GTG 81S Morgan

2001 is when the star began at NGC.
Here is a thread I made with some history:
https://www.cointalk.com/threads/post-your-ngc-stars-and-a-little-history.308504/

The plus started in 2010. PCGS and NGC announced it together.

https://www.pcgs.com/news/two-leading-grading-services-announce-plus-grading

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I am gonna give the reveal in the morning, haven't taken any slab shots yet.

 

I’m going to say 64

 

Could have even got 63 in that old slab

 

I am pretty sure that sliders weren't even a thought back in the 80's early 90's.

 

This one I just couldn't pass up under grey sheet. The obverse has plenty of mirror but I am not really sure that it would pass the muster for a PL designation. That mark at 3 oclock is really the only thing distracting on the obverse. Very frosty surfaces and great color.

The reverse is no doubt PL, there are many vertical polishing lines and very mirrored surfaces and frosty devices. There are 2 distracting contacts one above god, and the one to the right of the wing at 3 oclock.

I did not remove the sticker because the one on the reverse compromised the slab.

 

The toning on this one follows the toning seen in this style of slab, especially on MS Morgans. This one is going in the soapbox collection. As of right now I have 5 of the 16 prefixes. 17 actually A is extremely rare only 3 known.
I am still on the hunt for a 2nd gen slab. I have yet to find one.

 

Very nice coin at a great price! Is the slab cracked where the sticker is? That sticker looks like it's been on the slab for years. For a fee, you can resubmit to ANACS for a regrade and reholder with the option to leave as is if not the minimum grade desired. I just hate their new slabs now, so I get it if you don't do it.


Edited: I would consider sending the PCGS for a resubmission, if you really want it upgraded. The reverse is PL for sure, maybe the obverse as well.

 

The 1881-S Morgan Dollars were well made, and high grade examples were available by the roll years ago. I'd say this one is maxed out at MS-64. If the grader was feeling nasty and had seen a bunch of MS-65s before this one, it could called MS-63.

 

The slab isn't cracked, there are some nicks and scratches but it is fairly clean. The sticker has been there since the 90's. I have zero plans on cracking the slab for a regrade. After 35 years, we all have nicks and bruises to remember.

 

I think the pictures look better with the whole slab. It's a damn purty coin for sure. It should get a PL designation, but the TPGs have some kind of personal vendetta against early S-mint Morgans. I guess they want to be able to read the obituaries from across the room while looking at the coin to "earn" the PL. I'd gladly pay that sticker price though, if'n you're looking to sell it

 

There is a vendetta, you have to add that this coin does not have a standing in any of the top VAM's for the year and MM. Maybe a couple, it's a common coin.

 

You riled me with that response, right in line with a lot of graders when I started buying slabs 10 years ago. All the photos of this coin have been taken from different settings, lightings, and distance from lens. I have no problem buying this one in Gem condition.

 

Maybe he meant the TPGs have a hard on for the S mint for these 3 years and don't give them the respect because they were so nicely struck. I think the TPGs have that attitude for sure based on their curmungeon lack of giving a PL coin their just due just because of that era's clean and amazing strikes. I'll give you $130, best I can do. Now let's go to the desk and do some paperwork.

 

Was just wondering why you didn't want to remove the sticker from the slab. I still don't understand that. Stickers on slabs piss me right off. I guess I'm just not comprehending that situation.

 

Just that this one had been in a collection for years and that sticker is old school matches the slab.
Plus did you see the condition of that sticker, it nearly Mint State.

 

Gotcha. I still think that grading coins based on the year and mint based on their rarity, their real condition be damned, is DEI grading and BS. A coin's condition is a coin's condition, your coin is stellar and should be graded on it's own merits and not subject to their down trodden history of "all released into circulation, saved in vaults for years and later released, yada yada yada." Yet we all know this happens, and it aggravates me.

If my comment isn't clear to everyone, I think it's undergraded, PL.

 

81S has many Premium gem examples, take a look at the MS69 examples. You could break down the MS70 to 65 the same way you do the same to 65 to 60.

I see now where the + and star designations came from in the guess's.

 

I hear you, but I've seen some dazzlers from those years not get the rep that coins in similar condition get in other years and mints. If I'm not mistaken, I'm actually quoting you from a thread a few months ago. So....

LOL. Don't complain so much when I'm giving your coin street cred.

 

I like it as a 65; even though I guessed 64, I did think it had the look of a gem (65). I'm guessing it would get the same grade today. And it's obviously not worth cracking as the premium is the old ANA holder, which also has a nice coin in it. The 115 was a great price as I would expect this to normally sell for above generic PCGS/NGC 65 prices (135 in the greysheet last I saw; around 150-175 in this holder).