O Mint Morgan Registry Sets

BAJJERFAN · December 11, 2005 12:11PM

Man; interest in these lasted but a few hours!!

morgannut2 · December 11, 2005 1:14PM

When a guy posts a set that's number one and finished, then hides the set, it just takes all the fun out of it--Instead of posting the rest of my O mints (MS60/1/AU58) I'm going to delete the ones that aren't already imaged or are interesting to real collectors. Why contribute to the sick ego of someone with a lot of money, who's #1, but who has no interest in the actual coins??

BAJJERFAN · December 11, 2005 1:22PM

That is kind of a pisser aint it Bill?

morgannut2 · December 11, 2005 1:32PM

Yep-- He wins (sort of)

Coxe · December 11, 2005 1:36PM

Yeah, I added a set and threw in some PCGS date I had handy myself as it is a neat idea for a registry set. Oh well, plastic collectors.......

BTW, I just picked up a cool 79-O over at Heritage tonight. Someone else obviously saw what I saw in that piece (PCGS 63) as it hammered at double the sheet.

Missed my Teletrade lots. My confirm came back saying my first bid was confirmed but all the others (a dozen of them) arrived after the auction ended .... and I wasn't really sniping either. Got in the door with a couple minutes to go and the site page refreshes we abyssmally slow. Got an 1878 VAM-80 DMPL and missed the others. Some others got the 21-D VAM-1B in NGC 65, 82-O VAM-7 in PCGS 65, a possible 88-S VAM-1B in PCGS 63, among several other VAMs that weren't attributed and others that were.

MORGANHUNTER2 · December 11, 2005 1:43PM

Ya gotta love a player- seems like those that ARE IN the top spot- think there chit don't stink and there is no need for you to know what they have.

This has led me to believe that PCGS condones those that may or may not have what it takes for a true registry set.

I say this with the conviction as to what I have seen in the eliasberg registry set- no pics of the coin in general- but listed with a NO GRADE- what is this ? if not slabbed by the almighty- how can it be in the top set?

since I can't get the numero uno spot- will try for 50th.

Coxe · December 11, 2005 1:50PM

Having 100% pics of a well-balanced and well-matched set makes for a great registry entry. I am tempted to build the set I proposed in another thread, an AU type set, just to show you can make a really nice one for a small fraction of themoney of the big guns. I am sure in most or all types, you can find a top AU (55/58) that is just as good looking as an MS64.

Some day I will get to putting the pics on mine over here. I got so burnt out doing that for the NGC registry last year.

morgannut2 · December 11, 2005 1:59PM

Coxe--What was interesting on the 79O?? I missed it-- It's a a tough date to find nice regardless--Is this for the "Coxe Registry Set" at NGC??

Coxe · December 12, 2005 12:31AM

Well, at first the mintmark looked oddly like a possible horizontal O over O, but slightly off. When I checked the orientation of the overall mintmark, it looked like position that was undocumented, shifted slightly right and tilted left, if memory serves me. Not the C3e from the VAM-7. The VAM-13 supposedly also has the C3e reverse. the obverse looked to be that one and I suspect the VAM book incorrectly assigned the C3e reverse to it and it is really this one. Don't have a VAM-13 here to compare but will have the coin soon enough. Should be a fun one to check out nonetheless. In any event, I just assumed the combined purchase of the two lots I got was still ok. I picked up the 80-P 64DM. The 0 in the date got my attention. You never know if it is something on the plastic though. Didn't like the scratch by the mouth. The one in my DMPL set is 65DM, so this is for curiosity and to VAM it.

As far as the registry sets at NGC are concerned, the 79-O isn't for them unless it is a Top-100 piece. Even if it turns out to be O/horO, it would be a new VAM and PCGS would need to start attributing it before it would get retagged. Possible upgrade to 64? Hard to tell as Heritage washed it out with their lighting.

morgannut2 · December 12, 2005 6:20AM

For those who haven't looked--The Coxe "Proof Wannabes" set of PL Morgans at NGC is an invaluable resource to Morgan Collectors even though it isn't "CALLED" the one of the Registry. In fact I sold a number of common CC's and bought a rare 1886O DMPL based in that research and have been most pleased with the trade.

Coxe · December 12, 2005 8:33AM

Thanks for the kind endorsement of my efforts over there and glad it was useful. The 86-O is a tremendous DMPL. Finding a well-struck two-sided one is a task and cornerstone element of a great set. You probably did yourself a big favor.

Those 1881-1885 CC DMPLs are common and will always be available. I hadn't bought any CC's for a decade until the past couple months because I couldn't justify the prices. Picked up a 78-CC in NGC 64DPL VAM-11 as a Top-100 piece and cherried a half dozen Hot-50 85-CC in PCGS 65 and 66 (and one in a 64 GSA NGC wrapper), no PLs among those though.

O Mint Morgan Registry Sets

Comments

Leave a Comment