Opinions on Coin World Editorial on PCGS Set Registries?

[moosesr]

The editorial is about PCGS not allowing NGC graded coins in the PCGS registry and basically says not allowing this is not an overall good thing for the coin collecting hobby. The article also says that PCGS registry members voted not to allow NGC coins in the PCGS registry.

 

What do you say?

[halfpint]

 

 

........competition.

[physics-fan3.14]

I like the NGC registry because it allows both companies. I like it better for a few other reasons as well, but that is a main one.

[James_OldeTowne]

I have no interest whatsoever in biased "registries", and really don't understand the "competitive" spirit which seems to drive up silly prices on so-called "registry quality" coins.

[Schatzy]

I also like the NGC registry better....I used to put coins on the PCGS registry but have gave up doing so. Just deleted my whole account a few months back.

[BillJones]

I refuse to participate in the PCGS registry because they don't allow NGC coins to be registered. When it comes to declaring that the top sets in ANY registry are the finest sets in the world, the logic is flawed. Those sets do not include raw coins, coins that have been certified by other services and coins owned by collectors who chose not to participate.

 

Still, the PCGS registry has a bogus claim to presenting “the best coins” when they exclude all of the pieces that have been graded by their strongest competition. They thus prove that they have nothing but a pure marketing device that has been established to stroke their narrow minded customers who maintain a slavish loyalty to their product

 

[Arizonadesertrat]

I refuse to participate in the PCGS registry because they don't allow NGC coins to be registered. When it comes to declaring that the top sets in ANY registry are the finest sets in the world, the logic is flawed. Those sets do not include raw coins, coins that have been certified by other services and coins owned by collectors who chose not to participate.

 

Still, the PCGS registry has a bogus claim to presenting “the best coins” when they exclude all of the pieces that have been graded by their strongest competition. They thus prove that they have nothing but a pure marketing device that has been established to stroke their narrow minded customers who maintain a slavish loyalty to their product

 

 

Spot on. Registry sets are good illustrations of the power of marketing in our hobby.

[realone]

Agreed with most of the above but disagree with the fact that anything raw and/or owned by collectors not willing to participate leaves them out of the running and why not. The latter is simple, if you don't show and tell then no one will know of its existence, and if you have it in a raw state albeit nothing wrong with that, it becomes even more subjective than what has been graded by the best NGC and PCGS. I mean what do you expect to happen with raw coins, the uncertainty of genuineness and grade along with lack of whereabouts lens itself to complete uncertainty. I am a believer that the finest known is already graded and if it is in a raw state it can't be the finest. Flame away I am ready .

[TomB]

I don't see why most folks should have a problem with the PCGS registry. It is a self-promoting marketing tool quite similar in style to the NGC registry, but it has its own quirks. As for myself, I do not like the cumbersome nature of the PCGS registry while I like the more nimble qualities of the NGC registry, which is why I have my only sets listed at NGC.

[okbustchaser]

Agreed with most of the above but disagree with the fact that anything raw and/or owned by collectors not willing to participate leaves them out of the running and why not. The latter is simple, if you don't show and tell then no one will know of its existence, and if you have it in a raw state albeit nothing wrong with that, it becomes even more subjective than what has been graded by the best NGC and PCGS. I mean what do you expect to happen with raw coins, the uncertainty of genuineness and grade along with lack of whereabouts lens itself to complete uncertainty. I am a believer that the finest known is already graded and if it is in a raw state it can't be the finest. Flame away I am ready .

 

Actually, I currently own 3 coins which PCGS says are the finest known. All 3 are currently raw and will stay that way until after my death at the earliest.

 

That being said I also know for a fact that at least 2 of them AREN'T the best known since I have seen better examples. By the way, both of those coins are raw too.

[James_OldeTowne]

Agreed with most of the above but disagree with the fact that anything raw and/or owned by collectors not willing to participate leaves them out of the running and why not. The latter is simple, if you don't show and tell then no one will know of its existence, and if you have it in a raw state albeit nothing wrong with that, it becomes even more subjective than what has been graded by the best NGC and PCGS.

 

I trust traditional "condition census" figures far more than I do those of population reports or registry listings. After all, a true condition census has NO inherent bias with regard to coins that qualify. The bias is entirely contained within the grading standards. Certified coins have this same bias, plus the problem of coins that are deemed "ungradeable", or not graded by the TPG in question.

[michael]

I have no interest whatsoever in biased "registries", and really don't understand the "competitive" spirit which seems to drive up silly prices on so-called "registry quality" coins.

 

(thumbs u

[michael]

The editorial is about PCGS not allowing NGC graded coins in the PCGS registry and basically says not allowing this is not an overall good thing for the coin collecting hobby. The article also says that PCGS registry members voted not to allow NGC coins in the PCGS registry.

 

What do you say?

 

marketing, collusion and quotas................. nothing more nothing less

 

choose wisely your slabbed pcgs coins and ask yourself if i break this coin out of its slabbed pcgs holder does the demand and value increase or decrease??

 

if the demand and value decrease then let the buyer beware

 

as every coin stands on its own merits not on the plastic unless you want some really expensive registry points

[awb]

I have no interest whatsoever in biased "registries", and really don't understand the "competitive" spirit which seems to drive up silly prices on so-called "registry quality" coins.

