Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;JPeace$, post: 2361361, member: 42727&quot;]Welcome to the Morgan challenge!</p><p><br /></p><p>It&#039;s very difficult to get in the minds of bidders, but in general, the &quot;+&quot; on a label leads to higher premiums.&nbsp; Throw in the CAC sticker and the bids sometimes just don&#039;t make sense.&nbsp; Many people will pay a big premium for that &quot;+&quot; designation.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>Take the third coin in the list: PCGS 05875545.&nbsp; Based on my knowledge of HA pictures, the fields appear to be highly reflective.&nbsp; Not enough to earn a PL, but I&#039;ll bet they are very nice.</p><p><br /></p><p>The first NGC coins appears to have some hazy toning at 11 on the obverse.&nbsp; There are a few small but deep marks at 6 o&#039;clock on the obverse.&nbsp; The strike does not appear to be strong for an early &quot;S&quot; mint coin either.&nbsp; See the lack of detail in the hair above the ear.&nbsp; If I were bidding on the coin, I would not have bid strong money for that one.</p><p><br /></p><p>As mentioned, trying to explain the difference in pricing, one or more of the bidders might have thought a coin was a potential upgrade as well.&nbsp; Another factor might have been 2 PCGS registry &quot;setters&quot; wanting to add points to their set.&nbsp; Another factor might have been where the contact marks might have been on the coin.</p><p><br /></p><p>I didn&#039;t look through all the coins.&nbsp; I got the flu over the weekend and just didn&#039;t have the patience to do a proper analysis of the coins.&nbsp; I&#039;m still not 100%, so this answer is also lacking more analysis.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in