1892 CC On The Way To PCGS Grade?

THAT is a real nice coin. PCGS rarely overgrade Morgans. And I have to agree with PCGS on this one. It's not a great 65 but it's a 65.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Thanks. It was an NGC coin, and it is a borderline 65 if so--the fields are not super clean on the obverse right side of the coin. However, it has great luster and nice tone. I feel the OP's coin isn't far behind--that to me is a 63 as I said. Morgans get lots of latitude on bag marks and nicks, as they sat in mint bags and were moved around, causing plenty of contact. CC dollars are rarely penalized for just contact marks--strike, luster, eye appeal tend to get more play in grading from TPGs.

 

It is a typical MS 63 or possibly a MS 62 nick from contact in a mint bag. Not at all unusual for Morgans--sorry, Doug, but that is how they grade them--get used to the fact that this is what you will see as MS 62-63, and accept it as the norm.

 

I don't fault Doug for being old..... school.

 

I think it's a nice coin too, but from the OP pictures, there is much more weakness in the hair below liberty and over the ear than yours. This is a key date CC for sure, but it's either high AU or low MS. I agree that both NGC and PCGS are lenient on CC coins and understand that bag marks are inevitable, but the OP coin has way to many distracting marks on the cheeks and prime areas to get a 63. Just my opinion.

 

60/61 or unc. details damaged. I just got the result on a three coin express submission to PCGS, an AU58 $20 NGC was AU details damaged at PCGS! The other two "cleaned". So the supposedly lenient grading services can be anything but!

One thing is for sure this gentleman will make money either way.

 

I agree Morgan's and liberty $20 s are often heavily bag marked and what is a ms 60 or 61 for most other coins is a 63 or 64 in them I feel that their graded by a different standard by the tpgs if they were graded by the same standards anything in a ms 65 or better would be an extreme rarity

 

I all too well understood your point and agree to some degree. However, if it has happened, there isn't a thing you can do about it, so why not accept it? MS 65 coins basically look like the bottom coin, and have for some time, according to TPGs. Disagreeing with them isn't going to change that, so why fight City Hall all the time????? It only vindicates them more, and makes it look as if you have an axe to grind against their decisions. Besides, I would say that the top coin was always a MS 67 or so--never a 65. Think you got that one wrong for sure.

 

Not true. I know coins as well as do you, and have accepted it a long time ago. Many agree with me, as they buy coins graded accordingly. Face facts, if a coin is graded MS 63 and sells as a 63, and numismatists with a reputation far exceeding yours call them 63s, they're 63s as far as the marketplace goes. If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck--perhaps it is a duck, Doug. Give it up on the "higher standard" that was supposedly there in past years--it is nostalgia for the "good ole days."

 

Well two things, the first picture is overexposed and I am sure there are things that are hidden because of that. I could probably make the second coin look almost, but not quite as good as the first if my goal was to make the coin look as good as possible, instead of of an accurate representation.

The second thing is there are grades MS60 -70 for UNC obviously, with 65 smack in the middle. Is that coin really a middle of the road coin???? If that is what a 65 looks like, what the heck does a 67 look like. Maybe this new math is a tad better?????????

 

Total nub question as I am reading through this argument.

Why do you guys care what a TPG grades a coin unless you are selling it to a less informed buyer? I mean, if two titans of the coin industry sat down at a table to make a deal, does the slab really matter? Won't they inspect the coin in question and come up with their own idea for value?

As a nub, I feel like I would need that slab as a security blanket but to an experienced collector, I see it just getting in the way unless you were selling to a dope like me.

 

I agree from an ethics point of view, but if I am to lazy to learn how to grade, I deserve to buy over-graded coins.

 

C'mom Doug, the second picture is worse than the first. That over exposure can be hiding all sorts of sins,
But lets get past that that and I will conceed the point of gradeflation, but so what.

Things change, they used to do kickoffs from the 40 yard line then the 35 yard line then the 30 and now back to 35 yard line. The important thing is not if the rules change, but if everyone understands them or not.

While it is impossible to have 100% standards in coin grading since no two are alike we all need to do our part to attempt consistancy.

This is what PCGS says an MS 65 Morgan should look like.




It looks similar to the MS 65 that is posted and that is great. Certainly the two coins you represented don't even look close to this. In addition, if this PCGS coin image would come across JA's desk he would say "Bean It" solid for the the grade. It all good to be on the same page. So while you may disagree with the grade other respected "coin guys" do not.

Now you would probably call the coin a 63, but what good does that do anyone? I know what you mean, because I know "your' grading system, but someone who doesn't know you would have no clue what you mean, you might as well grade the coin "Q" by your standards. Without a frame of reference no one knows what that means. In addition you cannot say any coin is "overgraded" without stating what reference point you are referring to. It really is not a right or wrong thing on what measuring stick you are using. It is just what the PRESENT accepted standards are.

Now as I eluded to in my previous post, this "looser" grading system may be superior. Going back to your first coin, I would guestimate that coin is better than at least 95% of the Morgans out there and you would like to grade it 65. That does not make a lot of sense to me since that would mean you would have to cram 95% of the UNC Morgans inro Grades MS60 -65 and spread out the reamaining 5% over grades MS66 -MS 70. If you spread them out more evenly, it would most likley be a more accurate sytem