Coinbuf

Sorry just strike doubling, I cannot not match your photo to any of the PUPs for the four known DDR's of this date.

The facts don't change anything you are representing that you have two coins one in NGC and one in PCGS when in fact you only have one coin. Currently now you don't have to as PCGS coins are allowed back in. But if you want to participate in the PCGS registry and only have an NGC coin you would have to buy another or cross and then you should change your set here to reflect the cross. Apples and oranges using the same coin in different sets is fine and allowed by the registry because you are using the same cert number, what you fail to understand is that using two cert numbers for one coin is the problem. That presents that you have two coins one in NGC and one in PCGS when you only have one coin. It is not the same you are using two different cert numbers for one coin. You have stated that it is not ok to represent the coin at time of sale as NGC certified, then why is it ok to represent the coin as NGC certified in the registry when the coin is no longer NGC certified?

If you look at the registry info: "All NGC-certified coins are eligible for the NGC Registry". So my question to you is once a coin is cracked out of a slab is it still NGC certified? If you believe that a cracked coin to still be certified as true then have you sold a raw (or entombed in another brand slab) coin as NGC certified and if not why? This is the argument and the way to rationalize putting one's ethics on pause that I see used often, "nobody is going to be harmed right". Maybe and maybe not but the thing is if you have to ask the question or make an excuse for the behavior is it really the right thing to do. Yes your correct that the registry is a very minor thing in the overall scheme of life, but if someone is willing to pause ethics for this what else are they willing to pause ethics for. Once you start down the path of what ifs, and its ok just this one time, where do you then draw the line; things don't have to be illegal or outside explicitly stated rules to be wrong. Edited to add: Not to rub salt in a wound but when you had your little bump in the road with PCGS I would guess that you expected them to act in an ethical manor. I wonder if at some time in that process was "its only X dollars does it really matter" thought by someone at some time.

I have my inventory setup just as I do my excel spreadsheet, the registry inventory is just a redundant backup of my excel file. I'm a plastic collector of old plastic (when the coin inside is nice) but first and foremost a coin collector, therefore all prior clothes a coin might have had is irreverent what it has today is what it should be represented as selling or not, to do otherwise is fraudulent and wrong in every sense. You have convinced and rationalized to yourself that its fine because it is what you want not because it is right. You are correct we do see the world quite differently, you do have X coin but you want to show it as though you have 2 examples of X when you only have one X coin. You seem to be very into collecting points by representing that you have the same coin in two different holders, and you do not. It makes no difference if you are selling or holding you have one coin in one brand holder period. And no I could not care less about the gradeflation that happened to coin X prior to my owning it, as I said I'm a collector not an investor. What matters to me is that I like the coin and I paid what I feel was an appropriate price for the coin. I never care who may have owned it in the past. completely unimportant to me. But then I've never been one to worship players, or movie stars, or coin collectors; they are all just people that put on their pants one leg at a time just like me. It should not matter once the coin leaves the holder the cert is dead to the TPG, as I said they will not reholder a cracked out coin without rendering another opinion so once cracked the old opinion is void. Loopholes are how ethics get compromised even if one's intention is not to intentionally defraud. I did not say that you set out to cheat the system but the effect is you are; you are showing two opinions for the same coin, even if the opinions align you are still gaming the system. Basically it seems that you have no issue with this because in your mind the outcome is not intentional yet the outcome is the same no matter the intent. I doubt that either of us is going to convince the other to change views on this, you feel good with your actions and I see them as improper and unethical.

Yes the same theory works for the PCGS registry as for the NGC, if the coin is crossed it should be removed, so in my opinion the ethical issue is very much open.

This would be very confusing to me but if it works for you then I can understand using it that way. Because you are representing that you have X coin in X grade in an NGC holder, but you don't what you have is X coin in X grade in a PCGS holder. Everyone knows that once you crack out a coin the TPG will not just simply reholder the coin at the same grade, the old cert is invalid and the coin must be regraded. Once you have the coin in its new plastic it should be represented as it is not as it was. I understand the way you and the member ATS view this but I do see it as less than ethical, even if that is not your intent you are misrepresenting what is in your set as you do not have X coin in X grade in the old NGC holder. Again you don't have a coin in an NGC 66* holder so its wrong in my view to say you do on the registry.

