| Author |
 Replies: 22 / Views: 2,512 |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
8938 Posts |
I saw this one up for sale. What do you think PCGS graded it?   |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8137 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7021 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
18660 Posts |
i think they graded it BBTL (blinded by the light) the best I can tell I'm at MS65 but the surfaces are washed out. Grape you know better than to post photos like this.  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2156 Posts |
MS-65 for me, but I think they said MS-66
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
8938 Posts |
@panzaldi, these were the photos provided. I agree they are overlit I could try fixing them in photoshop
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
857 Posts |
Personally I'd grade it MS-65+
But I'm gonaa guess it graded MS-67.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1590 Posts |
Actually I think PCGS tends to grade hard on this common date. Not wanting to hurt the value of highly graded examples. I've seen gems in a 3 holder more times than I care to remember
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8938 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5825 Posts |
Not a collector of this series, so my opinion is MS-64, obverse appears to have too much contact marks on her face.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4469 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8938 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8938 Posts |
In the wise words of anyone who has ever graded a morgan, what were they smoking? There is NO way this is a 67 much less a 67+! I've seen nicer 65's!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8938 Posts |
Here's the TrueView, not much better, but better at conceling the marks.  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Must agree, a long stretch.
Edited by Coinfrog
12/17/2019 8:56 pm
|
| |
Replies: 22 / Views: 2,512 |
Posted 12/16/2019 03:07 am
