I need to see bigger pictures before making any comment. Sorry. :(
Look At The Luster! :eek:
IMO, it is VERY difficult to grade coins from (DLRC?) scans -- they simply don't portray the luster well enough, and luster/toning/strike is...
Here's a similar comparison of the obverse... [img]
That's what an original morgan is supposed to look like.
Perhaps a photo will better explain what I'm talking about: [img]
Because they value the coin more than they did the $1200+. ;) Seriously, I'm scratching my head on that one too. Toned Morgans are a dime a...
Eddie, Again, IMO Doug is (and you are) mistaking toning for wear. Look again at the photos and my post above, repeated below... For the...
You can read the standards all you want, PCGS will grade Morgans with that kind of strike 65 all day long -- provided the luster is good and the...
If it's still in that green slab, chances are it isn't.
PQ 63 is my grade. Wouldn't be surprised with a 64 either.
What happens if NGC grades it 65? ;)
'Atta boy! ;) For the record, I think you're confusing toning for high-point wear -- you will notice that same discoloration on more hidden...
p.s. that's an AWESOME coin!
F-15+ /VF-20- Or Almost Very Fine 18. :)
Dipped, perhaps, cleaned, I don't think so.
p.s. I'd value the coin between $75 and $100.
Cheryl, That is a very nice and fairly problem-free example of the date, and one I would be proud to own. Well, well above average...Mike
XF 40, 35 on a bad day.
Yes, e-Bay archives. PCGS guides on moderns are a joke.
Separate names with a comma.
