1899-S Morgan Opinions Requested

Wow, Gem BU used to mean MS65, this only reaches AU and probably details based on the seller's images. Run away in my opinion.

Looks cleaned mid AU

AU-55, not even close to MS

Appears to have a partial cartwheel left of luster, so I don't think it's been cleaned.

It is an ugly/baggy AU but does not appear to be cleaned.

Seller has many red flags that should scare you off this coin:

- Uses terms like "GEM BU ++++" and "Key date" on the 2x2 for coins that are very much neither
- Charges $3 for "one day shipping" which would be more than 6 times more expensive in reality
- Has 3 negative feedback in the last year about overgrading and misrepresented items
- Runs every auction as a private auction, making it difficult for you to see shill bidding or to see if seller is overgrading/misrepresenting other coins
- Claims every coin is a key date, rare, "BU+++++", "PQ", or otherwise more valuable than it should be. That's a HUGE red flag.

Examples from this yahoo's current listings:
- An 1857 FEC is a "highly sought after key" in "gem bu +++++ MS64", reality is mid AU and cleaned with an obverse gouge. (161928441424)
- All of his Indians are "rare key dates" except, strangely enough, his 1909-S, which is not described as a key date. (!)
- A "MS67 full horn PQ" 1913 T1 Buffalo with E.D. ... (391350832942) listed with other jokes (he claims a 1938-D is MS68!)
- Cleaned AU 1858-O Seated 50c advertised as "GEM BU P.L." (391350905194)
- Ugly 1878 Morgan listed as a "1878 Reverse of 1879 7 tail feathers" !! (391352127417) (It's reverse of '78, 7TF)
- Cleaned 1851 Half Cent in low VF range listed as "rare" and "very high grade" (151912162668)

Go to their store for many more egregious examples of stupidity and fraud.


You did well to stay away.

Everything is listed as "bu" on ebay. I'd say maybe it's close to MS, but yeah, this most likely would be AU 58, maybe even 55 since that one contact mark on the cheek is horrifying...