Post A Slabbed Coin In MS 63 And Lets Compare Them....

Here are a couple more photos of the 1901-O Morgan along with another wonderfully mushy New Orleans coin, the conditional rarity 1896-O. This one is also graded by NGC and it comes in at AU58. Pay particular attention to the flat spot above the ear- you can see the luster on the 1901-O while the flat spot is a bit worn on the 1896-O. The 1901-O has fully lustrous fields while the 1896-O has luster breaks in the fields from light circulation. However, the 1896-O still has significant overall luster on an issue that typically has mediocre luster even in MS grades.

After I purchased this coin, I looked at as many AU58s as I could and quality appeared to be all over the place. It may look a bit scruffy for an AU58 when compared to other issues but it compares favorably to many other AU58 1896-Os. I truly believe that NGC accurately graded this coin considering its conditional rarity status. As you may know, TPGs hate to "create wealth" by bumping a coin up a grade and in this case, an AU58 is worth about twice as much an an AU55($198 vs $390 per Numismedia). I sold this coin at the St Louis Silver Dollar Show in October, many dealers there are specialists in Morgans and everyone that I showed the coin to for buy offers thought it was accurately graded and about mid-range quality for an AU58 of that issue. Unfortunately, it has some crud on the reverse that should have been removed before submission and things like that do tend to impact the value a bit on multi-hundred dollar coins.

Excellent photos really shows the difference between an ACCURATELY graded AU-58 and a weakly struck MS coin.

Reinforces my point about luster. If an area looks flat but has full original mint luster, IT IS NOT WEAR !

I have decided to ask some more questions to ALL members who have posted, or would like to.
I started this thread to compare coins and the differences about them, I would have to agree to disagree about some comments about Bob's 1901-O Morgan, I have some questions, leaving the weak strike, the known New Orleans problems striking coins, also condition rarity, out of the equation, My first question is this" Is there any one on this site that honestly believes the 1901=O Morgan has no wear." I have never seen a MS-63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, coin with no wear.If there were it would have to be graded an AU coin.

If the answer to this is yes you do believe there is no wear, how come, in your opinion, the coin ONLY was graded a 63!!!

I again started the topic to have a base for grading knowledge to assist others in this hobby, I would hope this IS being done......

I do believe people are not giving an honest approach to the question at hand, I have read the other day a member stated he has NEVER handled an MS66 Morgan coin, that said, I would ask, why would that be, and in all actuality, I have problems with the graded coins in MS that according to the ANA standards, should NEVER be a MS coin......

I also would say that as most know, wear equals a circulated coin, which is another term for a coin in AU condition, and alot of the coins posted here, on this thread, are showing wear, yet, they are graded MS, HOW could that be. I appreciate member's experienced answers, I just do NOT see them on this given few questions, please join in, any/all experts care to reply??

I think the entire grading process being money focused is a legal form of a catch-22 system ....

I guess I will bite....and be somewhat of a disturber of thought......Putting this 1901-0 aside for now....The creation of wealth..."IS A BIG ISSUE".... sorry but it is...ANY TIME A high end MS coin is introduced into the works, the known numbers can greatly effect the over all accepted value of the coins already within the system.....The level of grading is so much easier when looking at AU and below coins, the "WEAR" is SO APPARENT.......I think for one every one can agree to this...While one may believe its an XF40 another may see it as an XF 45...but NOT an AU58....the wear levels are MUCH broader and self evident in wear.....
HOWEVER..When an MS coin is on the block...The first thing that comes into play. is the thought of WEAR........

Now before I delve into this part of the thinking process.. Most of and our LURKER'S have seen these coins in holders for some time...WE OWN THEM..GRADED by our TPG's....and yet there are discrepancies even as we speak. on the thought that any wear...Drops to AU right off the bat.....So how is it that we have, and they still grade to MS condition.....

This the point of this discussion...TO gain understanding of how such a fine line is drawn between MS grades and the OBVIOUS wear differences in the lower grades of AU say 53 to G condition....the wear levels are quite obvious, in these grade levels to the point that they are posted or listed in the books we buy for grading..YET NO MS pictures are given for analyisis...
WE then must go to the conclusion that all "MS COINS ARE PERFECT WITH NO WEAR"...and the division lines are drawn by the NUMBER of bag marks or how many MINOR intrusions(scuff marks) are within the prime focal areas and the field.....HOGWASH......THIS thought of WEAR
IS the problem......The thought of no wear is not apparent in the MID MS coins.....yet by definition they are AU from the "GET-GO"

If this were strictly applied there would be no mid grades. Such a void and we own these coins...because they are better than the described NO WEAR...Because is very minor wear.....which leaves room for the individual (dealer?buyer...BU/GEMBU) to assume our wear is not wear..and is not PERFECT..MS65.. but better than AU58....and somewhere in between... the AU 58...WEAR....but not MS65...
THIS IS THE VOID...and what this topic is really about......IF a coin has a slight rub in the cotton bolls..THAT IS WEAR and now NOT by definition an MS coin...But most of our MS coins all have a "slight rub" there and on the ear hair. ECT ECT...and numbers of bag marks...and if there in the prime areas or field..
This thread, is about thinking of how much...the inception of WEAR.....and its ACTUAL use still used today in the grading of coins...

I'll stop here, for us to digest these concepts...and your opinions....SHOULD there be such, fine lines minor differences, within the MS grades as we see the obvious differences in lower grades? is this a level grading system.. an even level of "WEAR" between Po1 to MS65?

what are your thoughts...

While I respect those who SPEAK OUT about the questions, I still am no closer to any definitive conclusion, I am very surprised at the lack of posts, I apologize for the lack of others and their opinions for the topic's sake, I thought I would see more, I did not feel I was asking people to pull teeth, LOL.....

PS, I am NOT asking any trick questions, I was just of the thought that some "others', would rise to the occasion.....Let me be more precise, OZ, Bryan, Bio, 1893S, Fenton, Zee,Conder101, Coop, Twohawks, Seatednut, come on people, Inquiring minds really want to know, the opinions of some more experienced members........Thanks for reading the posts.....

I will be more to the point, and quite simple as to be perfectly clear to any one who can read, does this 1901-O coin show wear and/or would you consider the coin uncirculated. ALL bs aside. I have not seen people skirt an issue like this since Watergate...LOL. I am going to play in another sand box, I know this will make some happy, but the topic here will suffer from those who can simply answer, and do not!!!

Thank you OZ, for YOUR opinion.....In my opinion, it takes a strong experience level and knowledge combined with confidence to stand up here, POST and give YOUR opinion,Thanks again, I would like to see others.......

I cannot give an impartial opinion of this 1901-O based on photos alone because it was my coin, I have been able to see this coin in a way no one else here can. I have the advantage of looking at the coin under strong light and magnification and being able to rotate it while watching the luster dance, sometimes that is the only way to rule out wear. This is also a demonstration of the limitations of seeing a coin solely through photos vs. examining the coin in hand. I can say with absolute 100% certainty that there are no luster breaks(wear) on the high points of the coin but there are variances in luster strength in fully struck vs weakly struck areas.