Grade the Morgan

Agreed. Even though I guessed MS65PL, I also mentioned how I believed that was the grade that NGC had assigned. IMHO, it's not a "true" MS65 example by today's standards. I'm almost positive that if the coin were submitted to PCGS for grading, it'd be docked at least one grade - Those abrasions on the cheek are too deep and too distracting for a gem grade.

-Brian

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I agree, but it is much better than any 63's I've seen. It is the clarity of the fields. incidentally, if one looks at the PSGC examples on Heritage, they aren't nearly the strike this coin is.

First a 63



Now the PSGC example that sold for 700+





http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=1172&lotNo=9612#Photo

 

And don't ask me why this didn't show up on the list before but here is a NGC MS65 PL that sold for 405

http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=1156&lotNo=8987

 

There are more factors to grading than just clean fields and a profile free of bag marks. The reason this first coin you've posted (the 1883-O) received a grade of only 63 is due to a weak strike. Notice the high points of the bust's hair - Notice the missing hairline details. Just because a coin has the cheek of an MS65 or the fields of an MS66, doesn't mean that's the grade it will receive - There is much for the third-party graders must consider.

-Brian

 

Paralysis or Analysis

 

What? :scratch:

 

Paralysis of Analysis

 

I was thinking 64 no PL initially.

I imagine the coin has been dipped and has since retoned...however I may be alone on that thought.

 

For that coin, deal. I would say no deal without the toning, and would look in the $350 range for that date in PL normally, but with the toning? Definitely worth $450--that is a premium quality looking Morgan, by my standards as an experienced Morgandude. Also, I would net grade the coin as 64* as I said, so that is awfully close to what NGC gave it as a 65PL. THe reverse is definitely proof like and the Obverse is nice looking. Cheek marks make it slightly less than the perfect 65, but it has great eye appeal. If I were looking for a 65 of that date in PL, I WOULD buy the coin. I have a nice 66 of that date non-prooflike that I paid $240 about 4 years ago. GO FOR IT, Brooklyn dude!!

 

Here is my PCGS MS 66 for comparison. THis would retail around $500 today from others I have seen:

 

I'm seeing a 64 obverse , with a 65 reverse . Can't see if it's PL so I'd grade her a high 64 .

 

Very possibly dipped , but dipped well .

 

First off, Ruben, I would like to point out your flawed spelling of "Moran".
With that out of the way, I definitely like the coin, very few bagmarks on her face. I think it is a 65 PL.

 

A bit on the high side, but I don't see that price as too out of line -- particularly if you like the coin.

It is, however, not an uncommon coin and I wonder if you couldn't find a better example for cheaper with some patience.

But if the coin speaks to you, who am I to question your judgement?

Good luck...Mike

p.s. FWIW, I do like the look of the coin very much.

p.s.s. It's "paralysis by analysis".