BlakeEik

Hi Armour. I’m sorry for the experience you’re having. But since you say yourself that you are a new collector, I should tell you that you are feeling exactly the same way most new collectors feel when they submit coins for grading the first time. I can offer you some advice, take it or leave it as you wish. But I feel I learned these the hard way. 1. Coin grades are opinions. They differ from person to person and from company to company. Arguing about your coin grade is similar to arguing about who the best boxer was in their prime. You can’t win the argument. 2. If you want to own a coin with a certain grade, then buy the coin after it was graded. Trying to find a coin in the grade you want and thinking it will grade out the same will be very frustrating. 3. Submitting coins that are only worth a lot in high grades or with a full step designation, and worth much less in lower grades, will end up costing you lots of money. Don’t do it. Your nickel would have to grade FS to be worth the grading fees. If you want to grade those kind of coins, you need to send in a bulk amount and pay for pre-screen services. That’s the only way these kind of coins will be worth the fees. 4. Coins cannot be graded from photos. Even good photos do not accurately present an accurate luster of the coin. And you need high resolution photos to adequately evaluate the strike and any markings. 5. The major greeting companies are pretty good at what they do. You might not agree, but you probably have not yourself graded millions of coins. And you probably do not have on hand benchmark examples of each coin in each grade to compare them to. Of course there’s always room for error, but on average NGC is a pretty consistent grader. In my opinion, collectors need to find peace with these ideas to keep enjoying the hobby with coin grading services.

Hi Lily Girl, I think they have this already, you just need to go to the PCGS registry. All US sets in the NGC registry allow both NGC and PCGS slabs. If they change that policy, I’m sure it would be to exclude the competitor, not themselves. But I’ve been wrong before.

That’s a good question. Someone shouldn’t use an error to benefit them in the scoring, but it’s not their fault the holder came back with the mistake. I’m not sure what the policy is. Will NGC reholder a coin when there is a mistake on it?

Welcome Brian. The time it takes adding PCGS coins varies, but recently it seems to be only 1-2 working days. The way the "competitive" registry works, NGC decides what slots make up a set. Then you can only add one coin per slot. Usually, the one with the most amount of points. You can request that NGC add a slot to a set, such as a 1960 DDO slot, but they are reluctant to do that because it affects all users, and some users will definitely not want that slot. If you want to make your own sets and choose your own slots, check out the "custom" registry. It is on the old site NGC Registry Editor. Changes to these sets are unique to you, and these sets do not "compete" for normal awards, although there is an award for "best custom set" I believe. Restrictions apply, and the interface is somewhat clunky compared to the new site, so check it out.

I find that very interesting. Thanks for the response.

What I find curious is if you can do this, then why penalize people for marking their set private during the year? Would they not be able to just delete their private set, and create a new identical one at the last minute, because that is allowed? If so, what's the point of the rule?

Thanks for the follow up. I actually never expected it to be ready this year, and that’s not a slight, it just so happens to be an area of expertise of mine.

@Revenant screwy is my word. Rules that make one do the things you mentioned to win are, without a doubt, screwy in my opinion. But at least the same rules apply to all, and those that care can do the math to optimize their chances.

By the way, that ANA registry is going to be available at the "end of 2020" correct?

Agree with @Revenant and @zadok. The rules are a bit screwy because of the way they evolved. NGC needs to protect their brand and there is no perfect way to do it. Perhaps the ANA registry that is holder-agnostic will give NGC the out so they can switch to a NGC exclusive contest.

I took a peek at your 7070. I think you have been buying nice coins by the photos there. I don't think their book value will decline much over the years, but like I said, I think the rarer, older coins will perform better. If you have the opportunity (and $$$), I would look for the bust and seated coins first, and only get the moderns you are missing when you can't find suitable classics. When I started, I tried the opposite strategy, and bought the easy-to-find moderns, but that was mostly because that's all I could afford, and I like modern coins too. I bought the older coins once I made more money.

