Is this really a dmpl? what are the standards for dmpl?

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by goldrealmoney79, Jan 24, 2021.

  1. goldrealmoney79

    goldrealmoney79 Active Member

  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest

    to hide this ad.
  3. physics-fan3.14

    physics-fan3.14 You got any more of them.... prooflikes?

    This is a very common misconception: there is absolutely no requirement for contrast between fields and devices for a PL or DPL coin.

    PL coins could be fully brilliant across the entire coin and still qualify - it is based solely on the reflectivity of the fields. The cameo effect is incredibly attractive and will earn a premium, but is absolutely not required for the designation.

    Yes, there is a standard which applies to all dates and mints - that's why some dates are *incredibly* scarce in PL/DPL. Some mints/dates just didn't make very many high quality prooflikes.

    And yes, based on my interpretation of those pictures, that coin qualifies for DMPL.
  4. messydesk

    messydesk Well-Known Member

    Wow! That coin is sick! Yes, it looks DMPL and it has a good strike, too. I've been adding commentary to the date pages on VAMWorld discussing typical characteristics of each date, as well as how rare PL coins (including DMPL) are as a percentage of the uncirculated population. 91-O is rather scarce PL, and this is the pop top at PCGS. It's also the cover girl coin for 91-O DMPL, but the color is different from that shown on the eBay auction. I don't know which is correct. Contrast on DMPL dollars varies. The earlier and CC coins tend to have really good contrast. The later Philadelphia coins have very little contrast.
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2021
    Pickin and Grinin likes this.
  5. johnmilton

    johnmilton Well-Known Member

    After accessing access to the EBay auction, I have to say that coin looks incredible for a New Orleans Mint from the 1890s.

    Is it worth $49 thousand? Not to me. Not even close. I paid a bit more than that for an 1848 CAL. quarter eagle, with a compatible value. I would much rather have a nice example of that historic coin than this Morgan Dollar.
    John Burgess and serdogthehound like this.
  6. serdogthehound

    serdogthehound Well-Known Member

    An 1848 Cal. is such a great coin. And that Morgan is great coin but at $49k a lot of coins I would rather own
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2021
  7. John Burgess

    John Burgess Well-Known Member

    I'd have to say, for a Mint state coin, looking like a impaired proof that would have been recently minted in the last century and been handled lightly, this totally qualifies for DMPL. and it has a CAC green bean also... it's had another opinion. LOL.

    97209 Sep-2019 $40,800 MS65DMPL PCGS Heritage Auctions 2019 September 5-8 Long Beach Expo U.S. Coins Signature Auction Auction 3833

    97209 Apr-2019 $50,400 MS65DMPL PCGS Heritage Auctions 2019 April 25-28 Central States (CSNS) U.S. Coins Signature Auction Chicago, IL Auction 3785

    AUCTION RECORD:$58,750, MS65DMPL, 05-17-2018, Legend Rare Coin Auctions.

    Only 2 coins with this designation. There's only one at MS66 with PCGS. the 1891-O MS66 is for sale on collectors corner for $140K and sold last 03/19 for $108,688 at Legend Rare Coin Auctions according to what's listed of it although it might have changed dealers hands since then.

    I wouldn't be buying it either, but I ain't got money like that to be able to drop $50k or $100K on a coin.
    Is it worth it? Yeah, probably, to someone with money coming out the wazoo, it's likely in line with what it could sell for and not overpriced.
  8. mark943

    mark943 Member

    Even if I had the money I wouldn't spend it on an E-Bay auction unless I knew the seller. I'd rather play it safe and buy from a well-known dealer.
    John Burgess likes this.
  9. messydesk

    messydesk Well-Known Member

    They are a well-known dealer, but if I were going to buy this coin I'd call them directly with an offer and not go through eBay. Maybe see if they'd throw it in for free if I bought the 79 Stella in PR67+.
    John Burgess likes this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page