Summary Chapter 1 Rd. 1: 1883-O Morgan NGC MS63* [Obv]...CT -> 3.6 (Mid) vs You -> 4 (Mid-High) Rd. 2: 1880 Morgan PCGS MS62 [Obv]...CT -> 2.7 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid) Rd. 3: 1881-S Morgan PCGS MS65 [Rev]...CT -> 3 (Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid) Rd. 4: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS65 [Obv]...CT -> 4.6 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5 (High) Rd. 5: 1880-S Morgan NGC MS66* [Obv]...CT -> 3.2 (Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid) Rd. 6: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS?? [Rev]...CT -> 3.5 (Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid) Rd. 7: 1887 Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT-> 4.2 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High) Rd. 8: 1939-D Lincoln PCGS MS65RB [Obv]...CT-> 4.1 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High) Rd. 9: 1972-D Ike PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT-> 2.3 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 2 (Low-Mid) Rd. 10: 1892 GB Half Crown PCGS MS64 [Dual]...CT-> 4 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High) Rd. 11: 1967 UK Half Crown PCGS MS65+ [Dual]...CT-> 3 (Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid) Rd. 12: 1963 Franklin NGC MS65+* FBL [Rev]...CT-> 4 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High) Rd. 13: 1884-O Morgan PCGS MS63+ [Obv]...CT -> 5 (High) vs You -> 5 (High) Rd. 14: 1899 GB 6 Pence PCGS MS65 [Dual]...CT-> 5 (High) vs You-> 5 (High) Rd. 15: 1926 F.I.C. Piastre PCGS AU58 [Dual]...CT-> 3 (Mid) vs You-> 5 (High) Rd. 16: 1904 USP Peso NGC PF62 [Dual]...CT-> 2.8 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High) Rd. 17: 1944 Jeff Nickel PCGS MS 66 [Obv]...CT-> 4.8 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High) Rd. 18: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS 66+ [Obv]...CT-> 2.7 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid) Rd. 19: 1881-S Morgan PCGS MS 68+ [Obv]...CT-> 6 (Monster) vs You-> 6 (Monster) Rd. 20: 1887 Morgan PCGS MS 66+ [Obv]...CT-> 5.3 (High) vs You-> 6 (Monster) Rd. 21: 1880-S Morgan NGC MS 66* [Obv]...CT-> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High) Rd. 22: 1941-D Jeff Nickel NGC MS 67* 5FS [Dual]...CT-> 4.9 (Mid-High) vs You-> 6 (Monster) Rd. 23: 1961 Franklin 50c PCGS PR 65 [Dual]...CT-> 5.3 (High) vs You-> 6 (Monster) Rd. 24: 1884-O Morgan NGC MS 61* [Obv]...CT-> 2.7 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High) Rd. 25: 1941-D Jeff Nickel PCGS MS 66 FS [Dual]...CT-> 3.6 (Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid) Rd. 26: 1708 GB Shilling PCGS MS64 [Dual]...CT-> 2.8 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid) Rd. 27: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS64 PL [Rev]...CT -> 5 (High) vs You -> 5 (High) Rd. 28: 1835 10c PCGS AU58 [Rev]...CT -> 3.9 (Mid) vs You -> 5 (High) Rd. 29: 1888 Morgan PCGS MS65+ [Obv]...CT -> 4 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4 (Mid-High) Rd. 30: 1904-O Morgan NGC MS64 [Dual]...CT -> 3 (Mid) vs You -> 2 (Low-Mid) Summary Chapter 2 Rd. 31: 1878 8tf Morgan PCGS MS66 [Obv]...CT -> 5.5 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster) Rd. 32: 1880-s Morgan PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT -> 4.7 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5.3 (High) Rd. 33: 1881-S Morgan NGC MS 66* [Obv]...CT-> 5.6 (High) vs You-> 6 (Monster) Rd. 34: 1868 4D Mdy PCGS MS 65 [Dual]...CT-> 3.1 (Mid) vs You-> 3.5 (Mid) Rd. 35: 1884-O Morgan NGC MS 64* [Obv]...CT-> 4.2 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High) Rd. 36: 1884-O Morgan NGC MS 64* [Obv]...CT-> 4.3 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High) Rd. 37: 1881-S Morgan Raw [obv]...CT -> 1.8 (Low) vs You -> 1.7 (Low) Rd. 38: 1877-CC Quarter PCGS AU 58 [Dual]...CT -> 3.4 (Mid) vs You -> 4.8 (Mid-High) Rd. 39: 1919 Franc PCGS MS 66 [Dual]...CT -> 2.9 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 3.5 (Mid) Rd. 40: 1887 Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT -> 5.8 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster) Rd. 41: 1974-S Ike Raw [Obv]...CT -> 2.5 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 2.0 (Low-Mid) Rd. 42: 1885-O Morgan NGC MS63* [Obv]...CT -> 2.8 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 3.0 (Mid) Rd. 43: 1958-D Franklin NGC MS64* [Dual]...CT -> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4.9 (Mid-High) Rd. 44: 1886 Morgan PCGS MS66 [Obv]...CT -> 5.9 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster) Rd. 45: 1883-O Morgan NGC MS63* [Rev]...CT -> 3.5 (Mid) vs You -> 3.0 (Mid) Rd. 46: 1958-D Franklin NGC MS67* [Dual]...CT -> 4.1 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5.5 (High) Rd. 47: 1888 Morgan Anacs MS63 [Obv]...CT -> 5.1 (High) vs You -> 5.4 (High) Rd. 48: 1961 10c PCGS MS66+ [Obv]...CT -> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4.7 (Mid-High)
The dime I had as a 4.7. I normally don't collect dimes (I think they are a little too small to appreciate the toning), but this one I liked and it's the only toned dime in my core collection. @Morgandude11 you are up...
That seller tends to juice photos. I’m struggling to figure out what it really looks like but as is, I’m not a big fan. I’d call it a 3.5
I got outbid for this coin, by $90. It went for over a thousand. Sorry I did not bid higher. The coin picture is not juiced, to my knowledge
6. A monster to my eyes. Yes there are better out there but I like this one quite a lot. The more you look at it the more colors you see. Edit: After the following discussion, I'm pretty uncertain...guess you can put me in at 4.7 if others are changing their opinions.
You make me feel bad that I didn’t hang in there for the final bid, and raise it. I stubbornly hung in there with my max bid. My rating is 5.9. It is a monster, but the grade is a slight limiting factor.
I'll say you were fortunate to not win it. I've looked at plenty of eBay auctions and this photo is almost certainly manipulated. In hand you would have likely seen a middle of the pack coin that is nowhere near as vibrant as the photo.
I’m judging off of the above photo as I believe that is closer to what it actually would look like in hand. I call it a solid 4. I could be wrong but to me the OP photos absolutely look like the saturation is cranked. I personally think the coin is more attractive without the juicing anyway.
If the coin looks more like this photo, as opposed to the sold photos I posted, no way I would have paid $1000 bucks for that. It would be a nice 4-4.4 coin, but no monster, and not worth a grand. I have never seen the coin.
It should tell you at least a little something that one of this sellers coins that sold in the auction on 30 Aug on eBay for $445, also sold again on 15 Sep for a "best offer". It was likely not as the picture looked and was returned by the auction winner on 30 Aug. Just a guess. It could also be a bidder that didn't pay - but usually you'd just offer it to the under-bidder in that case.