The more scarce it is, the more potential it has to bring bigger gains. Scarce as in low mintage, but also in condition (as graded by NGC or PCGS). Modern coins like the State Quarters in mint bags sold for big buck when first released - these have no chance to make big gains from that point. Meanwhile I have a 1916D dime in VG8 that has (at least) tripled since I bought it in the nineties. Key dates in popular series will rarely lose money over the long haul. Common dates in high grades have potential for gain when the condition is rare, like a common date wheat cent in PF68 Ultra Cameo. But not so much for common condition like a memorial cent dated in the 1990s in PF70 Ultra Cam. And don't forget: the coin needs to like like it deserves the grade. I am a type collector too. I decided after collecting for a year or two that I wanted it to remain a hobby first, investment 2nd. I do not carefully track my costs for this reason. But I also decided I didn't want to make any bad purchases. What you say is good - stick to PCGS and NGC coins, CAC too if so, and buy coins you want (not the holder). Buying raw coins can be risky if you don't know what you are looking for. I'll pay up to "retail" price, either using the PCGS guide or the CDN guide if I really want the coin. The NGC guide I find to be more outdated, or over priced, but not all the time. If you are looking for a deal, research the hammer prices for similar coins. What ever you get, chances are they may go up or down in price as the market tends to cycle. But if you really liked the coin when you bought it, it won't matter much. Lots of good advice can be found here https://www.ngccoin.com/news/ If you are not a member of the ANA, join, their magazine has good articles and recommends more good reads.

Question for moderator: I assume this means that new sets created after July 1 are not eligible, correct? ****Please note! Private sets will not be considered for any award type. If an owner of a private set wishes to compete for awards and have the rank of their set displayed, they must have changed their set from private to public by July 1, 2020.

Copper coins in holders will only get more brown, not more red, unfortunately.

If you are worried about the coins you buy as an investment: add to your list Early gold (1795-1804), Early Silver (1794-1804, but especially with small eagles), Classic Gold (pre-1840), and buy key dates, not types. Also check the mintages and pop reports: As an investment, you are much better off buying a MS65 with population of 6 over a MS64 with a population of 600. Markets will change a lot, however scarcities do not change much. But in my opinion, if you are not so worried about the investment, the excitement in finding a nice type that you don't already have, like a Classic Head LC, Large Capped Bust 25c, or MS Seated $1, is worth more than potential gain your kids will inherit.

I was just trying to help with your question. Sorry it did not help you.

NGC or anyone else cannot provide an answer to someone too stubborn to listen.

Good luck to you.... you need it...

I have many coins that are both bullion and proofs. If you are talking about a name the Australian mint gave to a series of coins, fine, but claiming "no major mint will say a coin can be both a bullion coin and a proof coin at the same time" is theory you alone hold. Here is link to a registry set you claim should not exist - proof bullion produced by a major mint and certified by NGC. https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive/united-states/american-eagles-and-bullion-coins/7668/ Is this the Kangroo coin you say is "Proof" not bullion? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Silver_Kangaroo_(bullion) If so, alert wikipedia - they got it wrong too. No mention of "proof" but bullion referenced several times. There are lots of resources on line that can help sort this information for you.

Proofs and bullion coins are not mutually exclusive. A proof is a type of strike, and bullion coins are made of high purity precious metals. Bullion coins, like all coins, could be produced with different strikes including proofs, reverse proofs, enhanced proofs, uncirculated mint state, etc.

I have a feeling the rules may change when the ANA Registry is online. NGC has been tight lipped about it, though...

@NickelheadNGC periodically updates scores based on current populations. Click the history button on the top of a set and see what specifically changed.

Ali, That is EXACTLY what I was asking for. Thank you for facilitating the resolution. I'm glad they agreed - although my rank dropped in 2 of my type sets, it's better to have realistic scores for each coin. Thank you,

Ali, My question was about the type of coins, not a single coin. I can provide an example if I must. I guess I'm just frustrated after giving detailed evidence of why there is certainly an oversight in the brilliant proof wheat cents, and I got no rationale, reasoning, or even a reply. What did the assessment team think of my comments?

Hello, It's been 6 months so I thought I would check on this - how many requests are in front of this one (reducing the type scores for brilliant Lincoln-wheat proofs to a reasonable amount)? Thank you, Blake