trueview is more flattering and more gem-like than the initial set of images.
Regardless of the grade it is a beautiful coin.
This. I would gem it all day long based upon the Trueview image. Which is why I don't use Trueview...
I'm more of a 4+ based on the OP images; it truly is a nice, problem-free example of a 64. But, nothing wrong with a 65 and while maximized, I wouldn't call it a gift.
Comments
63
Ditto at 63 - if this is a graded "65" I want to have that kind of luck in grading my coins!, I think the luster is very nice, but the fact that the fields are nice & rev. nicer that it accentuates the obverse device key area hits (eyebrow, deep marks on the nose, cheek and the gauging down right side of cheek as well as higher areas of cap) that are distracting enough that I would not buy except at a discount. Even without the neck hit, it would top at a "4" IMO.
Well, just Love coins, period.
Looks like a solid 64 to me.
63
Grade is in: MS65!
Collector, occasional seller
Congratulations! The Trueview is more flattering and more gem-like than the initial set of images.
Regardless of the grade it is a beautiful coin.
Congratulations... I was a point low.... Nice coin... Cheers, RickO
It should be graded MS-63 or 63+. The marks on the face are too numerous to grade any higher. If it's in an MS-65 holder, it's over graded. If it's called MS-64, it's maginal for the grade.
TPG standards have loosened considerably, that's why stickers are so prevalent. Not too many would buy that at 65.
Talk about grade inflation!
I thought it would be a 64, or perhaps a 65 depending upon how forgiving the graders were that day for the neck bag mark, which is really not in a prime focal area.
Congrats on getting that 65. Prime focal area hits like that should never grade 65, even if the rest of the coin is ultra clean. Reverses just don't matter on Morgans if it is the higher grade side. A Morgan with a 64 obv and 66/67 reverse almost never grades higher than 64, especially on a better or key date. Flip that around to a 66/67 obv and 64 reverse and you'd at least get a 65 out of it.
This only confirms my beliefs that Morgans are going through a stage of grade inflation in the 65/66/67 grades. That's part of the reasons why the prices are dropping across the board. And you generate more grading fee revenues by loosening up the grades....not tightening them. No one would send coins in if they only received the most conservative grades possible. Might as well sell them raw in that case. I'm ok calling this one a 64+ though. I don't think there's much chance it stickers as a 65....maybe not even as a 64 either. With only a jump of +33% from 64 to 65 on this date, there's not much pricing damage. These days, low end 65 money = high end 64 money.
This coin seems to set the new standard for grading CC Morgans... Did not not see a 65 even with my liberal set of standards for CC Morgans.
Congrats...
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Once I get it in hand again I'll look it over and get back. It's been a while since I've seen it and I don't recall the cheek marks being as prominent as the pictures make them look. I agree that 65 is high though, I was thinking it would go 64. Regardless, it is an attractive coin that I will be holding onto for a while.
Collector, occasional seller
Or someone could say you have to see it in hand, hard to tell for sure. Strike and luster look high end, marks are an issue.
"Above average strike with minor marks or hairlines, mostly out of focal areas."
http://www.pcgs.com/grades#modal
NGC: "Well struck with moderate marks or hairlines." https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-grading/grading-scale/
http://www.pcgs.com/Content/img/grading/coin-grades-65.jpg
Compare the two.
The most severe obv marks and the majority of them, appear to be mainly in the focal areas. No question the obv fields and luster are at least 66. The orig toner MS65 RE half I once owned was a 66 except for a similar 4-reed hit on the neck...and nothing else. Best I could get for it was 64+ money....or about a 40% deduction from MS65 money. CAC wouldn't sticker it. Focal hits matter.
But what about the date/mm? Don't ccs tend to come with more marks that the coin referenced?
Yes. And that's why they're usually graded from MS62-MS64. Back in 1988 I think this one would have graded 62/63.
Never, ever crack that one out!
Check out some of my 1794 Large Cents on www.coingallery.org
This. I would gem it all day long based upon the Trueview image. Which is why I don't use Trueview...
I'm more of a 4+ based on the OP images; it truly is a nice, problem-free example of a 64. But, nothing wrong with a 65 and while maximized, I wouldn't call it a gift.
877-DISRPTK