Cherried this 1880-o VAM-4 today. What do you think?

mcmxi · September 19, 2007 8:54AM

It is begging for a dip. There is a haze all over it that appears to be covering PL surfaces. I am going to leave it alone though I have ruined coins before.
I just hope that I didn't mis attribute it.

messydesk · September 19, 2007 9:00AM

Don't dip it. I don't think the surfaces are PL. The only thing I'd do is hit it with some acetone to get off any scunge that might be on the surfaces.

SirAnthonyAC · September 19, 2007 9:05AM

Nice coin, strong breast feathers and wing tips along with hair lines above the ear, and rather clean fields, very few bag marks... very, very nice pick!

The only thing is... I wish you would post closer images of the date and mint mark... those photos are just not close-up enough.

PrivateCoinCollector · September 19, 2007 9:08AM

MS 70 gets the haze off, and no fear of ruining the coin!

mcmxi · September 19, 2007 9:14AM

coinkid855 · September 19, 2007 9:34AM

I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic when he asked for closer pictures.....lmao

mcmxi · September 19, 2007 9:38AM

I don't like to be out done in the sarcasm department!!

clarkbar04 · September 19, 2007 10:14AM

Nice score, top 100!

coinkat · September 19, 2007 10:15AM

I think you will regret dipping that coin especially if it has PL surfaces...

DorkGirl · September 19, 2007 10:43AM

<< <i>I don't like to be out done in the sarcasm department!! >>

I like it!

mcmxi · September 19, 2007 1:01PM

What is this coin realistically worth. I think it grades 63

mcmxi · November 21, 2007 4:25AM

ttt

Wolf359 · November 21, 2007 4:57AM

400-500 in a PCGS MS63 slab. Half that or less if raw.

Connecticoin · November 21, 2007 4:57AM

I have six 1891-P morgans with color like that, and PCGS bagged them all for questionable color. The coins I have toned that way from sitting in envelopes for a few decades. Before the CAC bru-ha-ha, the coins would have holdered. Now, if I want them to get holdered at all, I may HAVE to dip them.

DennisH · November 21, 2007 5:16AM

Nicely done!

The last two MS63 PCGS coins I have record of selling went for $610 and $599.

mcmxi · May 21, 2008 8:32AM

It came back as an AU-58. I probably shouldn't have submitted it under the 1880/79 number.

bigmansam88 · May 21, 2008 8:48AM

<< <i>It came back as an AU-58. I probably shouldn't have submitted it under the 1880/79 number. >>

From your pictures it looks MUCH nicer than AU58.

There doesn't appear to be any wear on the breast feathers and it's pretty minimal on the obverse.

mcmxi · May 21, 2008 9:03AM

I agree but I guess they wanted to play it safe. I'm considering sending it back under the normal submission number. Or cac.

JRocco · May 21, 2008 1:32PM

I think your pics are un-freaking-believable.

options26 · May 21, 2008 1:58PM

I have been burned on a couple occasions with good date VAMs coming back much lower than it should. I have learned to submit under the regular coin number and either selling as is or resubmitting for designation review once already holdered. I will admit that the designation review will add quite a bit to the value of the coin if the label says it's what it is.

Just like a bonding or insurance company, you don't want to put your neck on the line for big bucks if you don't have to.

options26 · May 21, 2008 2:01PM

BTW, I would gladly pay AU money for that coin.

Cherried this 1880-o VAM-4 today. What do you think?

Comments

Leave a Comment