Revenant

Well, since you got a transfer request, after you confirm with the friend that they haven't sold the coin to this other person, I'd refuse the transfer and make a comment to NGC about it. Yeah, you don't own the coin anymore, but this guy doesn't either and at least you aren't trying to use it to cheat. 

I'd also suggest to your friend / the purchaser that they chime in and let NGC know that the coin was crossed.

The PCGS fanbois that do this need to realize that they need to report these cross-overs or they're letting this happen.

On 2/1/2020 at 11:16 AM, mania said:

... as the most recent blog comments are getting into the many "what if" detail that I trust will be worked out over time ... 

Well, when you get an early stage announcement with relatively few details I think you have to expect a burst of rampant speculation and fishing for responses with more information.

1 hour ago, Walkerfan said:

Doubtful.  It would make zero sense to restore the registry only to scuttle it once again.

Well, you could let us update / build out our sets and compete in the mean time, copy everything over to ANA, have the 2020 registry awards and do the purge in January like they did last time.

Thing is, since they'll be running both from the same database, I don't know if they even can allow them one place and ban / exclude elsewhere - and that might also be the reason they aren't saying ANA will have ANACs. But... Like I said, I don't know. I guess we'll see how things evolve through 2021.

54 minutes ago, physics-fan3.14 said:

You might laugh, but it is actually a well written and very informative book. 

I received a copy of the first edition when I was ten, and it was literally the first coin book I ever read (I got this and the 1996 Red Book at the same time). 

I still have my well-used copy on my shelf. 

That's nice and good to know. Like I said I just found it interesting that there was a "for dummies," for this and that it so deliberately - even on the cover - tried to play to what the lay person would recognize.

1 minute ago, CRAWTOMATIC said:

Every 3rd page is a quarter sheet advertisement for PCGS.  

Just kidding.  But getting the opportunity to write a book in the "For Dummies" series where you could surreptitiously name drop your own company is the kind of thing you just can't pass up. 

Besides, we know the target audience for this is reading averse.

I had paid no attention to the authors. I just thought it was funny that someone made this and thought it was even funnier that the thing they highlight on the cover is statehood quarters, because that's something the general public knows.

57 minutes ago, Conder101 said:

Sounds to me like the recently restored all inclusive NGC registry will become the ANA registry and the Exclusive NGC registry will return.

Guess we'll have to see on if this place goes full-NGC only or not. But we have PCGS coins here for now and everything we do here in the interim will port over when the time comes. Seems like a win / good deal for us either way.

11 minutes ago, BlakeEik said:

@Revenant Agree! They must be confident about it to broadcast this far in advance. 

Yeah. I'm sure they are. Based on what KSTouch said I'd say they have reasons to be confident. But I'll refrain from further speculation for now. I'm just happy that this place is staying too.

15 hours ago, Coinbuf said:

Edited to add that this has me putting a hold on buying any coins for a registry set until I see how this all shakes out, If NGC scraps the registry here and only uses this ANA one I'm done with it altogether.

Sounds like "Sleepy Hollow" is safe and we can continue our staid toils without fear. I'll shut-up now and wait until they tell us more.  

1 hour ago, Coinbuf said:

Wow why was this rolled out and announced when the system so unfinished and there are no answers to the questions.  This is not directed at you @Ali E. but it would have been better if this announcement had waited until the development was far enough along that a sample of what the new ANA registry will look like could be provided, and information was available to not have so many unanswered questions.

This is a HUGE win for NGC in a lot of ways. I can't really blame them for being eager to brag on it some, but it does feel a little like a teaser trailer for a movie coming out in a year / year-and-a-half..

7 hours ago, BlakeEik said:

https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/7652/ana-registry/

Wow, so many questions...

How will the NGC and ANA registries coexist? 

Do they need to coexist or will NGC retire theirs?

Will NGC rules their change once this happens? It would be reasonable then that PCGS coins are not allowed (for everyone), otherwise there will be two duplicate registries, correct?

Will the ANA format be similar to (i.e. copied from) NGCs? It sounded as though that was then plan.

ANA wants their first competition in Aug 2021.  Is this enough time given the problems the contract developers have had to meet deadlines?

Any idea about the reasoning or timing of the decision?

Time to speculate! 

An admin going by KStouch was nice enough to respond to my wild-*** guessing in the other thread they started about the announcement in the US, World, and Ancient forum. 

