Morgan Roll Gamble.. CW article

I tried to find out but came up with a no reply. Guess the gentelman is out celebrating. Any hints

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Either he gonna strike out and illustrate the dangers of buying seeded original rolls OR the guy will look like a hero....
a Doyle Brunson of numismatics
(so 2 speak)...
Ill go w the 1st outcome

 

Anyone willing to finally share the published results?

 

This just seems to be a more expensive game of Ebay, unsearched wheat cents roll with a 1909 Lincoln on one end, and an S mint mark on the other.
If that was an original paper roll of dollars,
wouldn't the paper most likely be aged, thin, worn, disintegrated compost by now?

 

The results come out on the 22nd.

 

My bad; perhaps I missed that part? Either way, thank you kindly. I didn't realize this and had been looking forward to what I can only assume isn't going to be much of a surprise.

 

They usually will seed the roll with at least one good one, so the sucker, er buyer doesn't feel too bad.
20 coins in a roll, $120 per coin, assuming they range from AU-58-MS-63
there's at least $1000 worth of coins at $50 per, and perhaps one or two good ones?
Anxiously awaiting the results, and I hope the buyer gets "lucky".

 

It indeed was common to roll coin, by hand, in paper far back into the 1800's or maybe earlier. What was invented in the early 1900's were mechanical aids, followed by full-on counting and rolling machines in the 1910's.

There is only one photograph of the roll in question that I can see, so it's not possible to tell if it has crimped ends. But I doubt anyone would have interest in an "original roll" that did not have crimped ends. That process was not invented until much later.

I did a brief writeup of what I found related to rolling machines by doing a patent search a few years ago. That was before I found Coin Talk, so apologize for the outside link:

https://forums.collectors.com/discu...s-what-can-we-learn-from-the-earliest-patents

 

Or the ever popular well circulated 21P.

 

For those who haven't seen it yet, here are the results. Grades are the opinion of the roll purchaser. And no, it's not a copyright violation to post this info. He paid $2900 and figures he lost $1300. Not much chance it would have been a roll of MS 1879-CC's.

Cal

1879 MS-65 (obverse end coin)
1884-O MS-63
1885-O MS-62
1883-O MS-62
1884-O MS-63
1885-O MS-64+
1888 MS-63
1886 MS-64 (toned)
1898 MS-63 (toned)
1887 MS-63
1884-O MS-63
1885-O MS-62
1881-S MS-64
1885-O MS-63
1883-O MS-63
1888 MS-63
1885-O MS-63
1888 MS-63
1888 MS-63
1883-CC MS-64 (reverse end coin)

 

Ka-chorkle

 

He's lucky it wasn't full of Ikes.

 

Maybe this will be true for the next one.

Gambleeeeeeeeee!

 

Stranger things have happened. But not this time. Bet he was really disappointed that the only CC was 1883.

 

So I assume that doesn't include the $700 (?) he'd have to spend to make those grades official.

Did the piece say what sources he used to calculate value for the coins? Is he saying that he would've spend $1300 less to buy them retail, or that he'll make back $1600 selling them -- and, if the latter, where? To a dealer walk-in, dealer-to-dealer at a show, or placing them in an auction?

I'm just wondering how much wider the gap would be for a naive collector thinking "I'm gonna buy these unsearched Morgans and then make a killing reselling them!"...

 

We all know what Barnum said.........

 

He stated the grades are what he thinks PCGS would give the coins. On the financials, he gave total cost to him and an estimate without details of what he thinks he overpaid .

Cal

 

You can't get any more common than the dates between the enders.

It's amazing how many Morgans made the migration from New Orleans to Carson City Nevada. A large group from San Francisco mint would have made it slightly more plausible.

 

Choice of the obverse end coin by the packager was fairly clever. An 1889S would have been cheap, but might have roused too much suspicion. A high grade 1892 or 1893 of any mint would have been too expensive. The 1879 was about right, but perhaps also little too obvious. Possibly why the purchaser got the roll for only $2900; they often go for more. Better choices might have been an 1890 or 1891S. Both are relatively cheap in higher grades, but 1890CC and 1891CC are semi-key dates in the CC series. A roll of either in high grade would be worth way more than $2900.

Cal

 

OK, I understand now that the end coins were visible. This makes it 100% sure the roll was put together after 1913. This little piece of critical information could have saved the buyer $.