Hey Ben. I think you should do one of two things with the “dispute pile”. Send them back to CAC for reconsideration or make a video with JA where he explains the reason each coin did not pass.
My gosh, that was a whole bunch of beautiful, high end Morgan’s. Someone was very lucky to have owned that group! Thanks for sharing them with us. I’m sure most of them will go at the show.
On your ‘93-CC PL fail, I submitted one in MS63PL to CAC. It also failed to sticker but it was one of two coins on which I ever received a comment from JA. He said ‘it has beautiful lustre but is not fully PL on the reverse.”
Now that is the way grading should be done. Absolutely no reason why the graders can't take a few seconds to explain their position on a coin. If I owned a grading service that would be one of my highest priorities. Not only does it reduce any hard feelings about a received grade but also makes every collector who submits coins a more knowledgeable collector. At least more knowledgeable about what the graders are looking for.
Wow B-U-tiful my friend!! Opening up part deux with a MS67 CAC! sheesh! a gorgeous 85cc dmpl.. And then 95s in a 2! & 93s CAC Oohwee!!! Man I love Morgan's!! Again boss, B-U-tiful coins!!
And WOW!! That 96 Proof is immaculate!! Looking at that grade, seems undergraded and then you pull out another 96 in an 8!!! That toning is leaving me in awe!!
These are wonderful and valuable coins, but they had three things going against them: 1) most were in modern NGC holders, which tend to be overgraded compared to CAC’s standards (my BA at CAC with modern NGCs is abysmal); 2) the more valuable a coin, the more likely it has already been to CAC; and 3) it was Ben who submitted them 😂.
Beautiful coins...I think you really got squeezed on a lot of those No CACs......some were obviously deficient....but several looked to be excellent coins deserving of a Green Sticker. Submit them on a different day and you'll get a sticker. There is Inconsistency with ALL grading services including CAC.
That 1896 was absolutely stunning I'm shocked it didn't get a sticker. There were a number of others I thought should have got stickered as well. Maybe 1896 was one of those years where the proofs just came out looking very strong and that 1896 was just average for the grade compared to the rest of the proofs of that year.
re the 96 proof - if you have Wayne Miller's Morgan and Peace Dollar Textbook (mine's buried in a box in the basement) I know he mentions there's a run of years where the proofs come as B&W Cameos almost normally and I *think* the 96 is one of them. If you have the book take a look because I might have my years wrong. So maybe the reason it didn't get the Bean was because although it'd be a CAM for most years it just isn't for a 96
Hi, Ben. That first coin, the 1881-S in 67, is a beauty. I recognized that long before you showed the grade. I like the 85-CC DMPL. The 1900 O/CC looks like an O/Q. Carson City/Questa? The CC coins sure do look nice. I LOVE THAT 1896 PROOF!!! I call it Cameo. I love the pastel toning on that 1896. I'm surprised it didn't come back as questionable toning just because it is your coin. My wife is a "Reverse of 78" (concave chest, her actual reverse is plump!) J.A. at CAC is a beaner. I love the Green Bean! I like the 91-CC with the Bean. I like the toning on the 85-CC. Nice bunch of Morgans, overall. Thanks.
PCGS - NGC - CAC - ANACS, for grading these days? Get your good slabs to CAC for a possible bean? When the corporations bought PCGS and NGC I am now skeptical of them.
Nice video about Morgan’s, everyone loves Morgan’s but Iam honestly bored of them bc frosty ones are so common. I really like the last video with the early gold. Do more of thoses videos with older stuff like capped bust halves or something please. Not much content out there on that stuff as opposed to Morgan’s
For almost a year now I’ve constantly seen many channels overall come up with the same theme more or less. The quality of both PCGS and NGC has gone done considerably. It now looks like the hose job extends to CAC. Am fearing getting my feet wet in this waters, will wait till they get their act together.
While some of these I wouldn’t have sent in; that proof, that 93 CC and a handful of others you got completely hosed on Ben. CAC sniffing their own farts to much
First is price, then look at the details- strike, weight, look close, study a real one and create a mental snapshot, the hair, the stars, the nose, the lips, the eagle- all the details....
You use a couple different test such as weighing them a un worn morgan should weigh 26.73 grams if they way over or couple grams under its prolly fake and use a magnet to see if it sticks or not it shouldn't and just comparing the design to an authentic one like the dates and other markers in the coin to see of they look the same and silver has specific sound you can use a ping test or take it to a coin shop that has a sigma machine that will tell them if the coin is solid silver
So Ben went from openly questioning CAC’s existence… even creating a video mocking adding stickers to holders… to drinking the Kool Aid and doing a massive CAC submission. Just curious what caused the shift in attitude?
The 1896 PF65 is definitely not a cameo, and why do you want to crack it out, presumably to get a higher grade, when it didn't CAC in this grade? This obsession with cracking out coins is really getting frustrating - if everyone keeps it up it will just inflate the grades of everything while devaluing them, defeating the whole purpose of cracking them out in the first place.
