1895-O Morgan (Pic Update)

Thanks for sharing TLS5933
That was good practice for me.

I honestly believe your coin is graded at least 5 points low, TLS5933. I don't believe they took into account, or even determined, the quality of the strike when evaluating the wear. As a weak strike, that coin does not have XF-level wear. The wings are almost unmolested.

Bryan, that's a circulated coin in your link, IMO. The weakness of the hair and breast suggests weakness should be visible in the claws, lower leaves, eagle's neck and it isn't. I can see the hair and breast getting circulation wear before the other areas (if you hold a coin by its' flats, do you hold it at the edge or at the center?), but as recent threads have illustrated, the lower devices on the reverse are pretty good indicators of weak Morgan strikes.

quote:

---

Originally posted by SuperDave

I honestly believe your coin is graded at least 5 points low, TLS5933. I don't believe they took into account, or even determined, the quality of the strike when evaluating the wear. As a weak strike, that coin does not have XF-level wear. The wings are almost unmolested.

Bryan, that's a circulated coin in your link, IMO. The weakness of the hair and breast suggests weakness should be visible in the claws, lower leaves, eagle's neck and it isn't. I can see the hair and breast getting circulation wear before the other areas (if you hold a coin by its' flats, do you hold it at the edge or at the center?), but as recent threads have illustrated, the lower devices on the reverse are pretty good indicators of weak Morgan strikes.

---

Thanks Dave,
I agree,now if I can just get PCGS to go along. It's my coin now,for better or worse.

I have yet to look at any post past the first... and seeing there are two pages, I am sure the grade has been revealed.
The problem with grading this coin by pictures is the luster. The would help determining if it is UNC or not. Definately weakly struck. I am going to stab at a 62.

Now to see how close I am... (and instead of two seperate post, I am just going to add on here...)

Wow... XF45. I guess that is where the luster comes into play at. The 88-O I once owned, now owned by Rick was a lot flatter on the breast and above the ear, but was an UNC coin.
I still would have thought of this to been AU minimum.

Decent coin regardless...

You guys have now confused the heck out of me! I'm trying so hard to learn how to grade Morgans and now? Whimper, whimper! I do enjoy the comments though. I'll just have to try and sort it all out in my mind and will keep throwing in my grading thoughts and reasons and you can keep throwing yours back at me. This too will pass! ;-)

Guys and Gals, we're dealing with a triple whammy situation here. (this smilie seems to get used a lot in the Goin Grading Practice forum). First, it's a New Orleans Morgan with its characteristic weak strike which makes it appear circulated before it even left the Mint's doors. Second, the image isn't all that great. And third, we're dealing with PCGS's new standards for Morgans which leaves everyone . I truly believe PCGS's downward trend in Morgan grading is to lower the average in its Population Reports, possibly for market reasons but also possibly to tighten its reputation as a "tough grader". This is a very cynical viewpoint of a top-of-the-line TPG, but it's an opinion based on personal experience when even after I demonstrated a CC Morgan was uncirculated and not "harshly cleaned", they still wouldn't back down (hence the word, "retired" following my PCGS member number).

It very well may be we're never gonna get the grade right on most New Orleans Morgans, at least if we use PCGS as a benchmark.

I believe it's a fairly recent slab (within the past two years) with its higher number, so we can expect a lower than expected grade. Terry, I don't think it's gonna do you any good to resubmit it in its slab to PCGS, even with a Presidential Review although given the potential value of the Morgan, it might be worth the gamble of resubmission fees. Cracking it out might give you a better chance of a higher grade; I don't think even PCGS would lower the grade below XF-45. One strategy which I haven't tried myself: cracking it out of its slab, then submitting it to NGC or ANACS, then if it comes back higher, submitting it as a crossover to PCGS. I think if it were me, I'd first crack it out, then submit it to PCGS before trying other strategies. Certainly, the difference in value between XF-45 and even AU-50 of over a thousand bucks would make it worth the investment in additional grading fees.

with Dave's assessment that with this (and other similar Morgans, especially now-Rick's 88-O) Morgan, it's nigh on impossible to grade it unless it's in hand. The Morgan in Bryan's link has the same problem compounded with really bad images so that any attempt to grade it from the images is .

Fred

Please keep us posted on this, Terry. These O Morgans are giving all of us migraines. This thread will refreshen back to the top once a new post is made. I'd really like to be able to follow through with this Morgan if for no other reason to prove me right or wrong.

Fred