Should NGC limit the number of PCGS coins in each Registry Set?

[Ragone_Numismatics-migrati]

No, I think that is a very bad idea for NGC or PCGS Registry Sets !

[Gregg Bingham]

well ...here is my "take" and my views and why i crossed all my coins to NGC...i think you will find my conclusions right on when you boil it all down

 

grading.....the 3 services ( pcgs-ngc-anacs) grade coins according to the accepted nuances that were set out years ago ( 40% suf pres ...20% strike...20% luster... 20% eye appeal )

 

in 1986 pcgs was the originator of slabbing in which ngc soon followed..... being in direct competition to pcgs ...ngc needed an edge so they graded the 66.9 coins ms 67 and that is a fact in my opinion...but in reality all 66.9 coins would become ms 67at pcgs too if you sent them in enough and that too is a fact ( if your good enough to split hairslike some professional dealers...aka crack-out guys) but pcgs`s approach did 2 things...it made them more money by submissions and increased demand by the dealer base who would pay more because there were more upgrade potential in pcgs coins...

 

then entered what is known as grade-flation...some used to think naw...it doesnt exist but they were quickly proven wrong..AND IT DID EXIST and it does today.....is this a communist plot??? naw....what is really happening is that the services are really ranking coins....thats what i said...ranking coins...i have felt this for years and have purchased accordingly and the proof is in the pudding ...if you went to see my commem set in the registry i sure have dozens of stars...and coins like that trade way off the sheets thus substanciating my beliefs....slowly but surley the best of the best will be graded accordingly

 

several years ago i came to the conclusion that what ngc was doing was in fact properly grading coins...right on the money...they also did give an extra 2 to 5% boost out of the surface preservation 40% to eye appealing coins as they saw thats what the market was buying....pcgs on the other hand was purposely undergrading coins for 2 reasons 1) they went public and had to show great revenue growth 2) they saw it as a way to hurt ngc by saying ngc coins werent graded properly thus increasing their own demand from the collector base which in turn was followed by the dealer base.....thus you had the old adage...pcgs was worth more

 

well i loved this because i bought the coin not the slab and had a huge bonus...i did in fact buy many ngc coins cheaper due to the brain-washed and or unknowing public....

 

facts.......when i pedigreed my morgan set .....23 out of 24 crossed to pcgs ( the other crossed later but i didnt own it :-( ....)...why to pcgs?? simple because all the market makers in morgans were diehard -brainwashed pcgs guys like jack lee and bill spears...and that was the market i was targeting to sell to so i had to...period!!

 

why are all my coins ( except for a few i havent bothered with and are prorperly graded ) in NGC holders...because i feel ngc properly grades coins and they look better in white holders and pcgs does not properly grade coins...they under grade due to the pressure of being a public company in need of more revenue thru resubmissions...i even told pcgs they should have a NO BULLS$IT TIER...PAY A ONE TIME $500 FEE AND GET IT GRADED PROPERLY..it would save time and postage...seriously..i did!!

 

 

facts of my diatribe......if you believe in grade flation ( whether for the reasons i stated above or your own...EITHER WAY ITS A FACT )...then my 10 year old daughter has enough logic capabilities to say.... buy the really nice 65 and in time it will be a 66...or buy the best of the best 67...and since it was the best then it will be the best later...only then in a 68 holder....and daddy you can buy it soooo much cheaper!!!

 

today i fell that 100% of my set would cross to pcgs.....yeah even the 69 antietam ( heck the card i bought raw yeilded 1 ms 67 ...3 ms 68s...and my monster ms 69

 

and if they all didnt cross....i can either put them on the pcgs`s $500 NO BULLS$IT TIER....or just sit back and wait til next year when grade flation sweeps them up in to their new holders

 

ONE THING I WANT TO SAY IN CLOSING...GRADE FLATION IS A FACT...AND ALL COLLECTORS HAVE A VERY LARGE ADVANTAGE OVER ALL DEALERS.....AND THAT IS TIME...SO SIT BACK COLLECT THE BEST IN THE GRADE YOU AFFORD...AND IF YOU DID A GOOD JOB IN YOUR COLLECTING....YOU WILL BE REWARDED AT SELLING TIME

