NGC robbed me of my DMPL Morgan

Didn't you get that backwards? Your subsequent post says true PL/DMPL should not have die polish lines.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Recently on the bay, I have started noticing SPL on ICG slabs. I am assuming this means semi-proof like. Just seems weird to me. Here is an example:

 

Weird. I hadn't seen that before.

Skip, what does SPL mean?

 

In your PL quest these last few years, have you acquired a PL Peace Dollar?

 

My question concerns the "striations" mentioned above. One poster says they should be present while Warren Mills says they should not. @physics-fan3.14, since you posted the only reply, what is your opinion regarding "striations?"

I don't know about SEGS either. ICG grades PL, DMPL, PL Obv., DMPL Obv., and SPL (Semi-PL) something everyone used long ago to describe very reflective coins that do not make PL before it was dropped by the major TPGS's.

 

Whats next SFBL, SFB, SMS65? Something either is or isnt

 

Closest I've been able to come is a semi-prooflike Peace. This one is 63* from NGC. There are fully PL designated Peace dollars out there, but the price is insane.

Die polish is nearly universal on the PL coins of the mid-20th century. These are fully mirrored, sometimes deeply so, but covered in die polish. The method of how these were made at the mint varies quite a bit from the more common Morgan PLs, hence the confusion.

Huh, I did not realize that ICG used SPL. It sorta sounds like how NGC uses the Star, but is more specific to almost-PL coins.

I can also see why some people would be against this - as baseball says, it's either PL or it isn't.

I think that's why I like "PL Obverse" or "PL Reverse" over "SPL". That is more absolute - the obverse is PL, but the reverse isn't.

 

The SPL is different than the just one side is. Its for ones where neither side is but at least one side almost is from the explanation above.

 

Yes, I understand that.

I'm saying I like the one-sided designation better than the "almost" designation.

And I like them both better than NGC's incredibly vague "Star."

 

Agreed. I like the one sided designation, but dislike almost designations.

I hate the * simply because it has so many different meanings. At least use different symbols for the different things

 

I wonder if you may be misinterpreting the statements by Warren.

 

I'm really not sure what there is to mis-interpret - he says the die polished coins are not true PLs, they are worth a fraction of the other type, and that the only way to know for sure is to submit to CAC. His statements seem quite clear, and quite wrong.

If you are interpreting something different from the posted quote, please tell me.

 

That's nonsense! Au coins are not MS but they are - aren't they! I thought you were a knowledgeable old timer. At one time, DMPL and UDCAM did not exist. No one cared about FB on Rosevelt dimes and many other of today's designations either. Both sets of bell lines were needed for FBL Franklins UNTIL THEY were not!

When I started collecting reflective Morgans were either PL or Semi-PL. Some folks prefer a semi-reflective coin over a non-reflective coin. Our customers at ICG deserve that distinction if they want it. So, as you posted: "Something either is or isn't."

 

IMO, striations don't change the depth of a coin's reflectivity. If a PL coin has striations because it was struck with a polished die, it is STILL PL!

 

I think it is because Warren is referring to re-polished working dies or basin the dies. I can recall the conversation in-depth (no play on words) with him, and Tiso, when I purchased the TD and 36 RE and the 88 Morgan from him some years ago. It was something he often repeated, and I recall Tiso agreeing. I think you are both in agreement, but the method of written explanation is different. I will state I agreed and still agree with Warren Then again I am often incorrect, a lot. But, on my side of the Ledger I read your book and often refer to your points.

 

If it wasn't graded prior, how could anyone be robbed?

 

That's what I read from his statements, too. This seems a bit odd and I haven't heard that there's an appreciable difference in value between EDS PL coins and LDS PL coins. Many of the common date Morgan PLs are LDS, as you can tell when you see PL fields and mushed details. If I were looking through a bunch of PL 81-Ss to recommend one to someone, I'd take die state into consideration, but not to the point where the LDS coins are worth a "fraction" of the EDS coins, unless that fraction is something like 9/10. I'll have to ask others that collect and deal in these what their experiences are.

 

Do you have photographic examples of these striations or other precise descriptions? Does anyone else have good examples of striations?