| Author |
 Replies: 46 / Views: 6,312 |
|
|
|
Moderator
  United States
23522 Posts |
I think it'll make P01 in a PCGS slab, vermontensium. But that's market grading. Part of what this set will encompass is to make a statement about market grading.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
3660 Posts |
I might recommend asking those with experience in the field. I do not know who is in the lead right now, but the VW site administrator and John Goldsmith are (or were very recently) in the top two spots in the PCGS Morgan lowball registry set game..... John Goldsmith is a terribly nice guy and has a great collection.... he just loves showing it off and would happily give you the online link to his registry set, talk your ear off about it, and answer any questions you might have..... JohnGoldsmith is his username at VW as well.... PM him.
|
|
Moderator
United States
16679 Posts |
Mine has no MM, at least none that we can see, therefore, it will remain raw and listed "ungradable" in my collection. If PCGS ever comes up with a technology to see a mintmark on a Poor coin, I guess I will then submit. Until then, I will stash away :-)
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Pillar of the Community
3660 Posts |
With coin in hand, you may well be correct.... however, I have seen this discussion before.... creative submission seemingly has aided in producing desired results in the past.... I am sure that others would give it a shot (but then those folks are hard core low ballers).... It would not hurt for one of you to consult John on it.... something could be learned (concerning the topic of this thread) if nothing else. edited to add: (He doesn't bite)..  Edited by zeewool
01/21/2011 07:26 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
763 Posts |
So I guess we need to find another example of a Poor-1 Morgan dollar for the grading set. I agree that the 2nd coin is a Fair-2 coin. |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
2448 Posts |
As far as I can tell, both TPGs have the same standard. Xshift copied the descriptions directly from page 27 of the 6th Edition. Just because the ANA Grading Standards, 6th Edition does not display an example, does not mean they don't recognize the grade. The whole reason for this discussion, I'm beginning to believe, is the possibility of getting a PO-01 grade is for monetary gain, not joy of owership. But, then I've been wrong before. |
|
Valued Member
United States
230 Posts |
so I guess by these rules an older Philly mint coin can never be a PO1?
|
|
Moderator
United States
16679 Posts |
Quote:
The whole reason for this discussion, I'm beginning to believe, is the possibility of getting a PO-01 grade is for monetary gain, not joy of owership Well, that's not my intention with this coin. Like I said, I don't plan on submitting it. In fact, if someone needed it for a extreme low ball set, I would consider selling it someday, and, not much over melt. swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Pillar of the Community
3660 Posts |
Quote:
so I guess by these rules an older Philly mint coin can never be a PO1? That was exactly the point of my post fiddler.... No that is not true, and neither is the deal about both date and mm being legible.... Some Philadelphia Morgans can be recognized without either date or mm being.... there are other features (if recognizable) that can distinguish date, hub and mm.... I have seen it. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
763 Posts |
Also a Philly coin can still be a P01 coin if the area where a mint mark would be is not as heavily worn as the rest of the coin.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3077 Posts |
it may be just me but I swear I can see the date on the first coin so wont that make it by the rules a Po1? BTW what other types of Po1 coins will you be looking for ? i got a nice 1882 IHCEdited by yotie
01/21/2011 9:13 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2669 Posts |
Quote:As far as I can tell, both TPGs have the same standard. Xshift copied the descriptions directly from page 27 of the 6th Edition. Just because the ANA Grading Standards, 6th Edition does not display an example, does not mean they don't recognize the grade. The point of my post was to say definitely that the ANA *does* recognize those grades. The reason I then said there was no picture is because I was looking for one to compare to the coin in question in this thread. Quote:
The whole reason for this discussion, I'm beginning to believe, is the possibility of getting a PO-01 grade is for monetary gain, not joy of owership. But, then I've been wrong before. The reason for this discussion is to set a baseline for a P01 Morgan that can be used for the Morgan Grading Set. It may take a bit of hashing out as market grading looks to be a bit more lax than strictly grading by technical attributes. I can't wait for the upper grades when we won't be able to factor in eye appeal and pretty rainbow toning  Yotie, it may be possible the date is there, but we only have one picture at one angle. I can't see it, but many have better eyes than I do. These days I have to use a magnifying glass to read half the papers my kids bring home from school. |
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Quote:
It may take a bit of hashing out as market grading looks to be a bit more lax than strictly grading by technical attributes. Ding! "Better" coins are worth more. I do not accuse the TPG's of being lax in their grading, I accuse them of (probably unconsciously) taking grading into the realm of value-orientation when it benefits both them and the hobby to have higher-grade coins available. Which is kinda ironic when you think about it, because Sheldon's original intent with his grading system was value orientation; he concluded that the "average" MS70 coin was worth 70x more than the "average" P01 coin. That's why the Sheldon Scale has 70 points. I will take this particular thread as settled; we'll call vermontensium's coin Basal State Ungradable, and mine FR02. For the moment. Tomorrow, another coin. We'll be looking into VF/EF this time. |
|
Moderator
United States
16679 Posts |
If you are referring to the first coin SuperDave has posted for discussion, it is an 1887. The date IS there and you can see it in hand without a loupe. As for a MM, I don't see one.
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
I see the date easily, even in a pic. The mint mark only is suspect. That is sufficient for what I'd like to call this coin; it's the only Morgan I've ever seen approached "Basal State."
|
| |
Replies: 46 / Views: 6,312 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 01/21/2011 05:31 am
