Just got this today. Does this look like a 63?

I dunno. Looks better than that to me. It seems awfully high for grade IMHO.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Give us a head on shot........

 

We need closer pics.

 

Here is a close in obv. and rev.

 

Well, I'm thinkin' it quite possibly could have gone at least '64. It looks very clean with a minimum of contact marks, but I'm a lousy grader.....

 

The face and in front of it seem pretty chatty. But yeah I could see a bump to 64 PL.

Its got a nice low and left date which is neat.

 

Yea it can go 64...it wouldn't be the solidest 64 i've ever seen, but still nice.

 

Looks like a 63 but could go 64 as it looks rather clean.
Where'd you get it? I want one

 

You know...

I don't know much about grading Morgans but I've noticed many look quite banged up for the grade.

Searching eBay for "NGC MS63PL Morgan" and "PCGS MS63PL Morgan" is it just me, or am I noticing a HUGE difference between the two?

That looks pretty similar to the latter ones.

I always just assumed it's because of the large surface area and they usually came out of the mint that way.

 

I got it on Ebay. great price. BTW, here is one of my 64's for comparison. I think the '86 is actually cleaner than this coin, and it is 64PL in OGH--the 1880s. Morgans normally have a lot of contact marks, as they were in mint bags for years and years, making contact with other mint state Morgans. Since they are so large, there are always some marks on the cheek and neck. Basically, for a Morgan to be very clean in those areas, they have to be 65s. I may go for the upgrade submission to PCGS--nothing to lose.

 

Based on PCGS's pics......http://www.pcgs.com/photograde/#/Morgan/Grades.....I'd say Morgandude's coin could definitely do better grade wise.

 

I like it as a 64. Nice!

Funny thing is, graders may find some small issue that matters. A luster break, an eyesore spot. Hairlines or distracting hits, toning that just isn't appealing. So the coin takes a grade hit.

The difference in value between a 63 and 64 isn't big enough to warrant regrading or CAC. Enjoy it as it is and be smug that it's undergraded.
Lance.

 

Other than your money, no... does not warrant the expense. Enjoy it as-is and save the money for something else.

 

Thats basically my attitude towards TPG 99% of the time.

 

Not my attitude at all. If I can get the upgrade, I go for it. I have about a .500 batting average on that, as I tend to pick "good value" coins that are sometimes under graded. TO me, it matters.

 

Hey, it's what you like and collect. Me? I wouldn't do it, but you (the collector) are the one at the helm. If that's what ya need to do then go for it.

 

Thanks, Green. I appreciate that. I have a very specific collection this time, and am not going for a wide range, or a full set of anything. 10 years ago, I sold a full Morgan set, with fairly low grade mint state coins, and the keys were all beaters--my 1893s looked as if it were hit with a baseball bat. My 89cc was a bizarre problem coin in a "details" holder, and was beyond ugly. It was fun having the entire series, and I made a lot of money on the sale, as it took me 9 years to assemble it. Now, however, I am specifically collecting only higher grade Morgans--the lowest being MS 63s, with a strong preference for PL and DMPL coins. I am also going for GSA CCs and PL CC coins. I'd rather have high grade "good value" common dates in this particular collection, than a "beater" 1884s just to complete my set. I guess every collector has a different set of priorities, and I want pretty, eye appeal, specific coins. Not going for a huge collection this time either--going to keep it more selective with desirable coins, so grade is important to me for that reason--it isn't just the number, but the idea of having a grouping of 63-66 Morgans that are very attractive, valuable, and most importantly, unique for me.

Had my first Morgan at age 8, from my grandfather, and that was over 40 years ago. He was a furrier, and Morgan dollars were passed around in the fur industry (this is not commonly known) as tokens of appreciation. He gave me loads of circulated coins, and I still have an 1893 Philadelphia coin on my dresser. I keep it for sentimental value, as he gave it to me. It isn't in a slab, as it is "harshly cleaned." How do I know this? hehhehee--I harshly cleaned it with silver polish and a brush at age 10, since I thought all coins were supposed to be shiny. Now, it is either a "pocket coin" (nice date for a pocket piece), and it sits on my dresser and reflects the sun coming through my windows.

 

I am just saying that when you factor in all the costs of all the times you sent a coin into a TPG and deduct the "added value" from the amount you would have simply gotten for the coin raw it to me seems that you only would turn a profit by sending in only coins that would have a minimum value of about $200 with much higher upside values.


Getting a bunch of $1-$200 coins graded even for the first time more often then not comes out to be a losing proposition monetarily, at least from the coins I considered it for. The only reasonable reason I could find for doing it for those value coins is if you need to verify their authenticity.

 

Snap, you didn't read what I said. I have a very specific high end specialty Morgan collection that is only made up of slabbed coins, exclusively NGC or PCGS. I do NOT buy raw coins, but have had some recertifications, due to cherry picking. Since I have collected Morgans for so many years, I am fairly good at grading them.

 

Thats a pretty big goal Morgandude. I like Morgan dollars too, but I can't see myself going for a MS63 set. The key dates are way out of my range especially ones like the 1893-S. Even the semi-keys in MS63 are pretty expensive. But I do admire your drive, if you ever get a key date in MS63 post it up so I can see.