 

caveat: if you did a bad job...you will get a finacial spanking...as ability gets rewarded and the lack of it.....well votes for communism because they lack ability

 

think hard as i speak the truth

 

monsterman

 

come look at my Stars*...and enjoy ...thats what they are there for

 

http://www.collectors-society.com/registry/coins/index.asp?SetCat=Commemoratives

[jtryka]

Wow, that Antietem is awesome! Oh, and I agree with that other stuff you said too.

[Beijim]

ngc needed an edge so they graded the 66.9 coins ms 67 and that is a fact in my opinion...

[PovertyRow]

As a true collector, I really don't care much about the slab. I own PCGS, NGC and ANACS slabs and I rate them all equally, for the most part. Each company has its good points and drawbacks in regards to grading. ... But, here's the question, should NGC limit the percentage of PCGS coins it allows in each set?

 

As a "true collector", why even ask?

[gmarguli]

in 1986 pcgs was the originator of slabbing in which ngc soon followed..... being in direct competition to pcgs ...ngc needed an edge so they graded the 66.9 coins ms 67 and that is a fact in my opinion...but in reality all 66.9 coins would become ms 67at pcgs too if you sent them in enough and that too is a fact ( if your good enough to split hairslike some professional dealers...aka crack-out guys) but pcgs`s approach did 2 things...it made them more money by submissions and increased demand by the dealer base who would pay more because there were more upgrade potential in pcgs coins...

 

Come on now, give credit to Alan Hager and Accugrade for being the originator of slabbing.

 

I somewhat disagree with the idea that NGC started out a tiny bit looser. Maybe in the first few months, but for some time NGC was considered stricter by the marketplace than PCGS. Dealers paid premiums for NGC coins. Over the years this has gone back and forth a couple of times as the services tweak their standards for several reasons.

 

Both services play off each other and to some respect the 2nd tier services. The most memorable was when PCGS peed in their pants when ICG started up and they opened the floodgates on the PF70 coins. It wasn't that PCGS was stricter, it was that they were unreasonable. They reacted by loosening their standards quite a bit and they helped kill ICG. Then PCGS switched their grading standards yet again to get rid of the PF70 grade. All in the name of business, yet many can't see what actually happened.

 

 

 

why are all my coins ( except for a few i havent bothered with and are prorperly graded ) in NGC holders...because i feel ngc properly grades coins and they look better in white holders

 

Monster toned coins surrounded by a white background.

 

 

come look at my Stars*...and enjoy ...thats what they are there for

 

http://www.collectors-society.com/registry/coins/index.asp?SetCat=Commemoratives

 

Here is a direct link to your set instead of the category for the people who don't know who you are: Gregg Bingham's Set

[RobertB]

Ahhh, so you're Mr. Bingham...hmmm....well I'm #32 in NGC early commem.s and I'm coming for you!!! No, honestly I can't compete with you . You've got some beauties. Something to aspire to.

 

RobertB

[Oldtrader3]

You guys! I clicked on your set reference at the bottom of your post and have been dodging numerous Pop-ups including Paris Hilton (and others) demonstrating their physical abilities, plus cleaning out "Cookies" for 20 minutes. Tsk! Tsk!

 

 

 

[jtryka]

Man OT3, not sure which link you clicked on, but I didn't get Paris Hilton! What I did get was a link to the registry where I just noticed that I am catching up to you again, nipping at your heels in our Saint competition!

[Beijim]

What link did you click to get Paris Hilton nipping at your heels? Oh. Did I misunderstand?

 

Beijim

 

[tgilliams]

I totally disagree. The reason that the NGC Registry is the most representative registry is because NGC allows diversity by allowing PCGS coins. Furthermore, the more sets that become a part of NGC's Registry, the stronger the registry becomes. The awards is a great Marketing tool for this Registry and NGC should be congratulated.

