I really don't think i will be posting on this subject again. We have heard several suspect posts and a few legitimate posts on why ICG should be allowed in an NGC registry. I will try not mudslinging because i would prefer to keep the posts i make in a gentlemanly manner.
The simple FACT's are that a small group of legitimate registry poster's want ICG to be included and some less than legitimate poster's also do. Whatever all of these ICG proponent's motive's are, and I am beginning to believe they are plural in motive's, the point is moot not mute. Purely from a marketing stand point it would be insane for NGC to give any ground to anyone they did not at least consider an equal, and if this amateur see's a difference then don't you think NGC does?
The simple FACTS are that obviously among certain circles of people who have posted against the wishes of including ICG, they tend to agree that ICG is not up to par of NGC or PCGS. I find it odd that all of these poster's have been legitimate NGC registry member's. Well, not odd, rather let's say amazing!
The simple fact is that grading is an art moving towards a science and that is a good thing. It's a simple fact that not all graded coins are equal in third party grading, period. In other words, you really ought to buy the coin and not the slab anyway. But the simple truth is Caveat Emptor (let the buyer beware), and my behind ware's tell me that this current system is better than a proposed inclusion of ICG or anybody else, at this time, for that matter. This opinion was not solicited, is free of charge to you, and only a simple effort to provide the other side of the story.