EagleRJO

I remember seeing something like that posted, but I didn't realize that the lettering also included the year and mint mark until after I did the google search. Looks like the mint started doing that with the Presidential dollars, which I also haven't even looked at closely yet. The reverses are packed with design features, so why keep the obverses so plain and all the same. Seems like there is still plenty of room on the obverse to add the date and mint mark and still keep it uncluttered. Doesn't seem like such a good idea to only have a shallow incuse punched date and mint mark on the edge of the coin where it's likely to get filled in with smutch or worn away easily. Anyway, I got the idea to start collecting them from @Hoghead515 who was talking about them in another thread. I am enjoying collecting them as a lower cost coin and checking out the design information that comes with the individual proof coins from the mint with the various innovations and innovators on the various coins. I have already worked my way from 2018 (only 4 that year) to now plugging away on 2020 with the P, D S Proof and S Rev Proof for each year/state, with the BU grade P & D coins only being a few bucks each and the Proof coins only like $6 to $12 depending on if you get a set or individual coins. The only one so far I have done a double take on was the design for the Georgia coins (well, okay the rotated NH design too). They just had to have a peach on the GA coin, so they include a failed botanical garden by an Englishman in early America as the "innovation", that of course included ... a peach tree in the garden.

I recently started collecting American Innovation Dollar coins in BU or Proof condition, and once I get to current dates I may actually start working back for modern dollar coins as I am enjoying collecting something low cost or basically face value from roll hunting, in addition to circulated quarters. I just started going through a number of Innovation coins and I was going nuts trying to find the mint marks, and I am sad to say I had to ask google and felt I had a senior moment by not looking on the lettered edges which have a saying along with the year and mint mark. Boy did I feel dumb not looking there, but then again I think it's the mint being a little sneaky to mix things up putting basic info on the edges apparently starting with the presidential dollars. But what is the mint thinking only putting the mint mark on the edge which is sure to wear off in no time from normal wear.

Just do what I have been doing and keep a log for each of your coin collections/sets with year/mark, description, grade, purchase/find date and price (if you bought it) and keep that log with the coins. Anyone doing an appraisal of a collection is probably going to ask for such a list anyway with as much of that filled in as possible.

Gotta love that comment

Sandon beat me to the punch as I was just about to suggest the same to avoid disputes with just an interested party accessing the value to split it up.

@CaptHenway Coin World Almanac, 8th Edition, Pg 370 under "Rotated Dies". For other editions maybe check: Chapter 11 Errors, "Die Errors, Varieties, States & Stages" and then "Rotated Dies".

Could also be post-mint damage from a coin wrapping machine to the coin on the roll end as the machine spins the roll closed, which may be more likely from what I am seeing. See the discussion linked and the attached example damage. How Coins are Damaged by Rolling, Wrapping, and Crimping Machines (coincommunity.com)

True, but even then, they can't push a coin close to what people are willing to pay or they may end up the winner and lose money. Just don't bid above what you are willing to pay, and beyond that move on to the next coin you are interested in. And if that's still a concern, add more tin foil or just stick with GC.

Many avid collectors are also particular about keeping records of the coins they have (logs and/or receipts) which may include things like the grade, how much they paid for it, where they bought it, etc. So, you might want to do a little digging to find any records he may have had for the collection. If you are considering continuing the collection as a hobby, see the references and links provided. But is sounds like you are considering just selling the collection. In that case you are going to find prices vary greatly depending on rarity and grade. Like that same Morgan if it were an 1879-CC would be worth thousands, not just a little more than melt value. And for many other coins the grade can make a big difference, which is difficult to establish. You can also take the collection to a few local coin dealers for value and focus on any coins if they want to break them out of the collection. Good luck.

That is a very common date Morgan that is not worth much even in better condition like that one, which might be an AU grade depending on how it looks in hand as the pics are blurry. Either way it wouldn't be worth the money sending it in to be graded as that would probably cost more than what you could sell it for. If you are going to keep it and get into collecting, see this thread: And a start is to get a copy of the Red Book, which you can prolly borrow from the local library.

