A middle of the road common date 65. Is like a bit less chatter on the cheek and reverse. May not be as bad in hand as it looks like one of those really frosty coins that show every blemish. But it’s nothing to get excited about either. You want to buy this at greysheet bid or less
I agree with the grade assigned by PCGS and verified by CAC. Here are two 1882-S Morgans that received similar grades.
What do you all think of this one compared to the OP. https://coins.ha.com/itm/morgan-dol...1811-24351.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515
remnants of planchet striation marks. They don't bother me at all. I know they probably bother others, but I know what they are and when and how they were made. My eye looks right past them. Now if they were bright and shiny, it would probably bother me.
They leave money on the table with these washed out photos. I agree with the grade. The harsh lighting used here is making the coin appear worse than it actually is in all probability.
Yep. Luster suffers the most under their photography. It’s not terrible, but it’s no TrueView either.
Off the top of my head I have no idea, I'd have to do the research and find out just like anybody else would. But it wouldn't be much as these are quite common in 63. Maybe, but maybe not. Ya see I help a lot of collectors with their collections, I give them my approval or disapproval of coins they ask me about. And if and when they decide to sell a coin that I have approved of, it's usually sold in a very short time, often a matter of minutes and for a very good price. So you tell me, does that sound like something collectors wouldn't like ?
Why not ? They use standards that far off now - just off in the opposite direction Kinda makes ya wonder if that is not their intent doesn't it ?
Would you value it about $115 (about what the last 4 65s sold for), $65 (about average for a 63) or somewhere in between? I guess my question is whether you just disagree about the number on the slab or whether you think the coin is actually worth less than a standard MS 65.
I actually bought that one tonight. I'm pretty happy with the price I paid too. It looks like one of those that recently went through the very tough grading periods with PCGS. As soon as I have it in hand, I'll post my own images. On a side note, this Morgan was my very first purchase on Heritage.
I absolutely disagree with the number on the slab, the coin is grossly over-graded. I am a strong believer in buy the coin not the slab. As to value, what you're trying to do doesn't work, so let me show you something. The OP's coin graded 65, sold for $132 in March 2018 - https://coins.ha.com/itm/morgan-dol...1811-24354.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515 Now I'm going to show you a picture of the same coin, same date/mint, same TPG, but it's graded 63 and sold for $168 in Nov. 2017, roughly 25% more than the 65 sold for - https://coins.ha.com/itm/morgan-dol.../131746-23469.s?ic4=ListView-Thumbnail-071515 And if you click on the links, look at the blowup pics of the coins, you'll quickly see that that 63 coin is much nicer than the 65. Leaps and bounds nicer. Better luster, far fewer contact marks, better quality strike - better everything. So how can that be possible ? Easy, because the 63 coin was graded correctly, back when TPG grading standards actually meant something. Before they were loosened to the point of being a complete joke. So do you see what I mean about value ? I'm not the only one out there with eyes that can see. I'm not the only who actually knows what that date/mint coin should look like in 63, let alone 65. And the price paid for that 63 proves it. You can't just compare and equate grade numbers to dollars - it doesn't work, never has never will. You have to completely ignore the entire slab, pretend it's not even there and just consider the coin. Most people don't do that, most people can't do that ! Now somebody is going to say that the 63 has a gold CAC sticker on it - THAT's why it sold for more money ! Well it's possible you're right, it might have been somebody who didn't know what they were doing, didn't know how to judge coins, they just saw that gold sticker and said - OH WOW ! But it's also possible I'm right, in fact I think it even more likely that somebody who knows what they are doing bought that 63 coin. You see, the 65 coin has a CAC sticker on it too, which means CAC is saying it is either a mid or high 65. But then that's because all CAC does is go along with whatever the TPGs say nowadays - CAC has greatly loosened their standards too. And people who know coins, also know that. In today's world, if that 63 were cracked out and resubmitted it would probably grade 66. And people who know coins, know that as well. They are all too well aware that the TPG grading of today is a joke - and sad joke at that.