Morgan 1889 CC - Need estimates on Grade and Value

Your right. there seems to be a little extra space between all the numbers, and they seem a little thinner.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Yeah... thinner is a good way to explain what I'm seeing. It's also strange in that the 18 appears to be together closer then the 889.

 

It's real,F15.

 

Ahab, explain yourself. Why amidst all of this controversy, do you think its real? What about the weird mintmark, the strange toning and the date among others? Im very interested in your opinion.

 

Guys, take a look at this. Do we have any psych majors out there? Here is the response I received from the seller.

"Hello & how are you today Clayton? My apologies for any misrepresentations. This coin is 100% genuine & not a fake or altered copy in any way. The coin was removed from an ngc coin holder in order to complete a morgan set about a year ago. The slab # was 4011311-002. If you simply do not like the coin please send it back to: V.B. address removed for protection of individual for a paypal refund. If you want to have it certified to make sure it is genuine I am 100% certain you will not run into any problems. Please let me know on how you wish to proceed & if I may further assist in any way. Have a super week. "

Any opinions based entirely on conjecture here? Why do imagine they would remove it from an NGC holder? If it is certified why not recase it and sell it for full value? I havent run the slab number but Im almost positive it will come back positive. Why would even a counterfeiter give a fake number with so many real ones to steal?

 

It definitely is the same coin so it is definitely a genuine piece... This just goes to show how funky a picture can make a coin look.

To answer your question this coin was cracked out of the holder to be sold as a non problem coin. NGC has certified this coin as genuine but improperly cleaned. Did the seller mention in their listing that this coin had been cleaned? I doubt it.

 

While I do not consider myself an expert, I have been collecting Morgans for 40+ years and have gotten reasonably good at evaluating grade and authenticity. I do not find the mintmark or date strange as they are consistant with the wear shown on the coin. I believe many of these circulated coins have resided in someones pocket as a good luck piece and subjected to all sorts of physical and chemical abuse. It was broken out of it's holder because NGC said it was improperly cleaned, they even have a picture of it. I do this myself when I don't like what the label says.

 

Your right! No the seller did not mention that.

 

Well folks, it looks like the case is solved.

The NGC Cert number runs through clean and displays photos of both sides and it is the same coin as the one in question. I wonder what makes the coin so strange and why it brought up so much controversy. I appreciate everyone who contributed to this post and to my education. This was fun and Im glad it turned out to be real. Ill still take it to my guy tomorrow just to be absolutely sure that it is the exact same coin as the one pictured, but Id say its a pretty exact match.

Even cleaned, i stand to make a good bit of money from this coin.

This is one of those rare cases where you buy an unslabbed coin from a stranger and come out on top.

Thanks again everyone and I welcome continued discussion over this piece and really am interested in how Ahab knew so certainly that the coin was real.

 

Thanks Ahab. you might not be an expert but your the only one on this thread who hedged your bet towards genuine and Im impressed. The coin does look strange compared to others that Ive seen and all of the details pointed out on this thread by others were valid concerns.

Id invite your opinion on any of my future threads. Thanks again for contributing.

 

My guess is you are likely right, but there are also numerous people who crack their coins out of ALL slabs simply because they do not like slabs. There are a lot more than one on this forum who fall into that category.

 

I have some customers at the shop here that do the same thing. I understand why they do it... I respect it. It's not my speed... but different strokes for different folks. However I had a gentleman once who bought a nice NGC XF 45 1955 Doubled Die Obverse from me at a small local monthly show. This was the last coin to finish his set. He said he was going to crack it out and put it in his set. The next show he came to show me his complete set of Lincoln cents. He had polished every coin in his set to the nice bright shiny copper look... including the really nice original looking 1955 DDO he had bought from me and cracked out of the holder...

 

Caution, genius at work?

My attitude is simple. I can remove a coin from any slab just about any time I want. But once done, it will never go back into that slab. It might get reslabbed (I have done that), but that slab is now gone forever.

 

Not to mention it's not all that cheap to get them done in the first place... with all the club fees and grading fees that go into grading the coins in the first place.

 

Well I guess we know why I don't work for NGC. I guess the cleaning could account for the soft look of the devices and all the letters being odd.Someone went crazy with a buffing wheel.

 

You dont imagin it could just be a really worn die at the mint to account for the oddities? (Obviously it does have fake toning of some sort and was cleaned, but still, that doesnt count for the odd "C" in "CC" and the other strange casting anomalies.)

 

Wayne Miller in his "Analysis of Morgan and Peace Dollars" said that"

 

No. The things that I really wondered about were the roundness of the devices that don't fit in the weak strike or normal circulation wear. Plus most of the lettering around the obverse and some on the reverse looked like they were tooled. Both of these things are probably attributed to a harsh cleaning. The pits on the cheek were also what I thought may have been a sign of casting. Possibly corrosion that was cleaned off? Don't know. Either way the coin is a problem coin. Hopefully you will do ok with it. Let us know

 

Thanks for posting this thread,

I wonder if there is a repunched mm, maybe a cc/o? that first c sure looks like an o. Maybe someone will check their vam book.

 

anyone look at the images on VAMworld? There is a link that shows the different CC's used in 1889. Coin looks clashed and has a normal date placement. That eliminates half of the known die pairs. Maybe a 2A?