Did PCGS really grade this Morgan an MS-65?... Take 2.

VamGuy · August 24, 2006 10:41PM

Please feel welcome to post comments....

jayboxx · August 24, 2006 10:48PM

That's pretty scary. From the pics it looks like a lot of it is just rub in the frost, but the fields are not 65 by any means

AceK · August 24, 2006 10:56PM

Wow. I would have guessed 63. Do you think it got a bump for the great luster?

jmj3esq · August 24, 2006 11:03PM

I agree. That is the worst MS65 Morgan I have seen.

ER · August 24, 2006 11:05PM

Did they? Yes, they did.

Shamika · August 24, 2006 11:19PM

Could be bad photography.

coindeuce · August 24, 2006 11:28PM

If that was my coin, I'd send it to TeleTrash in the remote hopes that it would stick with a holder buyer or a bottom feeder that would be looking to put it into an MS-66 3rd tier holder

Wolf359 · August 24, 2006 11:57PM

Near full strike, eye popping luster. Original, undipped surfaces (a big plus).

MS64 or better without seeing it in hand.

Steve27 · August 24, 2006 11:58PM

Look at that strike! (Every hair can be seen above the ear.) Additionally, the hits look very shallow. That's a 65 every day of the week!

DennisH · August 25, 2006 12:09AM

Put me down in the MS63 camp.

Newb · August 25, 2006 12:13AM

Nice cracks!

AceK · August 25, 2006 12:16AM

The PCGS grading standard for MS65 states "[m]inor marks/hairlines though none in focal areas." Acknowledging an incredible strike and luster, and even assuming overly harsh lighting, there are just way too many marks in the focal areas for me to accept this as a legit 65. It's not just the marks on the cheek, the nose, or the field in front of liberty's face, but also the relatively substantial looking digs in the fields beside the eagle's wings.

dragon · August 25, 2006 1:27AM

<< Near full strike, eye popping luster. Original, undipped surfaces (a big plus).

MS64 or better without seeing it in hand. >>

You have no way of knowing if that piece was dipped from that pic. In fact, it does look dipped out and flat to me.

Yes, that coin looks overgraded by a full point and a half in that pic. PCGS is known to be very lenient on that date/variety though, along with several other dates such as the 1885-CC. Interestingly, PCGS grades the 1878-CC pretty conservatively from all I've seen.

I would grade the obv. a weak 64 and the rev. a 62/63

Wolf359 · August 25, 2006 3:47AM

You have no way of knowing if that piece was dipped from that pic. In fact, it does look dipped out and flat to me.

Doesn't look dipped at all to me. And PCGS won't grade dipped morgans as MS65, they max out
at MS63.

segoja · August 25, 2006 4:07AM

That coin has the best luster I've sene on a 78-P. Strike is out of this world.

Yes the bag marks are more than you'd like for a 65, but that is one original coin.

Not a major problem being in a 65 holder.

It has eye appeal.

rays · August 25, 2006 4:09AM

MS65 Morgans have a bit of chatter; if they have terrific lustre and no chatter they're 66 and 67's.

mdwoods · August 25, 2006 4:24AM

Mostly luster grazes, it looks like a 65.

UncleWiggly · August 25, 2006 4:28AM

No matter what grade, it's a 2 to me.

Jerry

Myqqy · August 25, 2006 4:48AM

And PCGS won't grade dipped morgans as MS65, they max out

If a good dip means you can't tell it's been done, then how do you know that they won't grade a dipped morgan as a 65?? And there's no way that morgan is a 65, unless you're grading for ntc- it's a 63, with a shot at low end 64....

dragon · August 25, 2006 4:58AM

<< You have no way of knowing if that piece was dipped from that pic. In fact, it does look dipped out and flat to me.

Doesn't look dipped at all to me. And PCGS won't grade dipped morgans as MS65, they max out
at MS63. >>

LOLOLOLOL, ok, PCGS won't grade dipped Morgans as MS65......whatever you say.

Winston · August 25, 2006 5:06AM

I agree with Steve27. That is one of the finest strikes I have seen.

dragon · August 25, 2006 5:18AM

<< Look at that strike! (Every hair can be seen above the ear.) Additionally, the hits look very shallow. That's a 65 every day of the week! >>

I think you should pay 65PQ money for that POS then

But seriously, it's very common to see the '78 7TF with a very full strike and 100% detail over the ear....no big thing for that date. That coin looks like a typical dipped scruffy '78 7TF that PCGS just made a mistake with. Out of that holder, you'd be lucky to get about 150.00 for that thing, on a GOOD day.

Yes it's true, PCGS sometimes overgrades coins

mcheath · August 25, 2006 5:43AM

impossible to grade from photos, could be the lighting and the luster is booming, could be every bit of a 65 in hand

Bryan1315 · August 25, 2006 6:04AM

I beleive I would send it to PCGS for a review and maybe they will send you a check for the difference in grade that it definately is. I have plenty of MS-64 1878 Morgans (since that is my main focus at this time, 1878 VAM's) with the same kind of strike and probably less hits in 63 and 64 slabs. I personally think they made a mistake when grading that coin and if they did I beleive they will pay you the difference in the grades or exchange it for a real 65 (which this part I am not sure of) because of their guarantee

Wolf359 · August 25, 2006 6:05AM

That coin looks like a typical dipped scruffy '78 7TF
But seriously, it's very common to see the '78 7TF with a very full strike

I have nearly one hundred 1878 morgans, most 7TF, and only a few that well struck. I can't think of one I own that has both a near full strike and booming luster like this one.