CAC adds green stickers to coins that “are premium for the grade.” So it’s not that they dispute the grade on the holder. They just don’t always judge the coin as being premium within the range for that grade. They add a gold sticker if they feel the coin is better than the grade on the holder.
Greetings Ben - Extremely nice group of coins - I am going to steal a line from a previous commenter - Do you think these graders CAC included have a price guide next to them while evaluating the grade or to give it a bean? Best wishes on a great show and stay safe - Look forward to your updates
I have an 1893-CC that I believe is the same VAM as the one you showed. It has a triangle shaped mark between the left wing and the wreath. It matches up to the hairline on the obverse. I believe caused by the striking of the obverse but shows up on the reverse. Can't remember what that is called.
It was GREAT meeting you with Queenie at the LB show!
Hey Ben. I think you should do one of two things with the “dispute pile”. Send them back to CAC for reconsideration or make a video with JA where he explains the reason each coin did not pass.
This would be such a fantastic learning experience for the community if JA were willing!
You have some absolutely beautiful dollars, Ben! I love nice Morgans and some of those are very difficult to obtain!
Wonderful coins Ben!!! WOW!!! Thank you!!!
Proof Cam, beautiful coin!
I've got the Morgan Set complete with 90 o/o mint state about 24 of them colored up real nice. Love to see coins like that showed.
All that Eye Candy is making me hungry !! Beautiful coins Ben....
My gosh, that was a whole bunch of beautiful, high end Morgan’s. Someone was very lucky to have owned that group! Thanks for sharing them with us. I’m sure most of them will go at the show.
On your ‘93-CC PL fail, I submitted one in MS63PL to CAC. It also failed to sticker but it was one of two coins on which I ever received a comment from JA. He said ‘it has beautiful lustre but is not fully PL on the reverse.”
Now that is the way grading should be done. Absolutely no reason why the graders can't take a few seconds to explain their position on a coin. If I owned a grading service that would be one of my highest priorities. Not only does it reduce any hard feelings about a received grade but also makes every collector who submits coins a more knowledgeable collector. At least more knowledgeable about what the graders are looking for.
I found 1889-CC Morgan in F-12 at a pawn shop for scrap$ back in 2011, when silver hit $35/oz, crazy stuff came out of the woodwork!
Coins you rarely see. Thanks Ben.
You always make me drool like a dog waiting for a piece of steak.
Just gotta love those Morgans.
I can never get the grading right on toned coins.
Wow B-U-tiful my friend!!
Opening up part deux with a MS67 CAC! sheesh!
a gorgeous 85cc dmpl..
And then 95s in a 2! & 93s CAC Oohwee!!!
Man I love Morgan's!!
Again boss, B-U-tiful coins!!
And WOW!! That 96 Proof is immaculate!! Looking at that grade, seems undergraded and then you pull out another 96 in an 8!!!
That toning is leaving me in awe!!
That 93cc in a 3!
I guessed a 5 for sure but, was that a Die Clash on the Reverse sir?
And no bean!!?
Wow that 93 Philly sure looked nice for a 63... I woulda gave it a green bean.
That proof is a beaut, Clark! Robbed with no sticker.
Wow some seriously nice tougher morgans in this video
Really nice Coin’s Ben just wish I could buy them as cheap as you are quoting them 😂.The CC Morgan’s have tripled in price in the last couple years.
These are wonderful and valuable coins, but they had three things going against them: 1) most were in modern NGC holders, which tend to be overgraded compared to CAC’s standards (my BA at CAC with modern NGCs is abysmal); 2) the more valuable a coin, the more likely it has already been to CAC; and 3) it was Ben who submitted them 😂.
Beautiful coins...I think you really got squeezed on a lot of those No CACs......some were obviously deficient....but several looked to be excellent coins deserving of a Green Sticker. Submit them on a different day and you'll get a sticker. There is Inconsistency with ALL grading services including CAC.
That 1896 was absolutely stunning I'm shocked it didn't get a sticker. There were a number of others I thought should have got stickered as well. Maybe 1896 was one of those years where the proofs just came out looking very strong and that 1896 was just average for the grade compared to the rest of the proofs of that year.
Watched this twice, it's just sooo gooood !
Nice 94-P, tough coin in AU, the 1899-P was always a tough coin in 63 or higher, nice set, old holder, shouldve gotten green bean.
re the 96 proof - if you have Wayne Miller's Morgan and Peace Dollar Textbook (mine's buried in a box in the basement) I know he mentions there's a run of years where the proofs come as B&W Cameos almost normally and I *think* the 96 is one of them. If you have the book take a look because I might have my years wrong. So maybe the reason it didn't get the Bean was because although it'd be a CAM for most years it just isn't for a 96
Hi, Ben. That first coin, the 1881-S in 67, is a beauty. I recognized that long before you showed the grade. I like the 85-CC DMPL. The 1900 O/CC looks like an O/Q. Carson City/Questa? The CC coins sure do look nice. I LOVE THAT 1896 PROOF!!! I call it Cameo. I love the pastel toning on that 1896. I'm surprised it didn't come back as questionable toning just because it is your coin. My wife is a "Reverse of 78" (concave chest, her actual reverse is plump!) J.A. at CAC is a beaner. I love the Green Bean! I like the 91-CC with the Bean. I like the toning on the 85-CC. Nice bunch of Morgans, overall. Thanks.
