I just bought this coin for about $25. (hoping to more than double that investment) It was set in a necklace. It wasn't "damaged" by the necklace and it was in good condition so i figured what the heck. got a few questions for this coin. 1 confirming that it is real. I am pretty sure, but i am always skeptical when it comes to Morgan dollars. 2 was the front cleaned? 3 toning on this coin is just kind of "off" for me 4 aprox value and grade 5 Whats your recommended next step. (if it has been cleaned) photo time http://pbckt.com/sd.LK6 i posted the the thumb of the nicest pictures.
The coin looks cleaned to me. Major hit at the 6:00 region on the reverse. The toning looks "cooked" to me. Maybe a means to hide the alleged cleaning? If I were to grade it I'd hazard an Au-50....$30 value, but that would be a guess for a problem free coin. Now, where's Raider? Lets see what he thinks and how close I came in my assessment.....
thanks =[ unfortunately i got my hopes up when i saw someone commented hoped someone had some info for me.
it is not a hit that is an untoned spot from where the holder on the pendant of the necklace was. it also has some white powder in the rim there that makes it really look like a hit, but i assure you with some canned air spray on that area i could clear it right up. The area i am looking at being cleaned is the obverse around the head of course. The rest is 100% legit(imo) but that is why i am asking the pros. I can be assured that because of the fact that the necklace left parts of the coins untoned and sealed. the rim of the coin is partially untoned. if the coin was cooked the necklace would have been effected as well. It simply wouldn't have been done that way. I do realize that however being in the necklace reduced its value because it left parts untoned. Au50 is pretty fair that's what i was thinking around when i bought it aswell. your price i also have problems with red book value is 50$ for au 50. would it help to get a photo of where the coin sat? in the same aspect of artificial toning i guess it could have been done inside the necklace if the jewelry was covered. i was wondering this because the what i assume is a 999 hallmark on. My caution is because the coin clearly toned in the necklace from the shiny holder marks. BUT the jewelry part of it is not even close to as toned as the coin. Is this common? i don't know if coin silver tones differently then 999.
Lol, I'm here. The toning looks AT, especially on the obverse, nothing looks right about it. I would say it has AU details. As for what you could do, I don't think there's much you could do to help out that coin. I would say it's worth right about what you paid for it. Also, don't go by the redbook prices, they tend to be on the high side. NumisMedia would be a better guide, price wise, and completed auctions would really be the best.
I don't mean offense but I am going to be brutally honest with you 1) It appears to be genuine 2) It appears to have been cleaned 3) The toning might be NT but is certainly not attractive 4) The coin has AU details but it is a problem coin and will net grade at XF40 making the value $20-$25. Exactly what you paid for it. http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=28014&Lot_No=24806 5) I would sell it immediately. Morgan Dollars are easily attainable and there is no reason to ever sacrifice quality or eye appeal in this series. The present example is from jewelry which highly increases the probability of it being a problem coin, usually for rim damage. Add to it that it might be cleaned and AT, it is almost a certainty that the coin is a problem coin. I think you would be much better off buying an MS64 common date Morgan with great eye appeal for $50. Furthermore, you can't use the redbook to evaluate prices. If you look at the link to the XF40 coin above you will see that Numismedia wholesale value is $21.
I'll make what i sell the necklace for. It is 999 silver and i am sure it is about 2 ounces. i assume from the style and overall weight of the necklace it would be almost 30$ in silver. So i made out okay to calm everyone's nerves. i knew something just didn't look right in this toning why the head of liberty was all splotchy and everything else was solid. I figured either artificial toning on the front to hide something. whether that be scratches or cleaning i don't know. I'd really rather keep it. I know in the photos the toning looks nasty, but call me weird , but i like it =p Something I like about dark toned coins lol. plus i believe the photos don't do it justice the toning has a deep blue toning to it more than a extremely oxidized black. why someone would have made jewelry then AT it beats me. I would assume more that the coin would be cleaned before being put into the jewelry. I am thinking it is toning over a cleaned coin which is why it looks shifty.
