Options
1900 Morgan in PL what do you think?
jtlee321
Posts: 2,367 ✭✭✭✭✭
I picked this Morgan up today at my favorite local shop. He was having a Black Friday sale. The surfaces looked very reflective, but had a bit of crud on it. It was in a yellow ANACS 65 holder. I couldn't resist picking it up. I cracked it out and soaked it in acetone and then MS-70 to help rinse away the gunk. This is what was hiding. I would love some of the Morgan experts opinions on this.
Here's a video of the obverse and reverse to show off the mirrors.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neFbr6ocKos&feature=youtu.be
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHTdZfvRqno&feature=youtu.be
3
Comments
Real hard to tell, may still be a little to shallow for PL. I hope you get it!
I have to agree - I think it just misses getting a P/L. Nice surfaces though, and should 65 in another TPG holder. I don't know if the cost of reholdering is fiscally beneficial.
Close call.
It's certainly one of the tougher dates to find in PL. I came across one that sold on HA as a 65PL in a PCGS OGH that was cracked out and submitted 11 times. It's first submission (at least with a True View) got bumped to a 66 but it lost the PL designation. It never received the PL designation again over the next 10 resubmissions, but it did get bumped to a 66+.
I've never seen it in hand, so I can't tell how close it is to PL, but I'm guessing that the 1900 is a very tough coin to get the designation. I do think this example is worth at least the gamble to see. Even if I lose two grade points and get the PL I will be ahead significantly on my original investment.
Thank you for those of you who have given your input so far, I appreciate it.
Nice and close but no ceegar.
Nice 64, perhaps 65 on a generous day. Doesn't appear PL from the pictures. Congrats!
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
BOOMIN!™
Wooooha! Did someone just say it's officially "TACO™" Tuesday????
Retiring at 55, what day is today?
Not an expert. But it is a nice coin and awesome photo.
The coin appears to have too many frosty spots to be a P-L to me. Sorry.
The video's show the mirrors better than the photograph... however, looking at the video's I think it will not get the PL....the reverse seems a tad better than the obverse though. If you send it in, please post a follow up....Cheers, RickO
I agree, the images really don't show off the mirrors. There is a bit of haze covering both sides of the coin. It's funny that you thought the reverse looked stronger in the videos. In hand the obverse is superior to the reverse and I can read standard size text reflected out to 5 inches. The reverse has a bit of distortion, but I can still read standard size text out to 4 inches. Now if PCGS sticks to their standards shown in the video below, then I believe I have a good shot at PL. In the end, it's all up to 2 graders and a finalizer though.
I agree with you on the grade. In my opinion its much closer to a 64 than a 65.
Also on a side note. Each of those white lines in the video is exactly 1 inch. I couldn't shoot the video with the coin much further away as my phone was wanting to focus on the surface of the coin rather than the text reflected in fields. Depth of field becomes an issue and auto focus becomes my enemy. So the text looks blurry, when in fact it's just the DOF preventing it from being in focus.
I will be sending this coin along with a handful of others to PCGS soon and I will update when it comes back.
I'll keep my fingers crossed.
Tough date for PL. It looks least PL when you show the coin head on. Good luck!
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Semi-PL. Still nice though. Once one has gotten hooked on semi-prooflike,full prooflike and deep mirror prooflike Morgans, one wants to just spend their other ones.
The measure of intelligence is the ability to change.
Albert Einstein (14 March 1879--18 April 1955)
Here's how it will shake out.
Decent mirrors for the date, not enough for PL.
They will land on 64+
Tell me about it! I've been bitten hard by the bug. I've picked up a handful this year. They almost make you feel like you need to start living in a cave and obsessing over them.
You can see it is definitely showing mirrors on both the obverse and reverse. Depending how clear they are at 4 inches of depth and if it is not showing any hazy spots, you might have a shot at PL.
The contrasting frosty devices against the field is also a big bonus for this coin.
Nice Morgan!
I just realized I never linked the PCGS video for their PL/DMPL standards.
I think it has a shot, as the video I posted above from PCGS states clear reflectivity between 2 and 4 inches. I can easily read 11pt. text at between 3 and 4 inches. The issue is, this is a tough coin in PL and may be held to stricter standards, so who knows until I send it in. I have a good feeling.
Good luck @jtlee321 ..... I hope your effort pays off. I do like her BTW
That is how I feel when I go to my to the SDB and look at my boxes of DMPL's.
There are dates that are harder to get PL on. 1900 and later have different PL's than the prior years. Only the 1904-O is the real common one for the later years. I have several in my set I shake my head at that I cant get them in higher grades or go fro PL to DMPL.
If there were objective stable standards, consistently applied, coin owners would not need to guess.
It's an art, not a science. It's sad for those who refuse to adjust to the consensual reality, but it's not as unstable a place as it is for Schroedinger's cat
.
No. Determining if a specific coin meets the minimum criteria for "proof-like" is not an art by any measure. It is the simple and direct application of a stable standard against the specimen being examined. In concept it is identical to determining if an airplane engine part meets specifications or if it is defective. A simpler analogy is the field goal in football - if the ball's path meets accepted standards, the kicking team scores 3 points; if not, there are no points scored.
Aesthetic appeal is certainly a personal opinion which determines, in part, the desirability of a specific coin versus one of identical objective quality.
It's a great looking coin, but will not PL due to the lack of mirrored fields.
End point.