Unnatural toning on that 1896-P MS68
Man, that was tough! CAC - 1 vs. Ben - ZERO! Great video Coin Geek!!!
That is tough to swallow, Ben!
93 CC in UNC.....She's a beauty!.....would love to put her in the CC type set next to the 70 trade dollar!
Comment down below....help that algorithm!
Ive seen more than a coupla 93-CCs graded 63, BITD, rather than 62!
Killer coins thx for sharing.
See you at the Long Beach Expo
CAC will sticker a morgan with some toning and a spot but blast white pretty much has to be spotless for a sticker.
That 92-CC was PL!
What Lupe do you use? Also what power do you use for grading vs finding varieties?
Hey some of those you can send them to "w" blast white or even Mac cause there's a demand for that
nice coins i enjoyed the video thanks. wondering why they did S for sanfansisco and not N for new orleans.
For the 1896 proof morgan, I can see why cac didn't sticker. Mainly for the two ugly spots on the cheek.
It almost seems like they randomly placed the stickers on this batch of coins.
It seems that CAC has really slowed down stickering coins lately due to the roll out of CACG.
Do you look at photos of a coin for authenticity?
PCGS - NGC - CAC - ANACS, for grading these days?
Get your good slabs to CAC for a possible bean?
When the corporations bought PCGS and NGC I am now skeptical of them.
The 95s is scarce in xf or better. MS 62 is rare.
Pf 65 definitely cam or cac
Nice video about Morgan’s, everyone loves Morgan’s but Iam honestly bored of them bc frosty ones are so common. I really like the last video with the early gold. Do more of thoses videos with older stuff like capped bust halves or something please. Not much content out there on that stuff as opposed to Morgan’s
For almost a year now I’ve constantly seen many channels overall come up with the same theme more or less. The quality of both PCGS and NGC has gone done considerably. It now looks like the hose job extends to CAC. Am fearing getting my feet wet in this waters, will wait till they get their act together.
Grading services just don’t give out PL or DMPL like they did 25 years ago, sad!
The "Waters I dont know" coin might be orettiest Morgan I ever saw. How MS 65?
While some of these I wouldn’t have sent in; that proof, that 93 CC and a handful of others you got completely hosed on Ben.
CAC sniffing their own farts to much
Also add me to those people who don't get why you don't have *at least* 100,000 subscribers
Same here
How can I tell if a Morgan is counterfeit?
First is price, then look at the details- strike, weight, look close, study a real one and create a mental snapshot, the hair, the stars, the nose, the lips, the eagle- all the details....
You use a couple different test such as weighing them a un worn morgan should weigh 26.73 grams if they way over or couple grams under its prolly fake and use a magnet to see if it sticks or not it shouldn't and just comparing the design to an authentic one like the dates and other markers in the coin to see of they look the same and silver has specific sound you can use a ping test or take it to a coin shop that has a sigma machine that will tell them if the coin is solid silver
Thank you!! I have done all of that. 38.1 mm 26.22 Oz though and it's not worn. My my had it in her silver Dollars bucket .
prices are too high, for my area anyway
hard coin envy lol
So Ben went from openly questioning CAC’s existence… even creating a video mocking adding stickers to holders… to drinking the Kool Aid and doing a massive CAC submission. Just curious what caused the shift in attitude?
He’s talked before about adapting to the market, there’s many people who want high grade CAC coins so it’s easier to sell them now
3-22? ouch
The 1896 PF65 is definitely not a cameo, and why do you want to crack it out, presumably to get a higher grade, when it didn't CAC in this grade? This obsession with cracking out coins is really getting frustrating - if everyone keeps it up it will just inflate the grades of everything while devaluing them, defeating the whole purpose of cracking them out in the first place.
How in the world was that proof only a 65?!
I didn't see much of anything wrong with it
So is cac basically saying PCGS and NGC can't grade? That's kinda what they're saying when they reject the vast majority of coins.
CAC adds green stickers to coins that “are premium for the grade.” So it’s not that they dispute the grade on the holder. They just don’t always judge the coin as being premium within the range for that grade. They add a gold sticker if they feel the coin is better than the grade on the holder.
Greetings Ben - Extremely nice group of coins - I am going to steal a line from a previous commenter - Do you think these graders CAC included have a price guide next to them while evaluating the grade or to give it a bean? Best wishes on a great show and stay safe - Look forward to your updates
Maybe
*FIRST*
I have an 1893-CC that I believe is the same VAM as the one you showed. It has a triangle shaped mark between the left wing and the wreath. It matches up to the hairline on the obverse. I believe caused by the striking of the obverse but shows up on the reverse. Can't remember what that is called.