Revenant

On 2/23/2021 at 9:25 PM, Coinbuf said:

... so I don't see a ton of price appreciation from the silver content.   Silver would need to hit at least $300 for the silver value to even approach the market value of the lower value coins in the series.

Well said.

On 2/7/2021 at 10:13 AM, D.Lowe said:

We have the entire MS70 ultra cameo statehood coins (rated 12th in the NGC registry whatever that means) and it seems like now they are inflated in value... What does the group wisdom think? Taking all insights here...  

The value of those coins is probably about 50-90% the fact that they have a 70 on the label and not a 69. Their market value has almost no connection to the spot price of silver. Now, a MS69 graded 2021 Silver Eagle is a very different animal and it could easily be (and has been) pushed up by the Reddit Raid and the squeeze, which has pushed up premiums on physical metal. Is now the time to sell? I know nothing about MS70 or PF70 quarters but personally I'm not selling my silver NCLT yet.

On 2/25/2021 at 5:53 AM, Morpheus1967 said:

They have been saying that about silver for 25 years.  

This. Exactly. They've been saying it continuously at least since I got back into collecting coins in 2008.

On 2/27/2021 at 7:12 PM, travis whiting said:

/is there a way to search registry sets for a specific coin

If you know a category/ set type a coin might appear in you could look at those sets to see if someone shows one. 

I've actually had people message me through the registry and offer to buy a coin off me that they saw in one of my sets. They actually got the coin since it became apparent that it was worth more to them than to me. Lol 

But... yeah, per Ali's response, it'd be creepy if someone could just search a cert # and see if someone has it registered or search for a type of coin (denomination/year/mintmark/grade) and see who all has one listed. I could see a lot of people not liking that one bit- especially if it turned up registered coins not included in any public sets.

1 hour ago, jtryka said:

The problem with the NGC boxes I've found is that some of the newer PCGS slabs have some sort of weird dimples on the corners that causes them not to fit.  So I switched to the intercept boxes.

Well, I'd never accuse them of doing that on purpose. 😆 

I bought a bunch of the NGC 20-coin boxes back in the day and they work great for NGC and PCGS coins. The old fatty NGC holders are a bit snug but they fit. I have no experience with ANACs or ICG holders though.

I never show the # in pics because I crop down to emphasize the coin. On the PMG side.I just scan the holder and note and post it with the number showing. I used to try photos and cropping but it was so much more work and everyone else scans with PMG so I just gave up and stopped torturing myself. 😆 

5 hours ago, Fenntucky Mike said:

Thanks! 

Congratulations to all the winners and good luck to everyone in 2021.

Thank You NGC!

Congrats to you again. Very glad to see your name in the announcement.

On 1/2/2021 at 9:42 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Whoa, that is a HUGE jump in grade, from 65, let alone 64 and 63.  You've had this happen many times ?

What coins are you talking about here ?  Pics would help.

 

I think when he says "looks better" you can get coins with fewer or less severe marks that are subjectively more unattractive. 

And we've all seen the AU58 slider that looks nicer than a lot of MS62 or even MS63 coins.

3 hours ago, LNCS said:

First time for me. Still in a tie for first in one set, so keep submitting to get some higher graded coins.

A win is a win. Congrats. Even tieing takes time and work.

2 hours ago, Walkerfan said:

Time for the next generation to step up!!

Congrats to all the new winners!!

There are some amazing, fresh sets out there, now!!

Several names I recognized among the winners. Quite a few I didn't. There's quite a few more ranked people than before. Maybe some of them will start joining us here. I'm surprised CoVID didn't drive more collectors online.

Thanks for the congrats!

2 hours ago, Coinbuf said:

I suspect this happens rather often.

I don't know... Call me naive, but barring evidence of widespread fraud I'd rather just keep my last shred of faith in people and assume that this is rare.

Sorry in advance for what is probably a silly question that's answered somewhere I haven't found yet but..

I'm trying to get my act together and send in some coins for Reholder and the system gave me labels to print for the coins on the invoice, but I'm a little confused on how to deal with them. The coins are in NGC holders and not 2x2s so there's no "pocket" to put these in. Should I just attach the label with a little tape (see below)?

