I made a few eBay Morgan purchases that I just received today. Both are NGC certified. The first is a 1901 O, MS65. The other is a 1900, MS64. I was expecting great things from the 1901 O, rated MS65 from NGC. I was surprised to see a fair amount of chatter on the obverse and a decent hit under the U in the word Pluribus. Does this look like an MS65 to you? The second coin, a 1900, looks to have an odd finish on the obverse. Its almost like a satin finish. It almost looks like its been polished. The reverse has some dark, splotchy toning. The obverse has almost no damage, which is nice, but the finish has me worried. Overall, I'm worried/disappointed by the grading on these NGC coins. Thoughts?
I'm of the opinion that the 1900 is closer to ms-65 than the 1901. I would grade the 1901-o a ms-64 at best.
The '01 could be overgraded, it could also be the pics. Eye appeal isn't that great in the pics - but for an O mint coin it has a great strike and I'm not really surprised at the 65 grade. There are no serious marks, just frost breaks. If I saw the coin in person I might give it a 65 too. As for '00, I think it's properly graded. Strike is bit weak ( look at the hair detail Zane ), otherwise it would have graded 65 too.
Good points. I thought the frost break was a hit, although that wouldn't make much sense for it to be a hit. I'm a little surprised the 1900 didn't come back as a 65, because they have pretty poor strikes generally, but I'm not sure graders take each individual year into consideration when grading.
I have a 1900 ms-65 and the hair is more flat than on that one. Here is one I found on Heritage that is graded a 66. I've been looking for a fully struck example, but can't find any, except for an ms-67 I saw, but the dealer wanted much more than I could afford.
Yeah, it is right over the ear. Now look up over the forehead - and compare it to the coin you posted. Also - understand my young friend, I'm not trying to argue with ya - just trying to point out a few things
Tell ya what Zane, after a few a years in your new profession - you be sure and come back and give me tips. Deal ??
Sounds good, although I think I will need more than a couple years perhaps! Also, I may have to learn a bit more about foreign stuff first.
My problem was, I automatically assumed that since the strike wasn't flat directly above the ear, that the rest would be better than a strike with a coin who is flat above the ear. I'm starting to look through all my morgans now, and realizing I couldn't have been more wrong. It's always good to have habitual mistakes or flaws in thinking pointed out. : )
Don't take this the wrong way, but that's probably the brightest thing I've ever heard ya say. Some folks can study grading their entire life and never learn that. Remember this - when a grading pro says to use your eyes to grade coins, not a glass, THAT's (what you just said) the reason. You need to always look at the whole coin. Using a glass tends to make you focus in on common problem areas, and if you do - you'll miss the obvious. Every coin has prime focal areas and it's too easy to get lost by just looking at them. You use the focal areas for fine tuning a grade - you use the entire coin to judge it.
I definitely won't take it the right way. I'm still learning, and whenever I can fine tune my thinking, or have flaws pointed out to me, I welcome them, as if you are unwilling to bend, you can't get very far. I'll definitely say today was a lesson learned
Thanks for the comments. You are correct that the marks on the '01 are frost breaks, not hits. However, there is a small hit under the U in the word Pluribus. I guess I just expected a nicer looking coin for an MS65. The eye appeal is not that great. Any comments on the finish of the '00? Its a darker, almost satin look, but still displays cartwheels.
I don't see anything unusual, it appears to have some light toning. I'd guess that the coin was struck with a well used die since it does not appear to be very frosty.
