When did our registry sets become "competive sets"...

[MikeInFL]

...and what does this new terminology mean?

 

What if I'm not competitive, but rather simply like to collect coins and share them with others?

 

[BillJones]

...and what does this new terminology mean?

 

What if I'm not competitive, but rather simply like to collect coins and share them with others?

 

Yes, I like the educational aspects of the registries. It gives collectors a chance to see more coins that they would not often see at local shops and shows. It's the main reason why I spend the time posting pictures comments about all of my coins.

 

I only wish that I could show post my non certified coins from an educational point of view. They would get no registry and could be left off the "percentage complete" score. I'd just like to cover as much ground as possible.

 

The "bad" sets are the ones that get prizes for the most registry points that have NO PICTURES and NO COMMENTS. Those sets are the pits and are not worth the electricity to show them on my screen.

 

Even worst are the sets that are hidden from the public. Those sets are worst than the pits. How can you "compete" with them if you don't even know what's in them? Those sets should be removed from the registry IMO. They are less than useless.

[MarkFeld]

...and what does this new terminology mean?

 

What if I'm not competitive, but rather simply like to collect coins and share them with others?

Then you'd best hurry up and get out of the registry business, buster!

 

 

 

PS - "Competitive" is generally a good thing for sellers and grading companies, but a bad thing for buyers.

[physics-fan3.14]

I don't give a rip about the competitive part, but I am currently in the process of re-imaging all my coins and writing better in depth commentaries on them. I am having fun studying my coins, and I hope that others will enjoy looking at them and reading them.

[cpm9ball]

It's only competitive for the people with deep pockets. The rest do it for the enjoyment.

 

Chris

[cpm9ball]

One more thing! Why doesn't NGC include a radio button that would allow someone to exclude any ranking for their set? That way you could participate without being aware of any numerical comparison to those of the money barons.

 

Chris

[Jeffrey Cardona]

I don't post my coins for competition...I like sharing them with other people. I really enjoy posting little comments about the coins...especially the modern commemoratives. Just little things like where I purchased them, or how much they cost me. It's a fun kind thing!

[EZ_E]

Arch,

 

Idea...

 

 

 

Why not create a supplementary page in each registry set to allow comments on one's set by another?

[Oldtrader3]

Great idea, Victor for the multitude of us that are less than "competitive" in our set building, read wealthy. I am ranked 626th in the registry, read nearly defunct, not competitive.

 

Jeff, funny tongue-in-cheek post. I thought that you were leaving Indiana for parts unknown?

[MikeInFL]

I only wish that I could show post my non certified coins from an educational point of view. They would get no registry and could be left off the "percentage complete" score. I'd just like to cover as much ground as possible.

 

You can, just not on the registries. Get a website and educate away.

I, for one, would love to see your collection together in one place, regardless of slabbed state. (thumbs u

[MikeInFL]

p.s. nobody answered my first question.

[EZ_E]

p.s. nobody answered my first question.

 

Waaahl, I reckon a dictionary could do that for ya, Mike.

[lehigh96]

p.s. nobody answered my first question.

 

Mike,

 

This is my guess! They recently created those little signature tabs for Signature Sets and they look very much like the signature tabs for the regular sets. I believe they added the name of competitive so that they are easily distinguishable from the Signature Sets.

 

Unlike many who have responded to this post, I rather enjoy the competitive side of collecting even though I have no shot at ever breaking the top 5 in any of my sets. It doesn't bother me that there are people with unlimited funds that will occupy the top spots, but it bothers me greatly that these collectors are awarded the best sets without a single photo or description of their coins.

 

I think that NGC should photograph every coin that they grade whether the customer wants it or not. Then they could simply attach the photo file to the database and when a coin is entered in the registry, the photo would automatically appear. If a collector wanted to replace the photo with one of their own they could, but the photo could not be deleted and left blank. This leaves only two problems, all of the coins already slabbed would be without photos, and NGC would not be able to charge $3 per photo at submission unless that passed the cost along in another way (raising submission fees etc.)

 

If the registry decided that only photographed sets would win awards, I think we would see many more photos in the top ranked sets. While I am on this rant, can anyone explain why someone would create a signature set that didn't have photos? How is it creative to post a listing of coins. It baffles me. over now

[DC Dawg]

p.s. nobody answered my first question.

Because NGC has two programs: the competitive registry sets and the signature sets. They are using the term "competitive" to designate the pre-determined sets that they offer annual awards. Signature sets are not really competitive, but they are different in that there are no defined sets.

 

Does that help?

 

Scott

[EZ_E]

A grader spends an average of 5 seconds grading a coin in order to keep up with demand. Do you think that a photography dept. w/i NGC could match that? Doubtful. They must keep the gears turning to make a profit as a company. A pic of each coin not only involves shooting but also cropping, etc.

 

Say NGC did implement this mandatory service, how much would they have to raise the grading fees to cover the cost? Not worth the trade off. Besides, NGC has never assumed the role of numismatic cop although they will be good citizens and will report a crime if it came to their attention, i.e. stolen coin, etc.

