Revenant

I agree with the idea and with pinning it to the  top of the page. The sad thing is, I still know we'll still get a ton of posts asking about such coins from newbies that don't read the post. Such is life.  (I love people, I do, but I'm either too old or too jaded to expect too much anymore).

On 9/30/2020 at 10:12 AM, LISA B said:

Hi!

That is because all re-holders go into the scratch resistant holder.

Thanks,

Lisa

So going "No tier" and "Reholder" is the right way to do this and it'd be $12/coin? (these are about $500 gold coins so they wouldn't need oversize or high value).

This thread has me wondering / trying to remember how many people I'll ticked off and how many pairs of eyes I've made roll back into heads (and how often). It's a funny thing to consider. Especially considering I was a lot more abrasive in my early and mid-20s than I am now, but I think I'm probably still pretty abrasive in my mid-30s. Oh well.

If I want to submit some coins for re-holder would I do it like what I have shown below? (No tier, Reholder Scratch-Resistant)

When I choose these options I'm noticing that the "Scratch-Resistant Holder" checkbox doesn't work.

If I do the online submission form, does it matter if I fill it out and it takes a while before I actually mail out the coins?

Infection levels in my area are dropping so I'm finally looking into maybe getting out a little more an maybe risking an extra trip or two to the post office (and I need to mail some things for work soon anyway) but I'm not 100% sure on the timeframe right now.

55 minutes ago, Coinbuf said:

We're not just talking about major awards yes those have to be at the 75% or higher NGC graded coins in order to win; that is not what I take issue with.  Many; in fact most; of the awards are given out for best in category and there is no percentage requirement for these awards, and before you say it yes I'm aware that there is also the NGC best in category that only calculates the score on NGC coins.  Granted those are just paper certificates but I just don't see the point in having the two best in category awards, it should be NGC coins only for the best in category awards.  I think its ridiculous and pathetic that sets which are 90% and in some cases 100% populated with only PCGS graded coins are receiving awards (yes I know only a paper certificate) from the NGC registry.  And to be fair if NGC were to make that change it would reduce the number of winning sets I currently have, but I'm still in favor of only NGC coins being counted for best in category sets (or at least use the same percentage rule as the major awards) and I'm also in favor of raising the percentage to at least 80%.

I am in complete agreement and in fact love that NGC has gone back to allowing PCGS coins in the registry for the purpose of sharing the owners set, I just don't think sets that are made up of mostly or completely PCGS coins should receive NGC awards.

Yeah. I think it could be nice if there was a rule that either a set should have at least 1 NGC coin or be 50-75% NGC to win the best in category.

Your post that I responded to had me thinking you were referring principally to the major awards with that comment.

On 8/16/2020 at 5:10 PM, Coinbuf said:

However when it comes to awards those NGC awards should be calculated on NGC holdered coins only (imo) as PCGS has its own awards

I don't know how much points matters to a Major award. I just know they require those to be 75% NGC graded to be eligible. So you're allowed to plus up or round out your set with PCGS coins and still be elligible for a major award but it has to be a smaller part of the set. I think that's a nice balance.

3 hours ago, Conder101 said:

What if it went back to the company that called it fake but this time they called it real.  Would it still not sit well with you?  After all a professional still called it fake.

I'd feel better about selling it at that point but I'd still be inclined to share the story on it before selling. I'd also be very inclined to talk to people at the company about it at that point and maybe see if they could trace back the submissions and see who looked at it each time and where the disagreement came in and why. If NGC had the disagreement I could actually see this working as they just seem more open and willing to communicate than some companies I've had the joy of dealing with. I've never worked with PCGS but what I've heard would leave me less optimistic.

Edited to add: My hang up is that, even if you find an explanation, there will always be an opinion rendered by someone that is supposed to be an authority that this thing is no good. The way I approach life, I would acknowledge that. Even if it cost me money, even if the next person didn't.

17 minutes ago, Coinbuf said:

Explains why I see so many comments like ' 

Yeah... Which is why a few years ago someone wanted to implement a rule whereby a description wouldn't count unless it was 200+ characters or something similar. It didn't get implemented because it wouldn't really improve things. You'd just get comments that are word soup or lazy repetitive boiler plate or strings of a's or similar garbage. As it is you still get the " ' " ones but I accept that for the extent to which it does get us "real" comments by making incentives - even though the tie breaks usually occur in modern sets of PF70s, where making "interesting" or original comments tends to be harder IMO.

26 minutes ago, Ali E. said:

Thanks, Revenant.

Yes, the program can only detect whether or not the collector has added comments in the field or left it blank. However, when judges are narrowing down choices for winners in the major categories, the quality of comments can be an important consideration. 

Very true, and very good point! But I give the judges here more credit than I'd give computer algorithms for having taste. 😆

It might also be helpful to know that the system places no judgements of value on the quality or length of a comment or description. You could make a comment / description that says, "This coin purteh! Hur dee hurr hurr." And the system will weight it equally to someone that has written a 500-word love note to the coin. Which is nice given that what makes a "good" description is highly subjective.

On 8/9/2020 at 9:22 PM, MarkFeld said:

That which you foresee, will never happen. And “never” is a word I use extremely sparingly.

Well, what he's saying will happen is a little like saying the England and France are going to agree to merge. Yeah. I suppose, in principle, it's possible, but... "Good luck." - Ain't happening.

I think you either need to acknowledge the prior opinion when selling or re-submit around some.

It would not sit well with me to let someone hand over $1,000+ for a coin that I know a professional called a fake.

It is possible that the company that called it counterfeit just knew the coins were commonly faked and just didn't want the liability. I say this having no idea who was who and who looked at it. I just think its human nature to some degree to hedge if you think there's room for doubt.