I'm also confused as to the draw of the registry. I would think having a nice collection to show and discuss with people would be more fulfilling than bragging about status on an online list.

[realone]

Again I agree with almost all that was stated. When I check for finest known I do not go by registry or by what pop reports say, I use these items and check them against all known high grade examples that I can find through auction photos and registry photos and any other photos I can get a hold of. I also use census info from organizations like JRCS but they do not provide photos and the grades they provide are either derived from raw grades or slabbed grades so that is basically a shoot and only a general tool to be used. I do believe that OK most likely has the finest known in raw becasue of his level of expertise and degree of knowledge but it is like collectors like him that are the exception. The average collector with raw material will not have the finest known in their collection. So how does one really know they own the finest known they don't for certain but I would trust OK's collection of finest known examples but if he hasn't seen my bust dimes and bust half dimes then he can't possibly have the finest known in all dates becasue I have some of the finest knowndo.

[okbustchaser]

Realone,

 

I don't necessarily collect "finest knowns"; it simply happened that those 3 coins when I bought them were all Pop 1/0 in the PCGS census. I would have paid just as much and been just as happy to get them if they weren't.

 

They are still listed in the population reports even though all 3 are now raw again. That's one reason why I (as well as many other people) say that the TPG pop reports have nothing to do with reality.

 

As for the OP I didn't read the editorial, but based on your post I would suggest that allowing NGC coins into the PCGS registry is neither good nor bad for the hobby. It is PCGS's registry--it SHOULD contain only PCGS coins if that is what the participants want. NGC allows both companies coins into their registry. That is their decision to make also.

 

Most of all, though, I think the registry craze itself is bad for the hobby. Coin collecting, IMO, should be a communal hobby not a competitive sport.

 

[realone]

I really wasn't commenting on whether PCGS should allow NGC into their registry, as long as NGC allows PCGS into theirs all is covered. As far as the registry's promoting competition, I agree but I hate to be the one to tell you that the hobby of kings would be just as competitive, I have fellow collectors stab me in the back for the top pop coins and some do and don't follow the either registry they just want the best for their collection. As much as I dislike competition I am guilty in that i want the finest, I won't step on anyone in order to obtain what I want but I will try to outbid at auctions in order to procure what I want. Interesting that your 3 top pop were crack outs becasue that kind of supports the TPG craze though. Either way I love the hobby, wish it were just that , ah hobby and not a business but either way I am having a grand ole time with it.

[BillJones]

The latter is simple, if you don't show and tell then no one will know of its existence, and if you have it in a raw state albeit nothing wrong with that, it becomes even more subjective than what has been graded by the best NGC and PCGS. I mean what do you expect to happen with raw coins, the uncertainty of genuineness and grade along with lack of whereabouts lens itself to complete uncertainty. I

 

For certain areas of the market you way off the mark when you discount the importance of raw coins. Early American Coppers club members maintain lists of the finest known examples of half cent and large cents by die variety. EAC grading for the most part is more stringent than the stardards used by NGC and PCGS. Many EAC members dislike slabs, and most of the finest know examples of copper coins ranging from common to rare are raw coins.

 

In general I'm far more interested in lists of condition census coins than I am in who has the greatest collection. For that reason I found condition census lists far more interesting and informative than registry sets. And given the grading mistakes and the crack out problem which has resulted in many coins getting double counted, I'm no fan of the populaton reports that the grading services publish. As time as gone on they have become more inaccurate over the years, not better.

[realone]

Sorry, I am only speaking of bust dimes and bust half dimes.

How can you say the JRCS census is not fraught with problems, no photos, no way of telling who graded it or how it was graded. If you are a member with many examples they list your name/number if you are a member with a small quantity of coins they list only the highest of that group at the end. So for instance I have some of the finest known cbhd's and I am not named/numbered just possibly added in the end if I am high in the rankings. Many times what is listed in the census has been upgraded and one would have no way of knowing it similarly to the pops.

 

However I use the JRCS census a great deal becasue as bad as it is it is still one of the best. I use the pop reports becasue as incorrect the numbers may be it is still a valuable tool. I use auction archives and dealer archives all the time becasue they are the best for accurate info becasue the photos are great and you can do your own verifications of the info provided.

[Treeman]

In my humble opinion. NGC shows respect for the PCGS graders by allowing PCGS coins in their Registry. On the other hand, PCGS is playing a strange game by allowing only PCGS coins, and, by doing so, they are disrespecting the proffessional graders at NGC.

As for the Registry being good, or bad, for the hobby...

I can only say that my own interest in collecting has increased drastically since I have joined the Registry. I have been a fairly serious collector for the past 30+ years, but coins were no longer at the top of the list. The Registry gave me new goals, and definately rekindled my interest. I don't look at it as competing with other collectors (because I certainly couldn't afford to), but, rather, having a place to keep an eye on what I have, and what I want. I'll never be at the top of any category, but I enjoy it all the same.

[moosesr]

I agree with Treeman on this point

I don't look at it as competing with other collectors (because I certainly couldn't afford to), but, rather, having a place to keep an eye on what I have, and what I want. I'll never be at the top of any category, but I enjoy it all the same.