You say there is no damage, what is your explanation as to what happened to this coin? Some areas look like damage, others like a vise job imo, but I don't see this happening in the normal course of mint operations without some human intervention.

You are correct there are phantom sets in the registry, some on purpose (I know of one that I suspect) and some that happen due to the death of the owner who's heirs are unaware and do not retire or delete sets. Usually those latter sets trickle down the list as some of the coins are bought and placed into sets or inventories, however not every coin is bought by an NGC registry user and some get crossed and the certs not turned in.

To what end? This only bloats the inventory as you would now have bot the old NGC and the new PCGS in your inventory, same coin listed in your inventory twice. In a very technical sense yes no harm no foul, but why not update to the NGC coin for the NGC registry. Again I 100% agree, if the TPG's had done this all along the pop reports would be much more accurate and usable.

Thanks all, that was kinda my thought also, just too busy and distracting with the numerals across the background.

Seems like a lot of work, but then again $1.10 was a few days wages back then.

In fact you had three choices; first you were not forced to cross the coin and could have left it in the NGC holder. Your second choice was to remove the coin from your set as you no longer have an XX coin graded by NGC you now have an XX coin graded by PCGS. And the third option was the one you chose which was not to update your set to accurately reflect what is in the set. As I said ATS I find this dishonest and fraudulent as you are misrepresenting what is in your collection, yes you still own the same coin but in a different plastic which could have an effect on the NGC registry, see below. Your though mirrors what one member ATS said, the coin has not changed and you still own the coin so no big deal. But lets say that by keeping that one coin in your set your set is just over the threshold of the 75% NGC graded coins needed to qualify for the major awards which it would not be if you deleted the coin from your set. By using a PCGS graded coin with an old NGC cert number you can sidestep the 75% requirement and be considered for major awards even though your set does not meet the requirement. Step into the opposite shoes and how would you like it if your set was the runner up for a major award to a set that shows as mostly NGC coins but in reality those coins had long ago been crossed and are in fact in PCGS holders. Would you still feel good about this practice as the runner up that would have won had the winning set been legit and accurate, or would you be somewhat upset to learn that. Now I realize that this scenario is the extreme but I also think it is very possible that it may have happened at some point in the past. It may have not been a big issue in the past but the major awards have been growing in value each year and thus the incentive for this type of fraud increases as well. This same issue could happen in the PCGS registry although I suspect that due to the current difference in market prices between the two brands it is far less likely. I 100% agree with you that the TPG's should handle this internally and not rely on the submitter.

Silver (bright silver) coins seem a bit washed out.

Do you find this background too busy, distracting, or otherwise bothersome due to the color and/or writing? I have for many years used a dark blue background and while that is very neutral but dark coins like large cents seem to disappear on that. And I was thinking this was a way to show the coins in my 7070 album without having to say that the coin is in my album, too much or ok.

That's because you omitted part of my statement which lost the context, my full statement in my op is: " perfectly ok even if the coin dropped a grade upon crossover in a previous thread" The last four words you omitted are important, He made those comments in a prior thread a year or two ago. Edited to add: And in todays thread he has brought up the old conversation that revolved around the MS66* that crossed at MS66, at the time of the first thread he expressed that he felt it was fine to use the old MS66* grade in the NGC registry even tho the new PCGS grade was MS66 upon crossover.

Use a PCGS cert in the PCGS registry after you had crossed the coin into NGC plastic or vice versa. Do you consider it perfectly fine or do you see an issue with doing so, this was brought up just a few minutes ago on a thread ATS (where one member who has proclaimed this action to be perfectly ok even if the coin dropped a grade upon crossover in a previous thread) again gave this action his stamp of Okie Dokie. Thoughts?

As was I.

Won't the virus be dead by the time a slab is cracked.

Great nickel, very nice cameo look congrats on the upgrade.

Looks like PMD, the good news is it is worth $.01.

Great idea just not enough people to participate.

Its very colorful, will make it easy to see you.

The color is the tell for cleaning.

Forgot all about this thread, it would seem that the collector market has been strong (almost unbelievably so) during the pandemic.