[lehigh96]

A grader spends an average of 5 seconds grading a coin in order to keep up with demand. Do you think that a photography dept. w/i NGC could match that? Doubtful. They must keep the gears turning to make a profit as a company. A pic of each coin not only involves shooting but also cropping, etc.

 

Say NGC did implement this mandatory service, how much would they have to raise the grading fees to cover the cost? Not worth the trade off. Besides, NGC has never assumed the role of numismatic cop although they will be good citizens and will report a crime if it came to their attention, i.e. stolen coin, etc.

 

Yeah, uh, they only charge $3 for the service now so I don't think any company would charge you less than it costs them to perform the service. So I will guess that it costs them less than $3 per coin. If they need more people to photograph and process (crop etc.) they can hire them, I doubt they would be highly paid employees to take a digital photo. I think it would be great feature to access the NGC database when buying a slabbed coin to ensure that the coin you are buying is the same one they graded. Maybe NGC doesn't have to be the numismatic cop, but if people are counterfeiting slabs, wouldn't this be a good way to help prevent the problem. By the way, I know this idea is inherently flawed due to the millions of coins already graded and not photographed so don't beat me up too bad. It is more of a wish than a suggestion.

[MikeInFL]

Yes, Scott and Lehigh, that's exactly what I was asking about and that makes perfect sense. Thank you..Mike

[gpnyc]

I guess I'm not competitive since I've been known to downgrade coins in my set (from a technical grade perspective) simply because I liked the new one better.

 

BTW - I agree than "obscured" sets should be nuked into oblivion.

[BillJones]

I guess I'm not competitive since I've been known to downgrade coins in my set (from a technical grade perspective) simply because I liked the new one better.

 

BTW - I agree than "obscured" sets should be nuked into oblivion.

 

Yes, I've done that. I call it "registry suicide." I once had an MS-65 Roanoke in my set, which I "downgraded" to an MS-64 because the the MS-64 was a better, more attractive coin. Ditto for the Delaware that is sitting in my set, although I would love to find an really great Delaware commemorative half dollar some day.

[Architecht]

Arch,

 

Idea...

 

 

 

Why not create a supplementary page in each registry set to allow comments on one's set by another?

 

Yep, that's been on the "to implement" list for a while.

[EZ_E]

Arch,

 

Idea...

 

 

 

Why not create a supplementary page in each registry set to allow comments on one's set by another?

 

Yep, that's been on the "to implement" list for a while.

 

Great minds think alike. (thumbs u

 

[Coin]

This reply is not directly addressed to any one person in particuar . I am playing the roll of Devil's Advocate for an opposing side of the issue .

 

I'll try to post more pictures on my registries , but they are going to look like krr-rap . My digital camera is the old 1.8 megapixel type and photos loook awful . I bought a few NGC photo pics with graded coins , they sent them in an email in a format that I could not open . I still have the files in my document folder , about useless for me. I use the registry as a tool . I am sorry that some people think that everyone must have a photo of a coin. A 1977 Proof quarter looks the very exact same as a1978 proof quarter that looks the exact very same as the last 45 you have looked at. Sorry but why would a pic make any difference what - so - ever unless my particular 1977 quarter had some unusual feature like toning ?

 

A majority of my moderns do not have a story .

 

Here would be a sample written in comment :

 

It is a proof 1986 quarter graded NGC proof 69UC as it says on the label on the listing , I'm only having to repeat the obvious because someone wants a comment for each of my coins. It is not special in any way what-so-ever. I bought it at a coin shop from a local coin dealer , blah-blah-blah....or I paid $8 for it off ebay....some coins just do not have a story . I do not want to type in a highlight or event for the year 1986 just to tie in a modern proof quarter...that is just making unwarranted work for no return...want to know what happened in 1986? Buy a Yearbook Encyclopedia .

 

The ones that have a story , HAVE a comment . Ones that don't, do NOT.

 

I should not have to type something up for every coin in a registry set just because there is a blank there ......and am tired of reading about it.

 

I do not think I need a picture of every coin in a set and am tired of hearing about that.

 

Do you think that it should really be a requirement to be allowed to use the registry , or are you an OCD completeist and can not stand seeing a blank square with no comments or pictures in it on someone else's registry set because you have comments and pictures on all of yours ?

 

I use the registry to keep up with the top Graded coin of each year of each series in my possession . Duplicates get deleted from my inventory and placed into a big old box in a dark closet , possibly forever , or until I decide that there is a large enough pile to dump on some auction venue .

 

I use the registry as a tool .

 

Perhaps the person that suggested that a button be created to remove a set from the competitive side was right-on the money. I think it was Chris that said that there should be a button that allows an owner to have and use the registry without having the owner's set placed into the competition venue .

 

This is the best idea of the Decade .

 

It would stop unwarranted crying about the registry sets by those wanting to out-buy the others and let the rest of us that collect for the pure enjoyment , enjoy the use and not be bothered to show every boring coin , but show coins that are worth getting someone to help pic , posted . Same with comments.

