I am very well aware that 1884s is a key date in Uncirculated condition, having collected Morgans for over 50 years. I completed two full sets of Morgans, and sold them. Neither had a MS 1884s—in both cases, the coins I owned were AU 55, and AU 58. Likewise, I am well aware that 1884s is probably the most conservatively graded date in the Morgan series. TPGs do not want to make the jump from a $500 coin to a $12,000 coin, or more rashly. However, I just happened on this coin, and my response was “holy crap!!!” (Actually stronger than that, but it will suffice for now). No way this coin gets graded MS 60, if it were any other date. It is at least a 63 or more, all day, night, and week long. Talk about market grading! Wow!
Here's an 1884-S that actually has the MS-63 grade so people can compare. I have no bone in this because Trade Dollars are my thing, not Morgans.
When does that happen -- at what grades ? And they sure didn't mind when they jumped the price of some Franklins in that infamous CU thread that I posted a few years ago.
You're saying this is an MS63 but PCGS didn't want to grade it that high...because the $$$ value of the coin would be too high ??
From a technical standpoint this coin should grade higher, but with luster as the most important factor in grading, this coin seems graded correctly. It has the washout look and diminished luster. Maybe it should grade MS61 as of the lack of severe scratches and hairlines, but not higher.
Yes, the luster, or lack thereof, is what immediately caught my eye. Perhaps dipped one too many times.
You can see the quandary that PCGS was left in: 1. Not hairlined from cleaning 2. Not attractive or original enough for AU58. 3. Not lustrous enough for MS61, 62, or 63. 4. Not worn enough for AU55.
I strongly suspect there are issues on the coin which are not apparent in those pictures. 60 is actually an uncommon grade, and they don't just toss it out.
Although, if you look at the TruView, it does seem to show something better than a 60 (maybe 61, but probably not 62). The strike is somewhat weak (but that doesn't really matter in the 60-63 range). The luster on the obverse appears decent, although reverse luster is weak. The entire surface of the coin is littered with tickmarks and light hairlines, however. I suspect this is the primary grade driver. There are no major marks, which I would expect on a 60 (just a *lot* of minor marks). They may also have punished it for a light cleaning that wasn't severe enough to give it a details grade.
My own looks about the same as morgandude11's, although mine is better looking. It was purchased raw for a lot less than $500. No evidence of foul play on it at all and superior luster. A trifle more wear, though, so no way it would make it to MS60. Would not trade mine for this slabbed one, even though.
No, it isn’t my coin. As I said previously, I only owned AU versions of the 1884s, AU 55, and 58. This coin is obviously MS, and ANY other date would grade at least as a 63 in my opinion, based on extensive Morgan collecting. The strike is average, and luster is average. It is somewhat baggy, but 60-62 coins are usually much baggier.