Ok, this was a difficult coin to capture. These were daylight shots, at an angle. If it got tense, sorry for any nastiness. Been in a mood, because of family issues. Looking at these photos, it looks like a different coin.
That looks like a different coin and how can it be a 62? It should be higher. If you want to nasty, visit my ex mother in law.
This was a daylight shot, near the window, with my Nikon on a tripod. See why I think minor little problems resulted in a grade that I think is 1-2 grades low? I guess I am not completely crazy.
Nice coin, I agree, but I still see the marks on the cheek and the stuff in front of the face and behind the head, not to mention the rim. Enough to knock it down a couple of grades...apparently!
I'd really have to see the surfaces of the obverse better to be able to comment on the grade. 62PL seems plausible.
It is my lowest graded Morgan I own, except for the 1893s at AU 50. I have hundreds of Morgans—no way this is a 62. I have 64s and 65s that are as clean. Yes, I acknowledge there are a few bag marks, and some die polish lines in the obverse rear fields, but not enough for a 62. That was my point of the OP. Is it gem? Not likely, but 63 or 64PL? Sure.
Maybe you should crack and resubmit. Also, there's the green bean as is. It should be a 64. I'd rather lose the PL and have a higher grade.
I have a subset of PL coins, and needed that date, so I would rather have the PL. May resubmit or try for cross at specific grade with PCGS.
I probably won’t, as it is an attractive coin, and it isn’t the only one I have that is probably undergraded.