 

Don't believe me? Look at the top #1 and #2 sets , usually 6 number 1's and 10 #2 sets in every category....then check out the top 3-4 #1 sets . Look at the dull photos and read the static comments. Those top sets have some of the most lame comments because they put them there only to get an extra boost to the top. Same as the pics...they all look the same.

Some of the top sets that DO have great photos , and then again some that DO have actuall stories for each coin ....these sets are great and THESE are the ones that the blank boxes are meant for . These owners had something to say and show about each coin.

I'm afraid that most of my modern sets are extremely dull with no saving grace comments . The coins that I thought were worthy of pics and comments got them because I had to go out of my way to get the pics .

I really do not want to go out of my way to get a pic of a boring 1979 proof quarter....it looks just the other 1,296 other PF69 graded quarters . ...do you understand my point of view on the pic & comment argument?

I agree with you but also disagree .

I really would like some way to pull my sets off the competitve side so they would not hurt someone else's feelings because they have no idea what a common proof 69 or PF70UC dime looks like.

 

I believe that there are a few folks that are trying to tweak the registry to their own purposes , and hope that they realize that not ALL people use the registry in the SAME way .

[BillJones]

Not all modern coins are boring.

 

When I purchased the three 1776-1976 Bicentennial coins I took pictures and was able to write three paragraphs about these pieces. This might seem like old hat to you, but a lot of new collectors don’t know these stories. To them it is something of interest, and I’ve gotten emails from people thanking me for posting the pictures and the information. When it comes to earlier coins, every coin is different, and the pictures can be of great interest.

 

I’ll make no apologies for post photos of every coin in my registry sets and writing something about them. If you go to the trouble and expense of forming a collection, you should have something to say about. And when I read an email from one these guys with top sets claiming that taking pictures is “too expensive” I just shake my head. If you can afford a collection that has a market value that is close to a million dollars, you can afford a $500 camera and a tripod.

 

[lehigh96]

Hey Coin,

 

I think you misunderstood our frustrations. We are not upset that everybody doesn't want to post photos of their coins. We are only upset that the people at the top of each category who are competing for best sets do not display photos with their coins. How can you compete against another set if you can't view what you are competing against.

 

If you are using the registry as a tool to either organize or enhance your collection in someway and don't want to post photos, that is absolutely fine. I don't think that anyone meant to criticize you for doing that. If we did, then I will apologize for everyone:

 

However, I will not change my mind about the top sets. I personally don't care if they don't want to post photos either, but IMO, they should not be considered for a best set award unless they do.

 

And BillJones is right, anyone in the top 5 of any category probably spent thousands of dollars to get there; they can certainly afford a $300-500 digital camera.

[Revenant]

I generally view my registery as being in a state of disrepair. This is due by and large to the fact that the sets continue to go while I'm at college. I don't get to take pictures most of the time because the coins are usually at home and I'm not and the descriptions aren't up to par with what I want either for much the same reason. I'm looking forward to overhauling the entire thing when I get back home in about a week for the summer.

 

Ultimately this needs to remain an issue of personal choice. I HATE obscured sets but I can see why some would want them.

 

"Rule your own sets. Set your own rules."

 

Edited to add: My Presidents set is ranked below 90 IIRC but it's 7th or 8th in the category for having the most views. I think this is because the pictures I have are among the best in that category when I get the chance to add them.

[Coin]

Alright , I over-reacted . I do understand about the classic coin sets where there are coins which are seldom seen ....a picture would be nice . I understand that some people have nice comments about particular coins and enjoy conveying these wonderfully written descriptions .

On moderns , which is what I had in mind , I must be old when a bicentennial quarter is something new , but when I asked my college-aged kids if they could tell me what was on the reverse of one, they had no idea ...even though there are literally a pile of them around the house (quarters , not kids) ....an yes , they have no interest in collecting coinage...think they are cool , but not their cup of tea.

 

I also see where those seeking the top spot SHOULD be able to compete fairly and personally feel that , yes , for a top set , there should be some kind of way to actually see what they are up against .

 

MY PET PEEVE :

I take it rather bad when I read any comment that blandly , in a broad-based manner, suggests that there is only one way to do anything when it comes to personal collecting or building a registry .

 

One such example is when I read where someone says to run away from damaged coins ....why? I have a nice set of 'cleaned' older silver commens....most of what is available has been wiped or cleaned in some way....look at all the BB'd ones that get dumped on the Bay....because most of the un-touched ones are now priced into the stratosphere above mere mortal's buying ability . With this personal set , at least I can hold and see the details and enjoy a peice of history , although not 'compete it' . I could NCS them (some are) and maybe do a signature set to show them , but they'll have to wait until I make time to do this.

 

As far as buying a decent camera , it has been in the works , but alas I have priorities , one of which is to obtain a searched for coin when it comes available before buying the camera .

 

I was under the inpression that the post was commenting that only sets with pictures and comments were warranted . Since it has been clarified that the intent was directed towards TOP sets , I feel I over-reacted and should have used a little better reading comprehension . My apologies for the long dissertation .