When shipping a submission to NGC do most of you use bubble wrap or packing paper or something different to pack the box? Any reasons? Any horror stories?

I think with most things, especially things like the Registry, past a certain point you just have to hope that the vast majority of people are going to mostly want to comply with the rules and act in an open and honest way. It is shocking to think about how many things in our lives ultimately depend on and assume a level of voluntary compliance.

On 11/19/2020 at 6:27 AM, BlakeEik said:

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.

I think you could make a new set up to Dec 3rd or 4th (before the cutoff time) and still win. There's one case I know of where someone threw a set together a week before the cut-off and won.

15 hours ago, BlakeEik said:

@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. 

Fortunately I have no proof that anyone is doing what I'm talking about. I'm just talking about what's honestly a low-probability scenario that probably only effects a tiny fraction of US sets.

I like the fact that sets have to be at least 50% complete to be considered because I want to see winning sets that are more than a couple of coins. I like that NGC requires the set to be mostly NGC graded for the NGC Registry Awards while still allowing people to round out sets with the odd PCGS coin - allowing people more freedom to buy coins they like without plastic and cross-overs being make-or-break.

What I'm talking about / the fact that its possible is just an unavoidable side effect of this.

And no one has to play these games I'm talking about, but it would not at all surprise me if at least a few of the 13000+ users here are aware of this and are thinking about it.

23 hours ago, VKurtB said:

Not sure whether Rev's wife's views are in his imagination or the whole wife is. Hmmmm.

Guess we'll never know for sure. I haven't been called crazy this week though. 

2 hours ago, BlakeEik said:

Agree with @Revenant and @zadok.  The rules are a bit screwy because of the way they evolved. 

Well, you're putting words in my mouth there. I did not actually say the rules were "screwy." I actually like both rules and the rule(s) overall. I was just pointing out what I thought the OP meant vs what Ali responded to and pointing out that the rules do allow for some interesting scenarios to develop for people who want to win awards with US sets that include PCGS coins.

In those scenarios I think the optimal approach would actually to be to exclude / remove PCGS coins until you are at 75% NGC - allowing you to check that box while keeping overall % complete as high as possible with the number of PCGS coins you're allowed.

If you have an NGC and a PCGS coin for a slot there could also be some gaming there if the PCGS coin is higher grade but adding another PCGS coin puts you under the 75% NGC requirement. For those that take an ultra competitive stance (and there are some) it adds some extra layer to thinking on set construction.

The math geek in me just finds it fun to theorize with.

1 hour ago, Coinbuf said:

It would be very pathetic if an 80% PCGS set were to win an NGC major registry award, and quite a slap in the face to those few dedicated NGC collectors.

Yeah, and you have to be careful in how you talk about this or describe it to be understood because there are now two important percentages with requirements - 50% or better overall completion and 75% or better NGC.

What also would be interesting: if a set is only 70% NGC graded - so ineligible on the 75% - but if you took out all the PCGS coins and had only the NGC coins the set would still (hypothetically)  be 50%+ complete overall. Would that set still be ineligible and would that user actually be better served by removing the PCGS coins or parking them in another set temporarily so they can be eligible?

To use my 1932 set as an example, if we had 1 more PCGS coins instead of NGC it would be 6/7 or 85% complete, but only 4/6 or 66.67% NGC graded. But if you then took out the 2 PCGS coins it would still be 4/7 and about 56% complete - so it would still hit the 50%+ requirement without PCGS. At that point, would we be smarter to pull the PCGS coins out if we were hoping for a major award? Its interesting to think about.

4 hours ago, Ali E. said:

Hello, CC Angler.

Thank you for your interest. There are a variety of factors taken into consideration by our senior judges when considering a set for a major award. Percentage complete is just one of them. A set that is 70% complete may have a much better set description, more attractive coins, better images, comments, etc., so a bit lower completion does not exclude someone from a major award. https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/awards/

 

I think what he's asking about is the rule that a set has to be 75% or more NGC coins to be considered, not the overall % complete.

It would be like if he had 10 slots, 9 of which are filled - so 90% overall complete, but only 6 of the 9 coins are certified by NGC - the other three by PCGS. So, while the set is 90% complete (it has to be at least 50% to be considered per rules), it is only 66.6% NGC coins (below the 75% threshold).