Value of a Plus Star Toned Morgan Dollar

So here is another common date with toning and pl surfaces. Would you all prefer this coin to the original one?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I think I like the 1882-S better because it doesn't have the breaks in the toning like the 1885-O has.

 

Yes. This is closer to something I would own for my collection.

 

Nice toning , but the fingerprint would bother me as does the dark eagle breast . I wouldn't buy this one . But that's just me .

 

How does she look in hand ?

 

I'm not crazy about the 85-O. It's nice, but I wouldn't pay a premium. The strike is quite weak and the toning has an unfortunate disruption that's not attractive. Any premium you do get will be based on there being a + and a * on the label. The 82-S has better toning, as it's not broken by a fingerprint. Modest premium, helped by the PL obverse.

 

It's tough to photograph, but the obverse is fully pl (maybe even bordering dmpl), but the reverse is not pl at all. The pl qualities also make the toning stand out. If this one was in an NGC holder, I think it would deserve a star.

The original coin is not mine, but I have been watching it for a while. I also don't like the two areas with the break in the toning, but I'm still surprised that the plus star combination hasn't helped sell the coin.

 

Don't love either. Not ones I'd pay a premium for

 

Yes, absolutely. The toning is undisturbed.

 

As far as the overall question about "*" and "+" designations on the coin, I give much more importance to the "*" on the coin. In the series I collect, I think I have enough skill to judge if a coin is at the high end for the grade, so the "+" doesn't do much for me.

I really enjoy searching for "*" coins. I always start with eye appeal when assessing a coin and this designation helps me when searching through the multitude of coins available electronically. I don't always like the "*" coins, but I do like many of them.

 

I agree. But many of my most eye appealing coins are in older slabs or pcgs slabs so it's not always a valid point

 

Bill, I was purely commenting on the "*" and "+" designations. I wasn't implying that coins without the "*" did not have eye appeal. In fact, most of my coins do not have either and I'd like to think they have eye appeal.

 

No I know. I just wish there was a way to designate eye appeal on pcgs or older slabs. The cac sticker helps sometimes. But often some of the real amazing toners are retoned after an old dip

 

BTW, were able to get any of the Simpson Sunnywood collection that was auctioned off last fall? There were some amazing toners. I came very close on one coin, but just couldn't bid higher.

 

No I didn't pursue any I liked many but not at the prices. They may well reappear for less money on the secondary market. I haven't really been buying coins for myself for awhile I've been more focused on resale and lately my personal life

 

IMO, worth $75 max.

 

The palm print on the 85O instantly kills it in my book. I would not buy it. However, I know plenty of people would. The "Plus" really doesn't carry a whole lot of premium - it just means it is nice for the grade. You'll get a little bit over 64 money for the Plus, but not a whole lot. You'll get more for the toning (hence the Star). Minus the thumb print, the toning is fairly attractive - but 85O's are very common with nice toning. It doesn't add as much premium as some would think (or at least, it shouldn't).

The 82S is attractive, but it is only a small crescent of toning. You'll get a good bid for it, but it shouldn't have a significant premium.

 

Personally, I would not pay a premium for this type of toning. It is minimal and uneven even though attractive. As a retail estimate, however, I'm guessing that $100-$125 wouldn't be out of the ball park.

 

I agree. I wouldn't pay a premium for any of the coins in this thread.

 

Nope me either. And I'm sure we've all seen the ones I WILL pay a big premium for