1897 0 Morgan. Discussion why grade is so low.

Hi just was doing the ebay search because I couldn't sleep and came upon this auction below.

I see the coin doesn't have that knock out look but it looks nicely struck for that year.

Since we have had so many Morgan discussions lately and I love them, why do you think this only got a MS 60 grade.

I am thinking because of the limited amount in the market.

All opinions accepted. thanks G


http://www.ebay.com/itm/1897-O-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-ICG-MS60-RARE-Key-Date-Uncirculated-Coin-/170993519170?pt=Coins_US_Individual&hash=item27d0020a42

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

It doesn't look overgraded to me, but what do I know.

Chris

 

I'm not an expert, but I see rubs on the jaw, cheek and maybe on the hair above the ear. Don't trust the slab grade. "Buy the coin, not the slab."

 

I agree with Doug - the coin is AU58. No better.

 

I AGREE with DOUG!! (yes, we do agree!!). The coin is overgraded, as ICG is/was one of the least accurate TPGs. If you look at the breast of the Eagle, there is minor wear. Same goes for high spots on the obverse--it is a circulated coin. I would go for a real grade of AU 55-58.

 

Although the subject is controversial, a coin's population isn't a factor in the it receives at the third-party grading house. They look at an 80-S Morgan the same way they look at a 93-S Morgan.

 

I concur.. One day I hope one of the current TPG's or a new TPG has a slab with a deep Purple along with the black insert that holds the coin. Ravens colors baby!!!

Oh, my bad, thinking of Football. Say hi to Mr. Cheeks.

 

I don't think so. I have a feeling that NGC or PCGS would put it in an AU slab. The wear seems pretty obvious on this one.

 

Do we know each other. I have had a dozen or so upgrade like this one in PCGS NGC slabs.

Too bad I send in the old label to ICG for pop numbers. I wish most collectors would do the same to those NGC PCGS labels when regraded.

I know a collector that has upgraded and yes downgraded slabs at the PCGS giant and threw the old stickers in the trash. We are not talkin about a few, I mean 100's over the years.
I tell him he is dumb, he tells me mind my own bee's wax. I believe the coin values guide has already gave this a study and values reflect it.
G

 

Do you truly believe that scarce issues are not sometimes viewed with a leniency that common coins do not get? Ideally, all should be looked at the same way, but this is not always the case.

 

That's a stunning coin. Were it MS it goes much better than 60, likely 64.

 

Like I said, the topic is controversial. But I'll admit, I tend to see "better dates" more generously graded by TPGs than common issues, but I don't think much of it and attribute it to mere coincidence... although, it very well may not be.

Like you said, ideally, all coins should be grading without bias, but until the theory that scarcer issues are consistently graded generously, I will continue to trust the TPGs are grading every coin without prejudice.

 

Hmm I'm torn on this one, I see some wear on the ear and on the eagle's breast feathers (not uncommon) but I also see luster and a clean cheek and fields.....I think in hand this coin must look very different than the pictures and thus the grade I can see going from AU to MS-64

 

Take a look at any ten slabbed AG-VG 1916-D dimes on eBay, compare them to your favorite grading guide, and get back to us on "TPG neutrality".

 

I do respect your opinion, Brian, but if waiting for that kind of consistency, you likely will be doing so for a very long time. The fact that you admit that you "tend to see 'better dates' more generously graded", in my most humble opinion, should be enough to accept that grading with prejudice is an unfortunate reality.