Guys - While I respect the fact that there are a lot of strong feelings on this, I'm hoping that this argument - which has completely highjacked this thread - can either end, move to pms, or move to the water cooler - even then, some of this is getting dangerously close to being political. This thread was about the ANA registry and NGC has given us their answer - it was delayed but they're still very much on it.

Stay safe. Stay healthy.

1 hour ago, Fenntucky Mike said:

Not a debacle in my mind,

You can't really call it a debacle when the mint got pretty much exactly what you'd expect when capping a mintage that low for a coin like that in a heavily collected series.

At the same time, the shenanigans with low mintage artificial rarities has made me lose a lot of the interest in that series that the milk spotting issue hadn't already killed.

4 hours ago, Just Bob said:

Yikes! I have actually been in that very situation, when I was in my twenties. Showed up for work one day and was told, "We no longer have anything for you to do. We will call all of you when we need you." They abruptly shut down the whole project, and we never heard from them again.

While I haven't experienced this personally, I found out from a former associate that I project I spent months on, which continued for months after I left, was similarly shutdown without notice and abruptly "de-staffed" to put it in the politest terms. It made me very happy that I made the decision I did and left for greener pastures. But I can't say it was surprising. The entire time we were on it we knew it could happen pretty much any time - just in the nature of the beast in that situation.

While it didn't cost me a job, I've had clients come back and just put projects on indefinite hold. You know when this happens that the project is dead though. Fortunately though it wasn't the only thing I was getting paid for at that moment.

On 7/18/2020 at 11:38 AM, kbbpll said:

Are you talking about a "journal" on this website?

Yeah, he was talking about the "Collector's Journal" area - which he's been using to create some amusing bits of slightly outlandish fiction.

On 7/22/2020 at 2:16 PM, kbbpll said:

Looks like they would be eligible for the additional "Struck in [year]" attribution. It's interesting because it seems like the same coins could be eligible for like 4 or 5 different labels.

With the current state of things, it seems like something released in January should be eligible for 3 labels at least, including the normal label, the ER label, and this new EP label. Then you get into the "First strucks," the signature labels, the other different designs and such that you can get.

It's reaching a point  where it feels almost impossible to get a set that has everything matching unless you either submit them yourself all at the same time or you send in a set that you've built for a re-holder (expensive). It's a real shame IMO.

On 7/20/2020 at 10:10 PM, Sir Shep III said:

Upon arrival I was only allowed 2 rolls of quarters , but was horrified to see 3 employees opening all the loomis rolls and culling / searching for West Point quarters 

I can't imagine the bank manager would be too thrilled about employees spending their work time doing this and doing it in a place where customers could see them, so I doubt you directly observed this happening.

I would also be surprised if this approach was successful given that, to my understanding, the W quarters were being dropped into bulk bags - not into mint rolls. So, again, from what I've understood, you aren't going to get a W from a roll unless it's already circulated a bit and gotten put into a roll subsequently.

On 7/21/2020 at 4:24 AM, Morpheus1967 said:

And with the coin shortage going on, I am surprised you were given even 2 rolls of quarters.  

Or that they didn't charge you for them - and I've seen this happen before.

On 7/21/2020 at 2:48 AM, Abo anas 09 said:

Sorry, Bob, I did not understand what you mean !! Do you mean that these two coins are fake?

Very very bad fakes.

Also, as those coins you posted are not in PCGS holders... where did you get those numbers from that you were trying to enter in? There's no slab, so no label, so no cert#.

10 hours ago, jgrinz said:

Actually none cause it is not true - I tried it numerous times and it does not move the counter.

Nice sets by the way

Thanks.

Maybe Ali's comment assumes people logging out so it doesn't show that they're viewing their own set then.

On 7/6/2020 at 4:28 AM, jgrinz said:

 I ACTUALLY DIDNT KNOW THE COUNTER WAS ACTIVE WHEN VIEWING MY OWN SET. Thanks for that information.

Lol, so how many of that 5000 are you? 😆 

You'd need something more / better than a view count though because looking at something doesn't mean you liked what you saw or thought it award worthy. I look at sets I'm competing with sometimes just to see what they have - with their non-existent pictures and comments.

8 hours ago, gmarguli said:

Does CGC certify the virginity of the submitter at the same time? 

Oh... You're terrible! The comic collectors are no better! I'm not convinced the coin collectors are much better, just older!  

I got a bit of a chuckle out of this because I have several boxes of various collectable card games from when I was younger - Mostly Magic the Gathering and Battletech (very short lived MtG derivative put out by Wizards of the Coast based on an IP I've loved since I was 11). Nothing valuable or rare enough to want something like this service but It was interesting to see. I could see a lot of people with an old Alpha or Beta Black Lotus that could want to go for something like this.

Is it horrible that my 2nd thought when seeing this was, "So when do we get a collectable card registry and registry sets? When do I get to request a category for "Battletech's" "Fire for Effect" Set?"  

Yes. I am a nerd! And dang proud of it most days.  

57 minutes ago, jmwachter said:

I'd die if I had to look at American Eagles all day....

Yeah... I have to admit; grading SAEs by the Monster Box load would sound like a special kind of living hell. Props to whoever gets stuck with it. I hope they get to listen to some fun music or podcasts while they work.

On 6/29/2020 at 10:19 AM, Coinbuf said:

I am sure it will happen but there was never a firm timeframe only that the first awards are scheduled for Aug 2021.  As that is still over a year away I am guessing a launch sometime the first qtr of 2021, but that is just my uninformed guess.

I wouldn't be surprised if it's somewhat disrupted by Covid - what hasn't been? But they'll do anything they can to hold on to Aug 2021 for the first awards

Since they will auto populate it with the NGC registry they basically just need to have it up by April or May to have a bit of a lag for the sake of checking boxes and having the normal cut-offs.

All just me guessing.