I bought a Morgan on ebay that looks like a VAM Top 100

Thanks Mike.

Mike wrote:
anti-spam wrote:

Waht does 'VAM' stand for?


Van Allen and Mallis, the authors of the "Encyclopedia of Morgan and
Peace Dollars".

Mike

Just curious, does this hold true to "Hallmark" (earlier PCI) slabs with a
10 digit number?


Here ya go: http://www.k6az.com/pci/pci.htm

Mike

anti-spam wrote:
Waht does 'VAM' stand for?

I was wondering at that too, anti-spam. Some of the other coin
collecting jargon got me as well.
Apparently VAM:
VAM number
Unique number assigned to each die combination of Morgan and Peace
dollar known to the authors of The Complete Catalog and Encyclopedia of
United States Morgan and Peace Silver Dollars. Called VAM because of the
authors Leroy Van Allen and A. George Mallis.
Van Allen-Mallis
The Morgan and Peace dollar variety book authors. First published
in 1971, it was updated and reprinted in 1998.

Found this and more at this website:
http://www.pcgs.com/lingo_static.chtml
cheers,
Riff

Randy Thompson wrote:
Thanks for the confirmation and information from both of you. Here is
the ebay auction where I won the coin.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=8413831771
....

You are right. I have had a couple of the old PCI holders and the grade
seemed right. It may crossover to a PCGS 65. I don't know how good the
strike of an O-mint coin has to be before it can make it into a PCGS 65
holder. I've had several O Morgans that were free of marks, but still
earned only a 64. The ones I remember had poor strike (flat hair and
ears, poor feathers). Yours may be better than the ones I remembered.
PCGS is lenient with the strike of O-Mint coins at the lower MS grades.
I've never owned a MS65 or better for the O-Mint, so I don't know what
the strike looks like in higher grades. ANA standards require a good
strike for 65, but good strike for the O-Mint may be judged more
leniently than for the P or S-Mint.

I think the price you paid is a good one for the coin. It has toning
that many people like.

Anita

"VAM" stands for "SCAM".

"but many of the coins don't bring a premium in the real market" - a
beautiful statement.

Morgan dollars ain't rare.

oly

oly wrote:

"VAM" stands for "SCAM".

"but many of the coins don't bring a premium in the real market" - a
beautiful statement.

Morgan dollars ain't rare.

oly


Yup, just like the 1955/55 penny... they made 300+ 1955 pennies after
all, common as dirt.

Mike

wrote:

Back to the OP's coin -- Randy's coin has another factor coming in. The
PCI slab. Many people don't know the old slab is considered favorably.
Holding onto it sounds like a good idea to me. If it crossed to a 65,
the slabbing/VAM costs would be worth it. If not, it is just money
spent. Sometimes sending coins out feels like a gambling game. 65 you
win; 64 you lose. It seems kind of crazy, since the coin is just
itself.

Anita


The real value of the coin would still be in the toning. Scribbling VAM3
on it won't matter at this point unless it goes into a MS65 PCGS holder.
He can either enjoy it or gamble. He paid 70, he'll be into it 95 after
PCGS. If he does it right he can get 2x bid out of the coin at 64
considering the color and PCGS/Vam3. If it goes 65 he wins bigtime. It's
a nobrainer--- send it to PCGS. Only time he really gets it is if they
say it's AT/AS.

Mike

Mike wrote:

oly wrote:

"VAM" stands for "SCAM".

"but many of the coins don't bring a premium in the real market" - a
beautiful statement.

Morgan dollars ain't rare.

oly


Yup, just like the 1955/55 penny... they made 300+ 1955 pennies after
all, common as dirt.

Mike

330+ million

wrote:


You are right. I have had a couple of the old PCI holders and the grade
seemed right. It may crossover to a PCGS 65. I don't know how good the
strike of an O-mint coin has to be before it can make it into a PCGS 65
holder. I've had several O Morgans that were free of marks, but still
earned only a 64. The ones I remember had poor strike (flat hair and
ears, poor feathers). Yours may be better than the ones I remembered.
PCGS is lenient with the strike of O-Mint coins at the lower MS grades.
I've never owned a MS65 or better for the O-Mint, so I don't know what
the strike looks like in higher grades. ANA standards require a good
strike for 65, but good strike for the O-Mint may be judged more
leniently than for the P or S-Mint.

Right. Going by the PCGS guide you can have a weak strike up to and
including MS66 ("well struck") for -O. I've seen plenty 65's with the
usual weak -O strike, so weak actually that I didn't pick up the coin
for that reason... just looks bad. At MS67 they ask for a full strike. I
doubt that's totally required as well. You get the soft strikes in
other years too, 1900+ coins have them quite often.

Mike

VAM is phony baloney. Psuedo-science. A mountain from a molehill.
False scholar****.

In the 1880s and 1890s the U.S. Mint had to wade through mountains of
silver every month. They made 1000s of dies. It had to be hectic, a
crazy time.

The flaws, the minor errors, mean nothing. They don't tell us ****
about the era that they were produced in, they don't tell us anything
about the minting process. Little flaws, nicks in the dies from where
they were dropped, tools hit the die faces, die clashes, big whoopee.

A 1955 double die cent would be a great thing to find for zero and sell
for a lot; but I'd never buy one.

oly

oly