Here's one to try and guess

Well the grader obviously agreed with you!!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

It is that, and the tone really adds to it's attractiveness. Everyone knows how I am about toned coins too :thumb:

You're very welcome

 

They did in that they slabbed it in a problem-free holder. I guessed 64 though, not 63.

 

Well, like Yoda always says, the difference between damage and market acceptable bag marks is a judgment call.

 

i don't recommend an attempted crossover

 

I don't think it was a "problem coin" in the sense of that definition. It was a coin with some marks that had a ton of eye appeal. So, it was graded in a spot that shocked nobody. I thought it had a lot of appeal, and had I not had multiple coins like it, if it were $100, I would have bought it. Those are contact marks from a mint bag--I don't think any person damaged it. At least, not in my opinion. The luster and details are very appealing.

 

If I remember from Bower's book, the vaults at the Mint in Philly, as well as the Fed handling the overflow at some point, these were stack from floor to ceiling, bags on top of bags, so I would think the contact happening in the bag is a strong possibility.

Course to, being 1887, she might have been in a saloon during a shootout lol.

I think if the price were more reasonable, and I bought it, this would be the only coin I keep housed in the slab.

 

So right you are sir!

 

maybe not as long as it was in a bag, BUT, it doesn't matter. These are silver coins and if one was bent in a 45 degree angle from being on the botom of a ton of silver coins, is it a damaged coin? Yeah!

 

Doug, you present a reasonable argument for the coin being inappropriately graded as a Mint State survivor and misattributing the damage as probable mint distribution rather than damage due to general circulation or mishandling. Maybe the graders flipped a coin.

 

The type of toning (no-brainer bag toning) over the hits virtually guarantee the hits occurred while in the mint bag. PCGS, in virtually all cases, will slab these types of coins with bagmarks that have toned over, and I challenge anyone to find a bag-toned morgan with these types of hits that was put in a genuine holder.

Now some may argue that they should not have -- as their own personal standards indicate this coin as a problem coin -- but to suggest that PCGS was incorrect in putting this in a problem-free slab is a mistake, IMO.

Said a bit differently, PCGS defines "damage" differently than some in this thread.

Respectfully...Mike

 

Hmm -

You might be correct but this was body bagged for damage

 

I find the TPG judgment on what is damage versus non-damage arbitrary,yet the definition is arbitrary. If it helps, I agree with Mike that the Morgan is helped in that it appeared that normal storage of the coin in mint bags appears to have caused it. Not saying its proven, but it appears so. Ruben, your coin appears scratched after the fact.

None of this is "right", I am just surmising from this that normal expected damage is more forgivable than more rarely seen damage that cannot be easily attributed to mint handling of the coin.

Again, simply reason #187 that they should give up on all of this and simply grade a coin on details remaining. Like I said before, in ancients the morgan would grade XF, maybe gXF, because that is what it really is.

 

:thumb: Mike I agree with you and for all intensive purposes, PCGS in their examination had also. As BU pointed out the facts about how tons of these pieces were stored and moved about in bags upon bags leads good probability that the " damage" occurred pre-circulation, not to overlook the toning factor.. A great thread with some very astute opposing opinions.

 

Your getting cranky in Florida... just saying.

What is Cresant and textile toning?

 

The toning pattern is crescent shaped.

Textile, I think he means like a waffle pattern from contact with the bag.