The internet experts did well on this one. FWIW, I was gonna say MS64. The reverse misses PL and the obverse is too baggy for a gem grade.
I'd buy 62's like that all day long. I won't be one to go out and say that PCGS really blew it on that one. I'd have to see it in hand, to give my full opinion. But I could certainly say that I would buy that for 62 money based solely on the images you have provided without worry. Well done. This is why we say "buy the coin and not the holder." Although, I do modify that a bit as some of you know. I'll buy the holder if I like the coin.
Looking at the pictures again on a larger screen, I see that I was hasty in assigning PL. From the images, the surfaces appear to have borderline MS-64/65 quality (my gut feeling is 64).
Heh, it's negligible on this one anyway to be honest- the difference between 62 and 64 is $12. Here's a couple 64's, a 65 and an alternate photo of this one to give a frame of reference though: I grade it MS-CoolerThanMyOtherMorgans.
Thanks! Yep, 50 bucks. Since it was so cheap I almost bought the ugliest 60PL ever for fun but I couldn’t bring myself to do it. Oh, @jtlee321 - I saw an NGC 4 slab, (the turquoise one) with a really nice gold toned 1937 Buffalo in MS65. You probably have that slab already but it seemed up your alley!
In an obscure box at a dealer. It was well-struck as I recall, but I was on the hunt for a Morgan that day. I’ll snag it next time I’m over there.
...couple more with the pinnacle of numismatic photography setup : the microwave light and an iPhone.