2 NEW MORGANS - BOUGHT LAST WEEK.. GTG?

[yonico]

2 additions to my set of toned silver dollars.

bought these 2 coins on eBay last week.

Got a good deal on both, in my opinion; the 1884-O ($75 below greysheet BID price for the grade), and the 1890-CC ($45 below greysheet BID).

very happy with both coins. care to guess the grade?

 

coin #1 : 1884-O MORGAN

 

 

 

 

 

 

coin #2: 1890-CC MORGAN

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

all comments and opinions are appreciated.

will post grades later on!

 

thanks

 

johnny

[Mary B]

84-O MS-62 weak strike?, 90-CC MS-64 the scrape on the cheek is really distracting or it could be a 65+

[FILTHYHOARD]

I like them both and would be happy to own either one.

The 1884-o I'll call MS63 and the 1890-cc is a solid MS64 all day long.

Nice pickups Johnny

[yonico]

Thanks.

The 1884-O has a lot of scratches and scuffs on the holder. I have to get better pics that'll show it's actual beauty. Maybe even get it re-holdered by NGC. Then ill re-post pictures. It's way WAY better than MS63 and is certified in higher grade. but pictures are bad.

 

PCGS and CAC agree with you both on the 1890-CC though

[jgrinz]

I will disagree it being way better than 63 on the 1884-o

Might squeeze a 64 in my book but I like the clash

Right upper laurel leaves )

64 on the CC

[rrantique]

Nice morgans I think both are 64's (thumbs u

[coinman_23885]

64 on both

[yonico]

I will disagree it being way better than 63 on the 1884-o

Might squeeze a 64 in my book but I like the clash

Right upper laurel leaves )

 

Well, like I said, the pics do no justice to the coin. Many (if not all) of the marks, scuffs and scratches are on the holder, not on the coin.

 

I'm gnna get NGC to re-holder it, and then I'll post new pics.

 

Not that i buy coins by their holder or the label on them, but NGC graded it higher than MS63, and not just one point higher.

[coinman_23885]

I will disagree it being way better than 63 on the 1884-o

Might squeeze a 64 in my book but I like the clash

Right upper laurel leaves )

 

Well, like I said, the pics do no justice to the coin. Many (if not all) of the marks, scuffs and scratches are on the holder, not on the coin.

 

I'm gnna get NGC to re-holder it, and then I'll post new pics.

 

Not that i buy coins by their holder or the label on them, but NGC graded it higher than MS63, and not just one point higher.

 

I caught on to the $75 below bid for the first coin, which would necessarily imply that the coin was MS65 or higher (unless someone was going to sell a BU Morgan for below melt). With all due respect, the weak strike limits the grade to MS64 IMO, and not a point higher.

[Coinbuf]

I really like the CC and agree with a 64 grade, but the 84-o is not my cup of tea. I'm not a real toining fan anyway and while the surfaces are clean the weak strike makes it a 63+ in my book, no matter what any TPG says.

[FILTHYHOARD]

I think the 84-o got bumped up for eye appeal but a 65 still seems generous. I'll change my original guess to MS64.

Maybe it is just the images, but it still looks too soft for a 65, even for a notoriously weak struck New Orleans Morgan. I still like it but maybe the weak strike was a reason it sold for $75 under bid?

[yonico]

what do you think..?

 

 

 

 

 

johnny

[yonico]

I think the 84-o got bumped up for eye appeal but a 65 still seems generous. I'll change my original guess to MS64.

Maybe it is just the images, but it still looks too soft for a 65, even for a notoriously weak struck New Orleans Morgan. I still like it but maybe the weak strike was a reason it sold for $75 under bid?

 

i said it graded higher than ms63, and not by just one point, but i DID NOT say it was a 65.. it is actually in an NGC MS66 holder, believe it or not.

 

 

 

the holder is scratched to hell. scuffs, marks, scratches. that makes the coin look a lot worse than it actually is.

 

by the way, i saw a few comments on the weak strike on this coin. now i was always told (and read in books, coin encyclopedias etc..) that the new orleans mint is known for having the weakest struck coins of all the mints. and so an "O" MORGAN DOLLAR IN MS65 might look weaker than a philadelphia MS65.

i'm not arguing with anyone about your opinion of the grade, but would like, once and for all, to know if it is true about the "O" mint, and if i should take it to consideration when buying coins.

 

thanks again

 

johnny

[Mary B]

The 1899-O is an MS-63 to 64, that deep gouge on the cheek really knocks it down.

[Coinbuf]

i said it graded higher than ms63, and not by just one point, but i DID NOT say it was a 65.. it is actually in an NGC MS66 holder, believe it or not. the holder is scratched to hell. scuffs, marks, scratches. that makes the coin look a lot worse than it actually is.

