| Author |
 Replies: 12 / Views: 1,650 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1590 Posts |
Not that any Morgan is ugly, lol. All these marks you see are bag marks. All of them, well...at least I think they are. Under those marks look like what at one time was a PL 1881 S. The reverse is just as bad. The cotton Balls, and cap show no other signs of wear. What I don't understand is why both sides are this bad. Any thoughts? Oh, and assuming for a second that this is an uncirculated coin, would that amount of bag marking downgrade it to a circulated grade? I do understand it really only has value at its melt value; I am just curious as to how it would be graded. Thanks!  Edited by jmkendall
05/12/2011 01:55 am
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
870 Posts |
Sounds like AU, but I think some higher resolution pictures would help. =)
|
|
Valued Member
United States
70 Posts |
I have some much worse, that actually looks good.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3294 Posts |
Looks a lot better then my CC Morgan.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4989 Posts |
Are those bag marks? Looks more like some scattered toning. Might be a candidate for a dip.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
565 Posts |
FYI:Back in the day casinos used Morgans in there slot machines. People started to take them home with them. So the casinos started to lightly sand blast the coins. This was to deter people from tacking them home . They have the look of a bunch of tiny bag marks all over both sides of the coin. If you look at the coin and it seems uniform that might be what happened to your coin. I bought a coin that this was done to.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2602 Posts |
are you sure they are bag marks? Upon magnification, do they look like tiny nicks? Could it be unusual toning or spotting?
|
|
Valued Member
United States
70 Posts |
Mycrob I think you jut nailed it.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
648 Posts |
The story I heard was that the casinos put the Morgans in a cement mixer along with cement to permanently stain them , looks like it worked !
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3345 Posts |
not bad! you should see some of the more worn ones  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
14454 Posts |
most 1881-S Morgans are in Uncirculated condition so this is actually a rare occurrence for this date/mm combination
|
|
Valued Member
United States
455 Posts |
Your 1881 S doesn't look so bad. I have several that look a lot worse that yours. Your Morgan just looks like it toned kind of freaky and it could probably use a dip (as long as it is in fact mint state). If you are nervous about dipping the coin yourself, send it to NCS for restoration and grading. In my opinion practically every 1881 S is in mint state that I have seen.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
16679 Posts |
Without seen the reverse, I'd say your coin is AU+. It does seem to have some splotches on the surfaces?
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
| |
Replies: 12 / Views: 1,650 |
|
Posted 05/12/2011 02:46 am