[Architecht]

You guys! I clicked on your set reference at the bottom of your post and have been dodging numerous Pop-ups including Paris Hilton (and others) demonstrating their physical abilities, plus cleaning out "Cookies" for 20 minutes. Tsk! Tsk!

 

 

 

That is because you have been infected with spyware and adware. It's unrelated to the registry site.

[Oldtrader3]

Thanks, Arch. I will find it and clean it!

[Tootawl]

It's very simple.

An NGC Registry set should have nothing but NGC slabs in it. If they have mixed, it's not truly an NGC Registry set.

A PCGS Registry set should have nothing but PCGS slabs in it.

[Tradedollarnut]

If they have mixed, it's not truly an NGC Registry set.

 

It's not about the slabs, it's about the coins!

 

 

The NGC Registry has three advantages over its competition. First and foremost is that it allows both PCGS and NGC holders. Why would they want to do away with their one big advantage???

[Gregg Bingham]

ping

[RareSov]

NO. I believe that NGC is taking the high road on this issue while PCGS's policy strikes me as snobbish to the extreme.

 

There are great coins in both company's holders, and I own coins in both company's holders, but I have seen plenty of coins in PCGS holders that I would not want to own. IMO just because a coin is in a PCGS holder does not mean that it is better than a coin in an NGC holder. I believe that NGC is not afraid to acknowledge that coins in PCGS holders are of the same quality as NGC coins. Is PCGS afraid to do the same?

 

John

 

Perfectly well put. This is the crux of the issue

 

By going "PCGS only" first, PCGS forces the issue. A coin cannot exist in 2 holders at once. Unless you cross it and don't tell them ?

 

That would be the way. But they would get mad and ban you. So how can you win. I don't like PCGS sometimes.

[erwindoc]

I prefer allowing both services in any fashion at NGC and will attempt to explain why. I enjoy the competition and for several years I owned a top ranking set here at NGC. I always wondered how my set would stack up against they guys across the street. I couldnt compete there cause my set is mixed between both services and I refuse to pay the money to try and cross my coins. When the top PCGS guy in the same series brought his set over and blasted my own down to number two, it forced me to reevaluate the set. Now I have a real competition to get back on top, if I can ever do it! However, if I do, then I feel I will have the best set at both between both grading services and something to be truly proud of.

[$ilverHawk]

Double, Triple, Infinity Word. (thumbs u

[KPARKE]

I honestly do not know whose better or worse. I have both grading services, and the first one also. I do not know how the ANACS coin would grade in a crossover, but I hope to find out soon. I went with NGC, because the grading fees were more reasonable overall. While I do not like somethings about it, such as the early release thing, I called the mint on that and they told me what I already knew.

A coin struck at the first part of the run (on the die) is better quality than at the end of the dies life. Getting a Early release label does not assure you perfection in anyway. So why the lable ? Money.(FOR THEM)

AS far as the Registry is concerned, I enjoy it. And yes it would be harder to put together collections if it was just one. I buy for the completion, and not really the holder, except I will stay with the top three from now on after getting a whizzed UNC details on one of my Morgans after I took it out of the one lower cost holders.

I also have some issues with the improperly cleaned designation. I had three coins from the time I was Three, 1961 and the coins were the same from that time on. but yet came back saying they were cleaned. They were in a whitman book and tarnished on the edges, but the coin was clean on the faces. I never cleaned it. That is not to say that it was not cleaned Before I recieved it.

So nothing is perfect, And I will still keep collecting, till I get priced out of the market with all the silver and gold hog speculators out there!

[coinman_23885]

I do not believe that NGC should limit the number of PCGS coins, but I could justify a SMALL NGC premium (no more than 20 to 30 points a coin certainly). This would boost NGC marketing. It is this marketing and the PCGS registry that has apparently created a premium on some series over NGC coins.

