Could this be MS? 0

[Truly Clean]

I'm considering buying this online.  Seller honestly believes it to be MS and PL.  I'd appreciate any thoughts/feedback please ?

[JKK]

Not sure where the seller gets PL. Just from the photos, I'd say AU-55/58. Seller will probably wet himself if you say that to him.

[Coinbuf]

From the photos it doesn't look MS nor does it look PL, in all honesty I would grade it AU55 at best from the pics.  Anytime you see a coin like this you should be asking "why isn't this coin graded by a tpg".  I understand that there are great high value coins like this out there that are raw, but unless you know the source very well and trust it completely (even then you can get burned) you should be very wary.  

[Greenstang]

No way that is a MS Morgan. Just look at the wear above the ear and on the reverse the wear on the eagles breast. The feathers are worn down. Plus there is a lack of lustre. I agree with the above and say it is AU55 at the best. Offer him AU price as that is all it is worth.

 

 

 

[Alex in PA.]

I agree with the above. Not MS and not PL.  Not even close.

Edited March 23, 2020 by Alex in PA.

[Just Bob]

The '96-O, like a lot of New Orleans mint Morgans, is commonly found with a weak strike, and poor luster. At least some of the lack of detail in the hair and breast feathers could be a result of being poorly struck, but the coin has numerous marks, and, in my opinion, appears to have been cleaned. And, I don't see "prooflike" anywhere in those pictures. I would not want to pay more than VF/XF money for it, personally.

[Truly Clean]

Thank you all for of your help!  I was considering giving the benefit of my doubt to the seller given the possibility in my mind that the photo or lighting hid any luster, PL or not, and even cleaning. He said it was his grandfather's collection who was a pure numismatist.   Also, like Just Bob said, this tough date is typically lacking in detail, but maybe I wanted it be MS too much.  It seems unanimous that those are circulation marks and not excessive unc marks.  I was looking to upgrade my AU55.  I think I'll stick to NGC and PCGS graded coins.  I've studied hard for the less than a year I've been collecting (Morgans only), but I still have so much to learn.  Why doesn't ebay allow video option?  Thanks again

[Just Bob]

If it was in his grandfather's collection, there is a possibility that it has been wiped or dipped. These were acceptable practices years ago.

[Truly Clean]

Oh, I see. I didn't know that.  I've read a couple books on Morgans.  Is there an especially good book or online archive that you would recommend about coin collecting in general ?

[jgrinz]

Well looks as though you got the answer already - No and No 

:-)

 

[JKK]

1 hour ago, Truly Clean said:

Thank you all for of your help!  I was considering giving the benefit of my doubt to the seller given the possibility in my mind that the photo or lighting hid any luster, PL or not, and even cleaning. He said it was his grandfather's collection who was a pure numismatist.   Also, like Just Bob said, this tough date is typically lacking in detail, but maybe I wanted it be MS too much.  It seems unanimous that those are circulation marks and not excessive unc marks.  I was looking to upgrade my AU55.  I think I'll stick to NGC and PCGS graded coins.  I've studied hard for the less than a year I've been collecting (Morgans only), but I still have so much to learn.  Why doesn't ebay allow video option?  Thanks again

Most collectors (especially those who just inherited Bampaw's collection) have a tendency to Perceive Bampaw as The World's Most Amazing Numismatist. In a few cases, they are correct. In the majority of cases, Bampaw just looked like he knew Massive Amounts because he knew much more than the kids did. Well, yeah. The drag there is, of course: how do you say politely "No offense, but Bampaw sucked at numismatics"? Most people will die in a ditch defending The Omniscience of Bampaw. There's no good answer except to stick to the observable qualities of the coin, and not to be influenced by The Supposed Omniscience of Bampaw. Frankly, when someone tells me it was their grandfather's collection, I brace for a major pain because I don't look forward to bearing the bad tidings that are likely to come.

[Just Bob]

18 hours ago, Truly Clean said:

.  Seller honestly believes it to be MS and PL.  I'd appreciate any thoughts/feedback please ?

 

Although there is no evidence of it being prooflike in those pictures, it is entirely possible that this coin could - technically- be uncirculated. That is, it could have been obtained from a bank, and never put into circulation. As I stated earlier, some of the lack of detail that looks like wear could be from a very poor strike. Many of the bagmarks could have been on the coin when it was first obtained. But, a lot of the wear/marks could have come from the coin being handled improperly during the time it was in the hands of the owner. How many times have we seen dealers dump a roll of Morgans onto a hard table or counter top, and then spread them out like they were sorting a pile of rocks, without any padding or without using care to soften the blow, or lessen the contact between coins? The owner could have done this exact thing many times.The coins could have been handle numerous times while loose in a bag or other container. How long would it take a partial bag of silver dollars to jostle against each other enough to wear the "new" off the coins inside. And, how often did the owner wipe the surface with his thumb or a rag? All of this and more could have contributed to the current look of this coin.

The seller may have a legitimate reason for assuming the coin is MS, whether it actually is or not.

I still would not want to pay more than VF/XF money for it, though.

As far as reading, I would start with the NGC news articles CLICK HERE and the What You Need To Know threads on this forum. CLICK HERE

There is also a list of books on the WYNTK page.

[Truly Clean]

1 hour ago, JKK said:

" Bampaw " 

ROFL.  Thanks for the laugh and help.

 

33 minutes ago, Just Bob said:

As far as reading, I would start with the NGC news articles CLICK HERE and the What You Need To Know threads on this forum. CLICK HERE

There is also a list of books on the WYNTK page.

I'll check it out.  Thank you!

[jgrinz]

With better pictures I would may change my mind.

The dark areas of the coin could be partial reflective surfaces 

but they dont look like that.

Even though is a "O" mint, which is usual for a weak strike, that will not make the gouges and field 

abrasions seen on this coin. 

May squeak to an AU

 

[Conder101]

Technically everything is part of an "estate" even if the owner isn't dead yet.

[Mactanboy]

IMHO most sellers believe the coin they are selling is higher than it actually is! A seller may "truly believe" the coin is MS but that does not make it so. I became frustrated with dealers who advertised their coins as MS 63 (not Third Party Graded) and asked MS 63 retail prices.  I bought a number, then sent them to NGC and they came back AU 55-58. When I spoke with the dealer he would always say--I gave my best guess at the grade and I am not a professional grader.  To which I responded: Why is it that the coins never come back at a higher grade! At this stage in my collecting life, I only purchase NGC or PCGS graded coins and turn a deaf ear when a seller claims the third party graders are wrong because they want to inflate the grade and price!

Edited April 1, 2020 by Mactanboy
misspelling