On January 18th, I posted a Journal entry about how NGC was making their World Coin Sets "NGC Exclusive."

I my somewhat verbose entry, I laid out the facts and why I thought it seemed like a bad move, and posed the question: "Is it just me?"

The members of the NGC Collectors Society have not let me down. I didn't hear from lots of people privately, but I've watched the additional journal entries here over the last week, including multi-award Journal winner Iowa Silver Baron most recently. I've also seen a number of similar topics on the Message Boards.

NGC said this in their January 17th announcement:

"Most NGC World Registry Sets are already NGC-exclusive, so this change will affect relatively few users. Ultimately, it will allow us to create more accurate Registry Sets, streamline the process for adding coins to sets, and enhance the competition."

Based on the reaction of long-time members, collectors, competitive collectors, many paid members, and newer collectors alike, I think NGC has severely underestimated the "few" users who will be affected.

Perhaps some of the negative reaction is intensified that this announcement comes so soon after NGC announced some very significant price increases, not just for memberships, but for coin-grading and imaging services, and WORLD COIN grading fees rose even more sharply, and regardless of NGC's intent, it might at least APPEAR that NGC is seeking to artificially create a market for its "CROSSOVER" service within World Coins for starters.

If someone was into conspiracy theories, that person could think that NGC was testing the waters with the World Coin sets to see if their World Coin "Crossover" submissions ticked upward, and that conspiracy theorist could also think that the reason they'd start with World Coins over U.S. coins is that U.S. coins are too big a chunk of their business, and worse, doing both at the same time might overwhelm them, so test a smaller segment and see how it goes. At least that is what a conspiracy theorist MIGHT think.

This raises my next question:

Does NGC monitor these Journal entries? Sure, they read some of them at least when it's time to do the awards, but do they read them and take them to heart?

Without invalidating the messages that we have all shared here, expressing our discontent, I wonder if it is now time to send those messages directly to NGC, via email, with phone calls, by snail mail if you prefer, carrier pigeon or whatever method you you may select?

The reason I ask is decidedly pointed. While not suggesting that we become villagers with pitchforks and torches to storm the offices of NGC, I DO wonder if it is not worth a more direct approach.

While NGC may read these messages, they are not required to answer them in any way shape or form, are they?

Whereas, if you email, call, write or what-have-you, there is some expectation of a formal response, for better or for worse. Netflix made some infamously bad announcements in 2011, and due to investor, member and general public backlash, they retreated from their plans to break-up their service. Would NGC do the same? I have no idea. I do, however, believe that members should be heard.

EXAMPLE: Despite the language of NGC's announcement indicating that U.S. coin sets would NOT be affected, the general feeling I've seen and heard in Journals and on NGC Message Boards is that U.S. sets won't be far behind. Clearly, many members don't feel reassured by NGC's statement. I would extrapolate that based on the number of postings, that far more people are concerned than have voiced their concern, because for every person who raises their complaint, there are dozens if not 100s or 1,000s who never say a word, but who just take their business elsewhere; that's a common axiom known in customer service and call center management among Fortune 100, and other companies.

Then, taking each of NGC's statements on the subject piece by piece, I haven't read or heard anything from NGC which supports their vague assertions:

1. "Most NGC World Registry Sets are already NGC-exclusive, so this change will affect relatively few users."

REACTION: Based on everything I've read from Collectors Society Members, I've seen only ONE individual who was relatively excited about this change, because his or her coin consisted of NGC coins where a competing and perhaps stronger set consisted of PCGS coins. Further, the sheer number of postings on the topic in strong opposition to the move seems to indicate that more than "relatively few" users are affected.

2. "It will allow us to create more accurate Registry Sets."

REACTION: On what is this based? Is PCGS known for counterfeit holders? Has their been a huge depreciation in PCGS coins due to a degradation of their grading standards? The answers are no and no. Therefore the question becomes, what exactly is more accurate about an NGC serial number vs. a PCGS serial number, especially with the extremely strong and technologically advanced steps PCGS is taking to prevent counterfeiting, particularly with its world coin grading. Further, if US Coins aren't being affected, why not? If PCGS coins are somehow "less accurate" for World Sets, the obvious question is why are they "acceptably" accurate for U.S. coin sets? It lends support to the theory posed by so many users that U.S. coin sets are next. Further, how exactly do PCGS coins in a set make it less accurate? It's sort of like an opposite-sex married couple in Springfield, MA claiming that somehow, a same-sex couple in Boston, MA somehow diminishes THEIR OWN marriage, but they don't really explain how their marriage has diminished. Do they love one another less? Has they marriage license evaporated? If they are people of faith, has their house of worship fallen into a sink-hole? Likewise, the assertion from NGC that PCGS coins will somehow make World Coin sets "more accurate" because apparently the PCGS coins in World Sets are "less accurate" is very short on specifics. In fact, it lacks specifics entirely.

3. "[it will] streamline the process for adding coins to sets."

REACTION: Will it? NGC must verify PCGS graded coins. They used to do this with a roughly 24 hour process or so, though it has been quite some time since I've added a PCGS graded coin to one of my sets. Therefore, I am unaware of this is still a delayed process, or if it has become automated. Perhaps other members can speak to this better, particularly if you plan to sent a complaint to NGC on this subject. However, it again begs the question: If NGC is trying to "streamline" adding coins to sets by eliminating PCGS coins in WORLD SETS, are they deluded enough to think that we don't expect them to do the exact same thing to U.S. sets as further "streamlining" at some point?

4. "[it will] enhance the competition."

REACTION: Will it really enhance the competition or will it just start the competition anew with different players? Winners past and present (2006-2011, and probably more) have sets which contain PCGS coins in their winning World Coin sets. I noticed a number of 2nd and 3rd place sets which either DID or DID NOT have PCGS graded coins in their sets. S