Do you consider Varieties as part of a TRUE Morgan Set ???

[jgrinz]

I have decided NOT to add them to my set - What are your feelings on the subject.

 

The coins in question are :

 

1879-CC LARGE/SMALL CC "CAPPED"

1882-O/S

1887/6-O

1887/6

1900-O/CC

[physics-fan3.14]

It depends on how you define your set - there is no right or wrong answer. If you want varieties, then add varieties! Some people want a Redbook set, some people want their set as defined by the Registry, some people want a straight date set, some people want a set with date/mms. It really comes down to whatever makes you happy.

[zrlevin]

FWIW, I am leaving them out of mine.

[McKinley-migration]

It depends on how you define your set - there is no right or wrong answer. If you want varieties, then add varieties! Some people want a Redbook set, some people want their set as defined by the Registry, some people want a straight date set, some people want a set with date/mms. It really comes down to whatever makes you happy.

 

exactly

 

i collect the varieties, they bloom out the set that much more... why not. they're fun. and they're made of silver.

[cpm9ball]

There is no right or wrong way. I collect VAM's, but not all of them. If I tried to collect all of them, I'd be broke. Let's see.......3000+ VAM's x how much? I only collect the ones that interest me.

 

At the same time, I know that I will never own a complete set of Morgans in the grades that I want. I've pretty much resigned myself to the fact that I cannot afford more than $2000 for any one Morgan, and CDN Bid shows that there are 20 Morgans that exceed this in MS63. In total, that comes to $426,560 if you include the 1895 Proof. What would be the retail value? $600,000? $700,000? More? I'd have to win the lottery!

 

So, hunting for certain VAM's does keep me involved with the Morgan set.

 

Chris

[astrostu]

I would consider varieties like that part of an "extended set." I would say the basic set is the date/mint set that you can then expand with the VAMs.

[TJ'S Coins]

Depends on how you define "true"...Go for it if you like!

[michael]

It depends on how you define your set - there is no right or wrong answer.

 

myself personally i would leave them out as they are not part of a complete set

 

a complete set in my minds eye is a complete date and mintmark set

 

no more no less and not including the 1895 which is proof only

[jgrinz]

It depends on how you define your set - there is no right or wrong answer.

 

myself personally i would leave them out as they are not part of a complete set

 

a complete set in my minds eye is a complete date and mintmark set

 

no more no less and not including the 1895 which is proof only

 

That would be my definition also - Thank you Michael for putting into words what I meant to spell out.

[kryptonitecomics]

I would consider varieties like that part of an "extended set." I would say the basic set is the date/mint set that you can then expand with the VAMs.

 

This is how I look at it as well (thumbs u

[michael]

It depends on how you define your set - there is no right or wrong answer.

 

myself personally i would leave them out as they are not part of a complete set

 

a complete set in my minds eye is a complete date and mintmark set

 

no more no less and not including the 1895 which is proof only

 

That would be my definition also - Thank you Michael for putting into words what I meant to spell out.

 

(thumbs u

 

all those coins together in a complete set and then out out on a table would be really something cool/sexy to look at and quite saleable and marketable in this market and i think a great set in terms of value and opportunity