1882 CC Morgan grade? To slab or not to slab?

The seller of the coin quoted above is different than the seller from whom I purchased the coin. Not to suggest there aren't multiple snake oil salesmen on eBay. Just wanted to clarify.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Or possibly VAM3D...
Break in liberty band as well as through tip of neck.

 

Oh yes I know, wasn't meaning to imply that's who you bought it from, although I've come across your seller multiple times as well.

Was just another example of horribly inaccurate photos and the example I posted is garnering absurd bid totals because of it. That coin would sell for $300 most likely and is at $520 with 2 days left.

 

I'd submit it.

 

All the more reinforces my opinion that it is MS 63 PL. Enough bag marks to knock it down to 63. Reflective enough to be PL. Submit, but don't expect DMPL. I would buy it as PL, not DMPL.

 

Actually just came across him again now, it's the seller I assumed it would be. Have to be careful, he has mostly good feedback but if you look at all his listings he exaggerates everything and his pictures are jacked. There's multiple PCGS/NGC slabbed Morgans with no PL/DMPL designation on them that he claims in all caps "DMPL MONSTER!". TPGs aren't perfect but they're not mistaking a DMPL for a coin that doesn't even make PL.

If you're goal is the get a raw coin like this slabbed I think you're much better off getting one already in a slab if buying online. Remember not only do you have to be right about the coin with only pictures (and normally jacked ones) you then also have to pay $40-50 to get it slabbed after. You have to be both very good as well as lucky to pull it off.

For reference I grabbed an 1883CC MS64PL off Heritage for under $300 awhile back and grabbed a GSA 1883CC MS62DMPL off ebay for $240 a few weeks ago.

Just my opinion.

 

So I guess the pressing question now is did I overpay for the coin at $350? PCGS values are

MSPL63. $285
MSPL64. $385
MSDMPL63. $475
MSDMPL64. $750

If so, is it reasonable to return it based on the marks on her cheek and in front of her nose which were obscured by the sellers original photos?
I am confident the coin would be considered PL at least. It exhibits no cartwheeling whatsoever, just mirrors.
Here is a slabbed MSPL63 in a slab on eBay whose surface appears significantly less mirrored than my coin:

 

Every one of these auctions fall into the SNAD category and are returnable in my opinion. I checked auction results going back to February and your coin is not listed under the sold auctions so you may be out of luck based on elapsed time since the auction ended.
Hope whatever you choose works out in your favor.

 

The auction only ended a week ago, so I should be OK timing wise.

 

That coin is extremely similar to yours in terms of grade and reflectivity. Your coin is NOT a DMPL, based on pictures you have posted. It is PL, in my experienced opinion. So, if you thought you were getting a DMPL for $350, you did overpay. My advice is to NEVER buy a specialty coin like that raw. You may think it is deep mirror like, but PCGS and NGC might not agree. When in doubt, pass on raw coins if you're not sure. I would be extremely surprised if it graded 64 DMPL. Sorry, but my caveat about not buying raw coins unless you know the series extremely well stands. It is a very nice coin, but it won't certify the way you want it to do so.

 

That's as DMPL as they come, she's just bagged pretty heavily. Either service is going to be 62-63 on her.

 

Can you explain your reasoning as to why according to my photos the coin is not a DMPL? I am asking for educational purposes, not in blind defense of my coin. The more you know...

 

It does not have sufficient cameo, nor does it seem significantly more reflective than PL coins. To me, it has some cameo, and nice, decent mirrors. However, DMPL coins jump out at you directly-- they kind of have that ultra-reflectivity that modern DCAM coins have. It is very hard to capture that effect on a standard photograph, but when you see a true, certified one, you will know exactly what I am talking about. People often hold up coins and take pictures, saying "look at those mirrors," but what they are really showing is a nice reflective lustrous Morgan. To be a DMPL, a Morgan now needs 8-10 inches of the deepest reflectivity, AND considerable cameo. A lot of nice PL coins display some of those indicators, and make the owner think he/she has a deep mirror like coin. Do a search, and check out 'Vette's collection of DMPLs. He has some of the nicest examples I have seen in a long time. Here are some of his threads: https://www.cointalk.com/search/2828407/

 

I know who you bought that from. And I have bought from him before and been disappointed. He manipulates the pics to make the appearance of DMPL. Personally, I have submitted 2 of his supposedly "DMPL" coins and the both came back PL.

 

Can you assess my coin based on the photos I took regardless of seller or photos from his original post?

 

63PL

 

My guess is the reason this seller has only 1 negative feedback is because he willingly takes back returns. I think you can take that $350, scan the different sites for about 2-3 days max and find a beautiful slabbed example of a PL/DMPL you're looking for and be in a much better situation. And to boot you'll have the beautiful coin in hand faster than you would if you sent your current one off for grading.

 

I already did. MS63PL. Nice coin, but NOT a DMPL, and a little too much "face chatter" to grade as 64.

 

Also be careful with the values you are assigning these coins. I see you just used the PCGS numbers. If you look underneath those you can see what the coins actually sold for and they are almost invariably lower than the numbers PCGS suggests. Looking at actual sold results will give you a better idea.

 

For what it's worth, here's a photo of the coin taken from a distance of 14" with no zoom. That's the reflection of my finger holding the camera at the bottom of the coin.