 

by the way, i saw a few comments on the weak strike on this coin. now i was always told (and read in books, coin encyclopedias etc..) that the new orleans mint is known for having the weakest struck coins of all the mints. and so an "O" MORGAN DOLLAR IN MS65 might look weaker than a philadelphia MS65.

i'm not arguing with anyone about your opinion of the grade, but would like, once and for all, to know if it is true about the "O" mint, and if i should take it to consideration when buying coins.

 

thanks again

 

johnny

 

While this is true in general, like any blanket statement there are many exceptions. Some dates come very fully struck, while others are very hard to find fully struck up. You can see weakness in the hair over the ear and on the cotton, two of the areas that are tough to get fully struck. If you dont have one the catalog and encyclopedia of Morgan Dollars is an excelent guide and explains which dates/mm's have certain tendencies on strike, luster, etc. As to the grade that was given well all I can say is that imo NGC will forgive a touch of weekness if the surfaces are clean and the coin has attractive color. Another grading company I have seen be more forgiving of contact marks if the strike is full. Just seems that each service has its areas of focus, in the end if you like the coin thats all that really matters.

[jgrinz]

I would assume you got it that cheaply as no one agreed with the grade

 

An okay coin in an awesome holder, but as long as you are happy, thats all that counts - right

[yonico]

i said it graded higher than ms63, and not by just one point, but i DID NOT say it was a 65.. it is actually in an NGC MS66 holder, believe it or not. the holder is scratched to hell. scuffs, marks, scratches. that makes the coin look a lot worse than it actually is.

 

by the way, i saw a few comments on the weak strike on this coin. now i was always told (and read in books, coin encyclopedias etc..) that the new orleans mint is known for having the weakest struck coins of all the mints. and so an "O" MORGAN DOLLAR IN MS65 might look weaker than a philadelphia MS65.

i'm not arguing with anyone about your opinion of the grade, but would like, once and for all, to know if it is true about the "O" mint, and if i should take it to consideration when buying coins.

 

thanks again

 

johnny

 

While this is true in general, like any blanket statement there are many exceptions. Some dates come very fully struck, while others are very hard to find fully struck up. You can see weakness in the hair over the ear and on the cotton, two of the areas that are tough to get fully struck. If you dont have one the catalog and encyclopedia of Morgan Dollars is an excelent guide and explains which dates/mm's have certain tendencies on strike, luster, etc. As to the grade that was given well all I can say is that imo NGC will forgive a touch of weekness if the surfaces are clean and the coin has attractive color. Another grading company I have seen be more forgiving of contact marks if the strike is full. Just seems that each service has its areas of focus, in the end if you like the coin thats all that really matters.

 

Thank you for the detailed reply.

 

I see what you're saying.

 

I think you might be right about NGC "forgiving" weak strikes and soft marks on the coins. The reason why I posted a pic of the 1899-O as well, was cause I looked at the coin and it has a small but very distracting scratch on the cheek, also a mark by the "M" of UNUM, and a few more spots on the face, but clean fields, I would think it'd grade 64, or 64+ in a very good day, but the certified it as MS65.

 

I still like the coins, and I'm happy with the purchases, so it's cool. But I get your point.

 

Thanks

 

Johnny

[coinman_23885]

i by the way, i saw a few comments on the weak strike on this coin. now i was always told (and read in books, coin encyclopedias etc..) that the new orleans mint is known for having the weakest struck coins of all the mints. and so an "O" MORGAN DOLLAR IN MS65 might look weaker than a philadelphia MS65.

i'm not arguing with anyone about your opinion of the grade, but would like, once and for all, to know if it is true about the "O" mint, and if i should take it to consideration when buying coins.

 

thanks again

 

johnny

 

It is absolutely true that many of the New Orleans coins, including this date, are notorious for weak strikes; however, I have seen far better examples in terms of strike in lower grade holders (with clean surfaces and luster, etc.). No offense meant, but the coin is overgraded, and I think even $75 below bid is too much.

[Kamillion]

i would have guessed ms65 tops on the 1884-O

 

generous grade. which ultimately i guess is a good thing for you . =)

[coinman_23885]

i would have guessed ms65 tops on the 1884-O

 

generous grade. which ultimately i guess is a good thing for you . =)

 

I wouldn't consider it a good thing if you paid a price that corresponded to the grade on the holder. On common dates, Greysheet bid is high. Last time I checked, it was around $320 so $75 below bid = $245, for a coin that the most generous posters are calling MS65 and many are calling a 64 or lower. MS65s are selling for around $140-$160 on eBay, so I wouldn't call this a good thing at all.

[Kamillion]

ya i guess your right, not sure what i was thinking . the coin is more important than the holder.

 

and im not saying the coin is bad in any way. i think its a pretty toned coin that would look nicer with better pics or if the holder wasn't damaged.

[FILTHYHOARD]

I would assume you got it that cheaply as no one agreed with the grade

 

An okay coin in an awesome holder, but as long as you are happy, thats all that counts - right

 

Mike & Johnny, I finally had a chance to image mine, so for comparison, here's my 84-o MS66