AceK · August 25, 2006 6:42AM

I must say I find it fascinating that such knowledgable collectors, having vast experience with this specific issue, can disagree so fundamentally on whether this coin merits a 65. To me it shows the inherent subjectivity of the grading process and suggests we are perhaps too critical of TPG grading sometimes. If the experts can disagree so persuasively, how can PCGS possibly "get it right"?

kwmorgan · August 25, 2006 6:50AM

From the picture, way too much chatter in the fields and there's that nasty whack above her eye. MS63.

VamGuy · August 25, 2006 6:51AM

<< I have nearly one hundred 1878 morgans, most 7TF, and only a few that well struck. I can't think of one I own that has both a near full strike and booming luster like this one. >>

So in your opinion, this baby is one in a hundred. Well then, I'm sure you'll jump at the chance to buy this gem.

So by all means, I invite you to step up to the plate... BIN.

And be sure to post your images of the coin when you receive it so that we can all share in your joy.

In the interest of full disclosure, I'll state now that I don't own the coin, and do not know who does.

TwoSides2aCoin · August 25, 2006 7:07AM

it's a good fake from hong kong

Prethen · August 25, 2006 7:12AM

64

Whizzard · August 25, 2006 7:57AM

No better than 63, just too much junk on the fields and devices.

Wolf359 · August 25, 2006 8:14AM

<< 

<< I have nearly one hundred 1878 morgans, most 7TF, and only a few that well struck. I can't think of one I own that has both a near full strike and booming luster like this one. >>

So in your opinion, this baby is one in a hundred. Well then, I'm sure you'll jump at the chance to buy this gem.

So by all means, I invite you to step up to the plate... BIN.

And be sure to post your images of the coin when you receive it so that we can all share in your joy.

In the interest of full disclosure, I'll state now that I don't own the coin, and do not know who does. >>

I've already stated it's MS64 and possibly better, and the luster and strike may explain PCGS's grading. I collect vams, not grades, as you well know. So why in the world are you suggesting I buy it?

Wolf359 · August 25, 2006 8:20AM

<< 

<< You have no way of knowing if that piece was dipped from that pic. In fact, it does look dipped out and flat to me.

Doesn't look dipped at all to me. And PCGS won't grade dipped morgans as MS65, they max out
at MS63. >>

LOLOLOLOL, ok, PCGS won't grade dipped Morgans as MS65......whatever you say.

>>

Not where the luster has been harmed, no.

They max out at MS63.

robertpr · August 25, 2006 8:32AM

While I have not read all of the responses, you must remember that hits are only a part of the coin's grade. That coins looks to have very nice lustre and an exceptional, exceptional strike.

Leiana · August 25, 2006 8:35AM

The strike is way awesome and I BET the hits are not as noticible in hand. Those "hits" are just bag friction and it causes the coin to look shinier in those areas where Morgans rubbed up against each other in the bag. The photography simply makes the shinier areas stand out more from the rest of the coin.

-Amanda

messydesk · August 25, 2006 8:41AM

Maybe the edge of the coin is ultra-pristine and makes up for what I would call a 63, even with the nice strike. No way would I pay 65 money for that coin. On the Heritage site, it looks like a legit auction fell through and now they're just trying to unload it.

AceK · August 25, 2006 8:51AM

<< On the Heritage site, it looks like a legit auction fell through and now they're just trying to unload it. >>

It's a different coin, check the cert numbers. Looks like they're setting BIN price based on recent auction price of its brother. The jump in price from 64 to 65 ($200 range to $1000 range) sure is big.

coinkat · August 25, 2006 8:53AM

This thread is scary and perhaps explains why there are unwarranted complaints in connection with grading...

Lets look at the strike and lustre... the coin is excellent.

Lets not stop there... look at the frost that has a white satin look. It seems that part of the complaints relate to the facts that highest spots show friction. This is quite common for a coin that exhibits such frost and was likely is a roll at some point or may have left the Philadelphia mint in that condition. I would rather have a coin like that than a coin that exhinks obvious marks that have been either thumbed or treated to make them less noticable. Friction which interrupts the surface on a coin like this... end of discussion.

The strike and lustre alone warrant a 65 grade... the reverse fields have some marks... but look at the size of the picture. The coin looks like the size of a dinner plate!

The last component and perhaps the most import is the overall eye appeal... this is a blazing example... not exactly what I look for but for those that like white... it does not get better than this.

Folks... its a 65 all day long. Get over it and move on.

Coins101 · August 25, 2006 8:59AM

Maybe they had a problem getting it in the slab after it was graded.

Did PCGS really grade this Morgan an MS-65?... Take 2.

Comments

Leave a Comment