I didn't look closely at the VAM-7 as its missing the die chips/lines for that and the CC doesn't appear to be aligned the same. I did closely compare the mint mark and date vs the VAM-1 as well as the VF-25 coin posted from PCGS CoinFacts which appears to be the same variety, by enlarging/rotating and overlaying them so I could switch back and forth to compare them. The "Closed 9" for the VAM-1 paired obv die is a match, and the CC mark appears to be a fairly close match considering the listed one looks like it took a hit to the D which may have flattened out the top somewhat, which is slightly thicker vs the comparisons and which may have also pushed the top of the D a bit closer to the CC compared to the VAM-1. At least that's what it looks like overlaying the pics enlarged. The listed one also has a little more wear there too and the pic isn't as sharp as the comparisons. I can't tell if there is a slight doubling at the top of the Phrygian Cap just above the cotton leaves on the obv as in a VAM-1 paired obv die, but overlaying it with the PCGS one seems to match. Due to the limitations of the pics, I may not know if its legit for sure unless I get it in hand to look at it very closely, and just return it if the coin in-hand doesn't exactly match. But any added feedback on what I am seeing is greatly appreciated as I need to be very careful with this one. The 1879-CC Morgans are considerably rarer and more expensive than the 1883-CC Morgans, which I already have for around that price from GC. An 1879-CC graded VF-20 is valued by NGC at $625, and on GC an 1879-CC VF-20 to VF-25 has been going for around the high $500's to low $600 range recently. Due to the cost, I have been doing a lot of shopping around and also looking at raw options if I might be able to get a decent one for under $500. But this may be one of the Morgans where I go with a slabbed one due to the higher value and considering they are faked sometimes.

Yea, I was gonna say VF-25. Has a little more detail than the attached 25 from CoinFacts, but more contact marks. And at least to me the variety seems to be almost spot on with the Clear CC variety attached. Would be good to get some other opinions on that since it's a raw coin.

The 1879-CC Morgan in an XF grade is one of the more pricy ones where I have been considering dropping down to VF and came across the attached one. It appears to have VF-XF detail using modern market grading, but then again there are a lot of contact marks and dings, particularly on the obv like around the neck, the rim and date which prolly drops it down to a VF. But I'm not sure if that would drop it down below a VF. Any thoughts on grade?

Idk that you can really compare the two in terms of sold auction prices, including the GC BP, as that will vary depending on who is interested at that time. Even so, I have been finding I get coins for a better price at GC lately, at least for the coins I have been interested in which includes Morgans and older half dollars. And for "buy now" coins I think all the coins where I have made offers or where I have had to return a raw coin have been thru eBay, but GC is almost all auctions and they don't sell/auction raw coins.

Your dating yourself Sandon. 😜

I assume you don't read the fine print of investment prospectuses. Didn't you ever play spin the bottle or craps in the back alley? It would be kind of like re-living your younger days!

Congrats @DWLange for not only getting the Numismatist of the Year award in 2017, but for repeatedly making the cut on CW's list of most influential numismatists! I didn't realize there was such coin royalty actively posting on the board, but the fact that you are one of the few true "coin whispers" and the clear concise replies you often provide should have been a hint.

Not really like that, with somewhat of a matte appearance even though it is kinda shiny, which I have seen on coins prolly from a "light dip in the pool". More like a shiny crystalized appearance only on some of the highest points of a coin, like just some of the hair on the obverse for this coin. And I don't see any indication of the same appearance on the reverse. It also looks like it would take very little in terms a rub or contact with other coins for that to disappear. That would make sense as I have only seen a similar look on uncirculated coins which appear to have a very sharp strike, perhaps very early in the life of a die.

With the 15 degree number you are probably thinking of the cut off below which there is no added value, which is generally not much until the rotation exceeds 45 degrees except for a few coins, mostly proofs and some others like some state quarters discussed here ... Die Rotation on State Quarters (pcgs.com) A single digit die rotation tolerance would be consistent in term of order of magnitude with other mint tolerances like for weight and diameter, but I just haven't been able to find anything definitive in writing except the 5 degrees stated in Coin World Almanac.

I have seen the same frosty type appearance of some raised portipns of devices on a few PCGS or NGC slabbed BU "Stage Coach" Morgan Dollars as well as a few other raw Morgans I have, but I'm just not sure how to properly show/describe that or what it may be called.

[Cost of the coin plus postage?] At least ya went with a seller who accepts returns. I take a shot at raw coins sometimes when a pic just can't tell the whole story.

I recently purchased this 1892 Columbian 50C Commemorative for very little, and some of the features actually have a frosty or shiny speckled appearance on the obverse like at the raised portions of the hair, similar to some NGC slabbed BU Morgans I have purchased. It's hard to describe exactly what I am seeing with the coin in-hand, which is kind of like a frosty shiny iced snowflake like appearance on just some of the raised surfaces, or what that is called as I do not believe it would be called a "frosty" appearance like you would with say a Proof ASE.

Huge grains of salt (maybe lumps) with anything listed or claimed to try and bump the price. And then of course you get real winners like this guy who listed a common $1 circulated coin that wasn't in that great of shape (thought maybe the damage made it look old as in the date range given which is actually just when he was president) for $2,000. I think it was dropped to $1,899 recently, and there are several like this with another better condition one going for ONLY $500.

It really does look dumb, particularly when placed in a set with other "normal" $1 coins. I am still curious if RWB or perhaps someone else can shed some light on the official die rotation tolerance and source for that.

Actually, that is how it works on eBay, which I am willing to bet the family ranch is where Bill got the 1942/1942 dime.