 

Additionally, remember that NGC coins can already receive a bit of a premium. PCGS does not have a "star" designation and PCGS does not designate coins as 5FS or 6FS using only the "FS" designation instead. As such, I believe that NGC treats them as 5FS, but someone correct me if I'm wrong. I'm sure that this is similar for other series as well (although Jefferson Nickels are the only series that comes to mind where there is a numerical adjective qualifier added to the strike designation)

[Oldtrader3]

This post has been around for 7 years now and my sentiments have not changed one whit. I am glad the NGC took the high road and allowed both (NGC and PCGS) company's slabs on their registry. Plus, I most certainly do not support any weighting by NGC that favors their slabs. PCGS has allready taken that road by disallowing NGC slabs in their registry.

 

I still feel exactly the same despite heavily biased Marketing Grading and all of the issues that have come and faded somewhat in the intervening time since 2003 when this thread originated. The differences between the registries may be even more stratified now between dealers and collectors then they were even then.

 

My collection now is still about 55% NGC, 50% PCGS and maybe 5% ANACS (just because I never changed them over). However, I only have about 100 coins now that are slabbed versus about probably 600 in 2003. Part of this is an absolute commitment to not play the registry game for most moderns (with a few proof set exeptions) and part of it is retirement and an appropriately scaled down lifestyle, including the size of my coin collection.

[coinman_23885]

A few months ago I saw an NGC proof quarter purchased off ebay and then crossed one grade lower at PCGS. The buyer lost hundreds of dollars just for the satisfaction of putting it in some registry set. For what purpose, just so you could have some bragging rights on a forum? For me personally that would be an embarassment.

 

It was more than a few hundred dollars. It was a THOUSAND dollars which I believe represented about 30% of the value of the coin. I don't know if you know this, but the guy sold the set. Let's just say that I "believe" that coin is now being graded at NGC by the new owner. I'm not positive, but...

 

Did he not know that you can set a minimum grade for the cross-over?

[coinman_23885]

My collection now is still about 55% NGC, 50% PCGS and maybe 5% ANACS (just because I never changed them over).

 

[Oldtrader3]

My collection now is still about 55% NGC, 50% PCGS and maybe 5% ANACS (just because I never changed them over).

 

 

I have been very ill for awhile and when my blood chemistry is off, so am I. I have TB, am anemic and have heart, kidney and lung disease. Sometimes, my blood numbers get out of balance and I get a little goofy. Believe me, that you would too if you had my medical issues. So please, cut me some slack.

 

What I meant was 45% NGC, 50% PCGS and 5% ANACS. I believe that equals 100%.

[coinman_23885]

My collection now is still about 55% NGC, 50% PCGS and maybe 5% ANACS (just because I never changed them over).

 

 

I have been very ill for awhile and when my blood chemistry is off, so am I. I have TB, am anemic and have heart, kidney and lung disease. Sometimes, my blood numbers get out of balance and I get a little goofy. Believe me, that you would too if you had my medical issues. So please, cut me some slack.

 

What I meant was 45% NGC, 50% PCGS and 5% ANACS. I believe that equals 100%.

 

I was just kidding. I genuinely didn't mean anything by that at all. I know what medical conditions can do in terms of one's alertness. While I know that sleep apnea is minor and doesn't even compare to one of the things that you listed, it has kept me from being alert at times. It was probably during one of those times that I posted this; after reviewing it, I surely wouldn't have posted it. I sincerely apologize.

[Oldtrader3]

We are cool, no issue with what you said.

[bsandersen-migration]

Good Morning All,

 

I think NGC should put a limit on the PC coins a person can have in a NGC registry set. I would put the number at 50%, remember this is a NGC Registry, not a PC registry. If you want your PC coins to compete to it on the PC boards.

 

I personnaly feel NGC is showing a lot of flexibility on this. I'm also hearing of a top set archive similar to what PC has that is in the works.

 

Good things coming from NGC.

 

Brian

[Schatzy]

It seems like this year there were a lot of new sets created with all PCGS coins.

[physics-fan3.14]

At the luncheon yesterday, they announced a category of competition for only-NGC sets. Not sure of too many of the details, but it is coming this year.