GTG 1900 Morgan

MS60? Wow.

Batting 0 for 4 so far.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The weird thing is that it doesn’t look like it was left in a parking lot. I’ve seen some beat up low grade UNCs, yet this one isn’t like those. For example, take a look at the following two. How do they compare?

 

It’s not booming luster, but it’s there.

 

That is what I usually think too.
I’m really struggling with this market grading concept since I don’t think it was applied in this case.
I could see an AU 58 if there is some trace of wear but if it’s UNC, I would have expected a 62 (probably a 63 or 64 if it was market graded for color).

And I wouldn’t quite say it was a “deal” as I paid around 64+ prices. It was just so odd of a grade that I had to win it and see in hand.

 

If I had guessed MS60 I would've felt like an asshole! Lol I thought I was already being ridiculously harsh at 62. I've seen worse at 60.

 

I think of 60s as "its borderline details - one more hit and we'd have bodybagged her."

60 was more common a couple decades ago, but you correct, it is less common nowadays.

 

What do you think about the two Morgans a few posts above?

 

I think that 1900 has a considerably cleaner appearance on the obverse than the original. There are some pretty severe marks, however. I'd grade that one a 61/62 (luster is weaker than the original, eye appeal nowhere near as good).

The 83O has been beaten badly. This one appears to be a good candidate for 60 or 61.

 

That’s what I would think, but those two are graded 63 and 62, respectively. I guess it is what it is.

 

I feel like the TPGs are the most inconsistent in the 60-63 range, especially on common coins like these Morgans. I can see an argument being made for the second 1900 in 63, but the marks on the cheek are pretty bad. It's saving grace is that there isn't a lot of field chatter - one of the biggest grade drivers in this grade range.

 

Might have been a compromise verdict between 58 and 62. Toning makes it tough.

 

Maybe...weird compromise though ...they should have settled on AU 58+ and then it could have been an everyman registry builder's dream

 

But there is no WEAR!

There are a whole ton of ugly marks, but no actual wear. An AU coin is AU because it has wear. An MS coin is MS because it has no wear - no matter how many marks and hits it may have picked up. The 60 grade is often valued less at auction than an attractive AU, despite the higher "grade." But, that doesn't change the strict definition of the terms.

 

I don't trust images like these.

 

@ldhair Edit...I see the post was edited

 

I don't see any, but I might have missed something.
I'm just leaving all the possibilities open.

 

Why not? The first set (more accurate) come from a professional photographer. My image (bottom) isn't great. It was just a quick photo to get the slab grade (which I didn't even do that well as the light blocks part of the cert number).

 

@jtlee321 could probably tell you where the first set of images came from (GreatCollections) and verify that they do a solid job overall.

 

Yeah, I've learned to read GreatCollections images. They do a very good job with maintaining a consistent look. It certainly helps to buy a few coins from them and compare them to the images when you get them in hand.

 

So @ldhair why don’t you trust the photos?
They were from a professional photographer.