1895-O Morgan

Thoughts on this coin? http://www.ebay.com/itm/391019791532

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Aside from the rim dings pictures aren't good enough for me. There is most likely a reason its raw

 

Or someone could get lucky.

 

The especially poor photos are just a coincidence, I'm sure....

(roll eyes here).

 

Then why ask?

 

I don't trust these sellers that use flowery language like "ultra" and "big collection" in their descriptions. If I am taking a flyer on a $30 coin that is one thing but for a coin of that value it should speak for itself. Plus, why wouldn't a coin worth $1500 be graded and verified? The seller stands to lose a lot there if his guess is 1 grade shy.

 

no way pass

 

It probably won't grade because of the severe hit on the nose and the two hard hits on the rims, obverse and reverse........EF Details - Damage.

This time, I will make an exception for the OP. Maybe he is trying to change. Don't try to take advantage of a good thing! Otherwise, I'll revert back to my previous attitude.

Chris

 

Probably cleaned or dipped to death and the bad photos hiding a lot of marks I'd pass

 

Looks like someone took a knife to her nose...

 

Looks like that seller already sold that exact coin on Friday http://m.ebay.com/itm?itemId=161534798147

Coincidentally, the buyer of that coin bought a total of 7 high dollar coins from this seller all on Friday. Thousands of dollars.

 

@silentnviolent, not sure I'm looking at the same thing you were, bhat link isn't the same coin, not the same year, nose hits and rim dings arent there, flip has different info on reverse.

 

I would steer clear of this coin. It looks wiped, overdipped, lusterless and possibly polished. And that's before I comment on the scratches and hard contact marks.

If I were to spend $1500 on a Morgan, I'd either want to see it in hand if it's raw or have it graded by NGC/PCGS and be able to view clear photos.

This coin is trouble. If someone does buy it at that price, IMO, they are going to be sorely disappointed.

 

I'de say. Shiney without luster

 

The one that sold was a 96 s

 

I see that now. I also see that since my post, all sales have now been changed to 'Private' so I can't go back and copy the correct link, which leads me to the conclusion that these are being sold by the OP. He must be self promoting dishonestly here, against the rules, while attempting to feign interest in his own item and garner it undeserved attention.

I don't like dishonest people and this OP has proven himself to be just that with the majority of his posts.

@Profit man This is your coin. Why not be honest and say so from the get go?

Not that I believe you will respond, as your only goal here was to boost views of your listing.

 

This crap is why laws get made like the new bullion dealer law in MN. People like this OP ruin things for everybody so they can use deception to buy under FMV in his "not daddy's" shop, then polish the crap out of em and sell em in another venue as high grade.

When legislators in other states adopt the hobby killing bills like has happened here in MN we all will have people like this kid to blame.

I truly hope that single buyer SNADS every one of those items.

 

From the listing:
"There is a 14 day return policy plus we do not allow any returns of coins that have been removed from the
original holder. COINS REMOVED FROM HOLDERS OR SENT TO THIRD PARTY FIRMS ARE CONSIDERED SOLD"

So, trying to dump it even when a TPG confirms it is SNAD? HA.

 

Haha, where'd that come from? Sorry sir you are incorrect.