1894 Morgan Guess The Grade

There's not that much hits on it actually not all those marks are.The coin has lots of luster and no wear just a great slabed conserved coin.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

58s have almost no bagmarks. Quoting the ANA - AU-58 Very Choice about uncirculated .... No major detracting contact marks will be present Page 26 of the ANA guild sixth edition. I am not wrong but maybe Kenneth Bressett is?

 

There is a RIM dent on this coin. It should not be an AU58.

 

Absolutely not true. I own MS 65 Morgans that have bagmarks. Obviously, you know NOTHING about Morgan Dollars, and how they were stored. Looks like you are campaigning for my ignore list.

 

I saw the rim marks on obverse and reverse too and graded lower

 

So regardless, for the rim dings it is still more attractive than a lot of low MS grades. I am happy to have it in a AU-58 grade rather than UNC Details grade. I have seen quite a few coins with nice grades have noticeable rim dings. The

 

you got a very good deal that's why you buy the coin not the slab.

 

Oh I would like to have it too!

 

Contact marks on coins can come from circulation, too. These tiny little buggers rarely have any noticeable contact marks when they’re released into circulation. A contact mark doesn’t affect the technical grade until it hits MS, but it could affect the market or money grade.

 

For an AU 58 it's a nice coin.

 

I don't know much about Morgan Dollars, and I've only owned a few that were give to me as presents, including an MS66. But I do know how to __read__ the standard and I am not being rude. AU58s **are** more perfect than MS65's,***by the ANA standard, as it is written***. So what your saying is 100% correct, but doesn't contradict what I said. MS Morgans have bagmarks, but AU58s should have few if any, and certainly not rim dents. Again, this is part of the ANA standard on page 26 of the 6th edition guild.

What you are not being mindful of is that AU58s are often confused with higher graded coins (it says this in the standard as well), and that there is no continium of "perfection" from circulating states to to Mint Stats to Proofs. Each have different standards. So if someone says, this coin might be an AU58 or even and MS60, that would make no sense. If the coin can be viewed as a true AU58, and it terns out to be instead MS, it will grade much higher than a low MS grade because it is nearly perfect coin with minimal and hardly noticable wear (as an AU grade) and near phsyical perfection otherwise. It has to grade in the higher MS grades, like and MS67+. Therefor, this AU58 grade, in my opinion, according the ANA standards, is misgraded and should be more like an AU54-55, which is an outstanding coin. FWIW, I would always choose an AU-58 over and MS-62. I hope that clarifies what I wrote. Peace be with you.

 

Yeah we know..

 

Ignore list. You don’t listen to the advice of someone who knows about 30 times what you might ever learn about coins. Adios, and don’t forget NOT to write.

 

No, you don’t, obviously.

 

You should talk about yourself some more? I don’t think you do it enough?

 

Ignore list, and reported. Bye!

 

What did I do to be reported, there alligator skin? You’re just mad b/c I stated the truth.

 

I was talking about the coin, and mentioned to the OP that it was undergraded. My suggestion was for him to attempt a crossover so as to possibly triple the value of his coin. Two individuals who know nothing about the circumstance were gratuitously rude, and made suggestions that were numismatically unsound, and one of the two was personally rude. To get back to the thread, I do believe that the OP might stand to gain significantly by attempting a crossover. That was my only intention.

 

I have no idea why you are so angry, but nothing I wrote should have set off this emotional response. I am talking about the coins and the grading standards, annotated for you to look up yourself. There is no reason for the hostility.