1883 O Morgan (Luster?)

Somebody went to a lot of trouble to sell this coin for $6.

The local dealer bought it like it is 12 years ago for $6.

I see the halo you are talking about. It surrounds everything on the coin on both sides.

Oh well, I bought it at a dealer. I will take it back to him with loupe in hand and see what he says.

I think I will buy a slabbed coin next to see what I am supposed to be looking for.

I saw a mirror finish and got taken in by it.

Here's a good pic of how the field can be shiny, but
the devices are matte, or even 'frosty' looking.

Check the neck's soft sheen, compared to the field
just in front of the neck. The field has a nice
contrasting shine.
You want luster, but the luster must be a natural
contrasting and complementing variation of shines
and tones to make an attractive coin. An attractive
coin, not accounting scratches or damage, is usually
an uncleaned coin. Monotone like yours is often a
big red flag.

I agree that the coin has been heavily polished .

Here is another example of frosted devices and fairly deep mirrors .






I collect the Omints almost exclusively and the appearance of the coins can and does change dramatically from a frosty luster to mirrored .

Here is an example of a frosty piece and also a very dramatic example of just how weak the strike can be ,,actually this is the weakest strike coin for the series I have ever seen and has been argued here a couple of times as to the grade . I am convinced that the coin is a Mint state example .

markj,

You are learning fast! An understanding of the minting process will help you quickly pick out the whizzed, wiped, dipped, etc. coins. Look at Metalman's first coin and see the mirror on the fields and how the devices remain frosted. Anytime you see "shiny" devices (bust, lettering, eagle, etc.) it should send a warning flag. The 1888-O is also a great example of a weak strike in a particular mint run.

One final note ... if your dealer didn't flag this as a whizzed coin, you may want to find another dealer. This one is way too obvious.

Oh, sorry he made good on it.

See this https://goccf.com/t/34502#34502

wwhitman,

Morgan and Peace dollars are an anomally when it comes to mintage figures and survivorship. They were forced upon the public in mass quantities as a result of the Bland-Allison Act. Many more were produced than the public needed, so the majority ended up in canvas bags of 1000 in a Federal Reserve bank somewhere. Fast-forward 40 years ... when silver was removed from U.S. coinage in 1964, anything with silver content became very desirable. The Fed began releasing those $1000 bags and the market was flooded with BU Morgan and Peace dollars. Previously rare dates were suddenly available ... example 1896-O, and the hobby was in turmoil. Then toward the end of the 1970's, the Hunt Brothers collaborated to send the price of silver to nearly $50 an ounce. Many of those BU Morgans and Peace dollars went to the smelter.

The net effect of all of this was to abandon mintage figures for the most part and focus on documented survivorship. That's what you see today. There weren't any BU bags of 1893-S, 1884-S, 1889-CC released by the Fed, so they remain very rare. Some lower mintage Morgans were found in these BU bags, so now there are many BU examples available. Hope that helps explain it.

There are a couple of published works that "guess" on survivorship, but the best guide is the price list "greysheet". Another decent tool are the TPG's population reports that are available for a membership fee ... or if you nicely ask some members here who have access. We'll never know for certain, but the hobby has stabilized for Morgan and Peace dollars from what we saw in the 60's and 70's.

That could all turn upside down if some eccentric collector opens up some bags of rare dates that he/she has stored since the 60's. It's highly unlikely, but not beyond the realm of possibility.