Newest raw morgan, 1904-O

True, but I said it was cleaned already, just not totally. A polished coin DOES NOT have ANY luster WHATSOEVER.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I don't see luster. I see "shine." That is created by whatever mode was used to clean or polish the coin, and how much it has retoned (significantly). So, hard to say what it originally looked like.

 

Let me explain to you that shine would have a relatively uniform, colored surface. However, luster, has a grainy or "frosty" appearance.

 

You don't have to "explain" anything to me. I have been collecting coins for 40+ years. I know luster when I see it. That is shine from a cleaning. Don't agree--that is fine. We agree to disagree.

 

HA! Slabbed long ago, this coin came out of a roll of 1904-O's my dealer got recently that were put into an album around 1995. You should see the nice rainbow toning on the reverse of the other I purchased. Just wait until you see what I have in store for you...

I'd love to submit it, I'm pretty sure it's a lock 64... unfortunately, I don't have memberships with either of the big companies right now, maybe I should send it in to ANACS since they're running their special right now...

The entire coin DOES have luster. You really need to learn how photography can affect coins. Just wait...

40+ years of collecting coins and you think this is cleaned? What a joke... This video isn't the best, but it is certainly good enough to show you that the coin DOES have substantial luster, and when it catches the light directly, it simply is too bright for my phone to capture accurately.

[video=youtube;gyVlSOZaVEE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyVlSOZaVEE[/video]

Morgandude11, it's pretty clear that some here know what they're talking about, and some do not. I'm not a newbie to this, I can identify a cleaned coin from a mile away, and this thing is anything but cleaned. I'll be waiting for your apology.



If you still have some kind of an excuse for your poor eye in determining luster versus "shine", I'll post an even better video tomorrow when my phone is fully charged. Unfortunately, it died right at the end of the above video, which prevented me from flipping it over and giving another look at the obverse.

 

I am not sure what Morgandude11 is seeing on this coin but I see absolutely no evidence that the coin has been polished. Dipped and retoned? Possibly, but I think the coin will grade. As for the grade, there is a really large mark in the field above Liberty's cap that should certainly preclude an MS65 grade. In addition, the strike is really weak. I just can't see this coin going above MS64.

@FadetoBlack, if you are interested in submitting this coin, you can piggyback it on my next submission to NGC which I will be sending in about 2 weeks. PM me if you are interested.

Paul

 

I just remembered that I sold an uncirculated 1902-O Morgan Dollar with a very similar strike and toning pattern not too long ago.



Unfortunately, it did not have the luster that your coin has and it was in a third world slab, NTC MS64 IIRC.

 

Standard excuses. A newbie (you) who thinks he knows what he's talking about. It was slabbed--so where is the slab? It came from a roll? Actions speak louder than words--you think I am wrong (which I am not), submit it, or back off!! No way to prove what the coin is unless you have the wherewithal to submit. If you are not a member, get your "dealer" who sold you the coin that was slabbed but out of a roll, and then unslabbed (sounds like a pretty convoluted story right there) to submit for you. Otherwise, absent of a TPG, I stick with AU details. Don't like my evaluation? You can disagree, but I won't argue any more, as I am sure the coin was cleaned. You asked for opinions on grade, and don't like some of what people said. On this message board, you have to take the good with the bad--some might agree with you, and others don't. I stand on my years as a Morgan collector with considerable expertise--the coin has luster breaks, and shows wear in the high spots, at least based on your photography. Oh yes, one more thing--if you think that the coin is a MS 65, why did a knowledgeable coin dealer sell you that and another coin for $75??? He could easily have gotten $150 for the MS 65 coin you allege. Sounds fishy to me--and rather typical of people who come here with the "what is the grade" thread, and then spend the entire thread defending against criticism of their coin--not criticizing YOU, but your coin is no gem Morgan. Sorry and end of story for me--too much arguing with opinions rather than facts. As regards your little video, a dipped or polished coin can also show "shine" into a camera--that is no test. Does it have luster consistently to the naked eye, and no breaks? Doesn't look it from your pictures--sorry. There is also wear on the eagle's breast and on the obverse as well--very little wear but enough to take the coin out of the MS realm. So, I stand by AU details--cleaned.


Also, I consider your response to me rude, and condescending. I never attacked you--you are being nasty and flippant to me for disagreeing with my valuations on your coin. Please do not resort to "personal attacks," as that is contrary to forum rules. I never attacked you, but debated the condition of your coin. Extend to me the same courtesy, or I consider your response an attack if you can't be polite.

 

Paul, look at the shiny areas on the reverse of the coin. Right around "In God we trust," the toning stops abruptly, and there are shiny spots. Same goes with the eagle--appears like somebody used a q-tip to remove toning, as the toning pattern seems to begin and end abruptly, as opposed to showing some uniformity. On the coin you posted, the toning begins and fades into the fields from the devices GRADUALLY. That is what I see.

 

Oh, how quaint!

 

You can argue, bless, or trash the coin, but stay away from personalities. Neither side is going to slap their foreheads and say "Oh my gosh, yes I see now", so the thread will stay open a little longer to see if new participants can add constructively to it or not. Do not continue with the comments on the person.

 

Okay, complying with nothing personal, here is another 1904o that shows a pretty weak strike, but unbroken luster, and no wear in high spots--this one is MS 64, and is also mine. Notice that the breast feathers are weak, but not denuded as per the original OP coin:

 

Here is one of my 1904-O's. Yes the feathers are a bit flat however, it is still a solid coin. As for the mentioned 04-O in this thread, I would personally not submit it. I would give it a MS-64 (if it has not been cleaned) which would not make it worth the cost of sending it in to be slabbed.

 

Morgandude, I apologize for insulting you. It was late, I was grumpy, slightly intoxicated, and came home to a much longer than expected debate about this coin. The dealer I purchased this coin off of deals mostly in bullion, and prices common-date morgans at common intervals of grade... what he calls 63's go for 34, 64's for 38, 65's for bid. I bought a slabbed 64 '82-S off him for 65 bucks in December, I'm pretty sure that coin would bean. It is worth noting that you nailed the grade on that coin.

 

FadetoBlack.. Nice coin. If you like it that's all that matters. I personally dig the luster.

 

Thank GOD! However, America is a free country, so I don't mind if Morgandude thinks the coin is polished.

 

What I disagree with, Morgandude is that you say the coin is POLISHED. i realize that the coin has a partial cleaning, but i see some luster. The coin is AU53 details in my opinion.

 

That was what I was thinking if a TPG didn't ascertain a cleaning. I thought even stronger AU details--like AU 55 or 58. Fade, I totally accept your apology. You clearly are passionate about your coins, and whether or not it is cleaned or was cleaned in the past, it is still a pretty coin. I wouldn't submit only because the finances don't back submission--even if it were a 64, that is a very common date.

 

Au 58

 

Anybody notice the ding by "P" on the obverse? For what its worth, I don't think this coin could grade MS65 with the small rim ding.