GTG: 1881s Morgan Dollar

67 DMPL

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

66 + DMPL

 

Looks proof...but I've never seen one look this good in pic. so no grade from me.

 

OK, the whole story. I bought this coin, but never owned it. Those of you who know me well are aware that I am not a dealer, but occasionally buy coins for a few affluent collectors, who are fussy, but not that knowledgeable.

That was the case here—I bought this one, ironically, in NGC’s backyard, for a friend in Sarasota. He looked at the pictures, and fell in coin love. I explained to him that the seller is notorious for light saturation of coins, and using Photoshop to smooth out the surfaces of the fields in coins. He still wanted it.

So, even though the coin had a fixed price, and no offer situation, I negotiated the price down. I bought it, opened the coin, and looked at it. It was an extremely nice PL Morgan, but the seller made it look like a MS 67 or 68 DMPL coin. I then sealed it up in a new cardboard mailer, and sent it off to my friend the same day.

Now, how does one buy a coin like this? We often have to deal with juiced pictures of coins. Given the date, grade, and die state, I knew it would be a nice coin, but that the photos made it look undergraded. In hand, it is not undergraded—it is correct.

For an 1881s, which has many attractive PL gem grade coins, this one is quite attractive, but NOT MS 66 or 67 attractive. It has striations from die polish that were deliberately concealed. When buying a PL or DMPL coin, expect die polish lines, or it is probably not PL. I posted this coin as a learning tool, and a few experienced Morgan collectors immediately got it. I said that the coin looks like the photo—it does, except its virtues were exaggerated by lighting, and the smoothing eraser in Photoshop.

At any rate, here is the coin:

 

MS-62 Need better pictures.

 

Read the explanation above.

 

Auction King I would only buy graded coins from.
They purposely juice there pics and raw coins everything says High Grade , PL or DMPL
That said as long as the price was fair on this one then nothing wrong with A 65 PL.
Especially with how tough it can be to get A PL on A 81S sometimes.

 

The toning process is beginning to affect the luster, photos are a bit too bright, MS-63. Could go either way, up or down, in my opinion. I'm partial I like all Morgans. Good luck!

 

Read the explanation above.

 

MS66 PL

 

Went with MS67DMPL

 

66 DMPL

 

. Why is it black?

 

Now I got to look up DMPL(Dimple???). I think i remember that term. I’ll let you know

 

Deep Mirrors Proof Like

 

I'm going to guess this one before I hit page two. But based on the seller and the "Look" of the coin, I would be at 65PL. They make it look like a 67 Ultra DMPL, but I know how they shoot. I bet she's a real beauty in hand though.

 

Is that cloudiness on the obverse PVC residue? I just can't get past the white haziness. I've bought many blast white Morgan's, but if they have that white residue, it's always a pass for me.

 

I think that the photo has been juiced, and any “residue” in the fields is a vestige of the use of the Photoshop erase tool. This seller is kind of notorious for faking his photos.

 

Yeah, I can spot the seller instantly just by the photos in the main listing page. It's sad that they are allowed to continue to fleece unsuspecting buyers. But they do leave themselves wide open for SNAD's.