From what he's saying, it sounds like it'll run off the same database or be closely linked to the existing NGC registry database, so the NGC registry isn't going anywhere. Also, it sounds like, while the UI and presentation will be different, there will be a lot of shared *guts* / the underlying system will have a lot in common when it's all done, which sounds like it's going to be really good for us here because it sounds like it's going to make them double down and invest more into getting things running here and there and they'll be getting a 2-for-1 punch on some of those development efforts.

I was really nervous when I saw this announcement yesterday but now I'm actually feeling good about it.  

2 hours ago, KStouch- NGC Admin said:

Thank you for your concerns, but there are absolutely no plans to eventually phase out the NGC Registry. We’ve made a lot of investments in the NGC Registry over the last year and with this announcement we will be devoting even more resources towards making the NGC Registry and the ANA Registry the best possible platforms for collectors. It’s not difficult for us to support a shared database – we already host the NGC Registry on NGCcoin.com, NGCcoin.cn, NGCcoin.hk and NGCcoin.hk, all using a shared database. Whether you choose to use the NGC Registry or the ANA Registry or both, you can expect to see lots of new and improved features in the near future. Stay tuned for more information in the coming months as we continue to develop the NGC Registry and ANA Registry.

Thank you for the response and the clarity.

5 minutes ago, Coinbuf said:

Now we know why you win the monetary awards here JK, but in all seriousness if any of the big players from the PCGS registry (think Hanson and other whales) decide to enter sets in the new ANA registry little fish like myself will have zero chance of winning anything so no reason to be an ANA member. 

Hmmm.... That's a fair point.

I've been here 12 years. This is the first time they've given me money / credit and I'm honestly not even sure what to do with it.  

6 minutes ago, Coinbuf said:

It also says that while you don't have to be an ANA member to list a set only ANA members are eligible to win any monetary prizes, a bid to increase ANA membership I'm sure.  However I don't see how that will be an incentive for many like myself.

For $28 / year I could probably be convinced, which I'm sure is what they're hoping for, because so far I've never been a member. I am a paid member here again now for about $20-25 a year, which is about the same. I'm not sure if I'd keep both though. I'd have to think on that.

13 minutes ago, RWB said:

Does this mean that ANA members will have to be put in slabs and given numbers....?

Only after they're dead.  

15 minutes ago, CRAWTOMATIC said:

Nor in the recently announced ANA registry based on the press release.

"The ANA Registry will allow both NGC- and PCGS-certified U.S. coins to be registered and displayed,......"

Which is just a little hilarious.

It's probably going to help them help you if you give more information:

- what coin?

- cert#?

- what set are you adding it to?

- what slot?

1 minute ago, James nunn said:

It is 1795 $1 silver piece

 

 

Well, I can't tell you if it's real or not without very good pictures. The same goes for anyone else here - We'd need to see it.

That said, given that it's a 1795 Silver dollar, I'd put the odds of it being fake at over 99.9%, sight-unseen.

1 minute ago, James nunn said:

Can u tell me if something is fake or not?

 

Depends on what it is.

I'm always a little amazed when we get people in here asking us a question and then they start trying to accuse us of trying to take them for a ride and cheat them.

On 1/22/2020 at 8:15 AM, William St. Croix said:

Would a complete set of all proof or mint state coins (1999-Present) for a specific year be custom or competitive? I see competitive for things like a the standard issue proof coins, but not what I'd refer to as a 'master set' to include all proof issues for the year, including commemoratives, silver and clad issues, ASE, Spouse gold, etc.. If that is considered 'custom' is there any opportunity for a competitive category enhancement for this concept of a 'master set?'

What you might consider doing is something like what I do with my Zimbabwe notes in the PMG registry. I have competitive sets for my notes but those don't adequately express how I see the set of notes as a collected whole, across all the different series, so I also have a custom set that pulls it all together that I call "Gradually, then suddenly."

There will be competitive sets for proof coins for each year and there will be competitive sets for proof ASEs, but not a competitive set that does both. Just make competitive sets to park your coins in and have your custom set and that can be a kind of "competitive category enhancement" like what you're thinking of.

Only posting one side?

39 minutes ago, RWB said:

A Lafayette dollar was legal tender - even though it cost $2. Buying some and spending them on a new stove or range was a quick way to lose half your money. 

Yeah. The older commems were $0.50 and people bought them for $1.00 or $1.50.

Who are "they?"