Attack of the Killer Prongs -- the New NGC Holders!

[Connecticoin]

Seriously, this has got to be the worst product "enhancement" since "New Coke" was introduced in 1985. Not only do the prongs make for a terrible presenation of the coin (especially on small coins), the prongs obliterate a good portion of the rim, possibly hiding rim dings that could have a significant impact on grade.

 

I can understand wanting these on coins with lettered or starred edges (such as Saints and CBHs), but for other coins, especially small ones, I would much rather see all of the rim, than 3/4's of the rim and 3/4's of a reeded or plain edge.

 

 

Also, these holders are a nightmare for coin photograpy -- in this day and age of showing coins digitally (while storing in the SDB), this can only have a negative effect on NGC submissions:

 

 

My suggestion: Give the submitter a choice between the new and old holders, or allow us to "opt out" of the new holders and get the old holders that show all of the rim.

[wtc911coins]

I hear what you are saying but I think the holders where made so Chinese fake coins would have a harder time with selling their coins on the open market. Think about how easy it is right now to make a fake coin that will never be out in the open because its in a plastic holder. Just my 2 cent

[RI AL]

Connecticoin.

 

Good morning. I'm so glad that you posted your concern about the prongs in the NGC holders possibly covering up a flaw, ding or something. I had the same thought, but assumed that the NGC guys would disqualify a coin with a rim problem before placing it in the slab, hopefully.

 

2 beautiful dimes. Dumb question time...what is FT? Maybe "full torch" but I thought THAT designation was "full lines". I have a 1955 roosie, PCGS MS 66 marked "full lines". (Am I going to be embarrased when someone tells me what FT means?)

[realone]

I really don't know what is going on, NGC either is using different prong holders arbitrarily or with planning. It seems on big coins the prongs seem to hold the coin fine, not obliterating anything. One would think the same version just proportionally smaller would be used for little coins, but that just isn't the case, the prongs cover up much of the little coins that I imagine would prevent any collector from wanting it holdered in the new holders.

 

Also, why opaque/white which screws up coin photography besides viewing pleasure, why not clear. So in summary white over built prongs that cover up more than they are showing is a flat out terrible decision that I hope they will reconsider using, this could hurt them in favor of collectors switching to pcgs.

 

BTW nothing can be said to show me that this is a good decision on small coinage, nothing:(

 

Lastly, sure it is nice to see the edge, like holding a coin in one's hand and looking at it, but not at the expense of the actually sides of the coin or the rims, what are you thinking NGC, please use your common sense before you have hurt yourself over this snafu.

[DirtyGoldMan]

I have already passed on a coin or two, in part, because of the new, improved NGC holder.

[WoodenJefferson]

Connecticoin.

 

Good morning. I'm so glad that you posted your concern about the prongs in the NGC holders possibly covering up a flaw, ding or something. I had the same thought, but assumed that the NGC guys would disqualify a coin with a rim problem before placing it in the slab, hopefully.

 

2 beautiful dimes. Dumb question time...what is FT? Maybe "full torch" but I thought THAT designation was "full lines". I have a 1955 roosie, PCGS MS 66 marked "full lines". (Am I going to be embarrased when someone tells me what FT means?)

 

These acronyms are sometimes confusing when used for different reasons. Looks like PCGS opted to keep the FB designation for both the Mercury and the Roosevelt dime series while NGC differentiates the two, which to me, actually makes more sense.

 

Full Bands, FB (PCGS)

 

Term applied to Mercury (Winged Liberty Head) dimes when the central band is fully separated (FB). There can be no disturbance of the separation.

 

Also applicable to Roosevelt dimes that display full separation in both the upper and lower pair of crossbands on the torch.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Full Torch, FT (NCG) Roosevelt Dimes, full separation in both the upper and lower pair of crossbands on the torch.

 

Full Bands, FB (NCG) Mercury Dimes, meaning the central band on the fasces are visually split

[physics-fan3.14]

Amazing dimes, Connecticoin. And I agree - Down with the prongs! Rabble, grab your pitchforks! Maybe an angry mob will convince NGC to abandon this idea! I too have passed on a pronged coin.

 

I recently got a (no-prong) new holder, and I do like it. I just wish it would stack with the old holders.

[DavidMSadler]

I to do not like the new prongs, I wish we could pick the holder insert for the coin type we had. If you like it good for you, it may fit your need. I for one have a good many coins in NGC holders and I wish they all to look the same. david

[WoodenJefferson]

[YeahToast]

Would the basic design shown on the link be a better way of displaying the edge?

 

Coin edge holder

[Mozin]

If NGC is to continue with the white prong holders, I wish they would use three prongs instead of four. I would prefer a clear section around the coin, say something just a little larger than a Morgan dollar. It could be round, or it could be most any shape.

 

Sure happy I do not collect many small coins.

[pendragon1998]

I will personally be passing on any coins slabbed in that holder unless they're truely, truely exceptional quality. Coin photography (for myself and for sharing online) makes up ~50% of my enjoyment in the hobby and those new holders are absolutely terrible.

[ant]

im with you pendragon! i love taking photos and went out and bought a expensive cam with goodies to do so.

 

most of the time i see edge letering it is far more worn on the edges. you can have a very nice coin details but the edge is quite a bit more circulated looking. most collectors dont collect for the rim letters and once you have seen the edge letters on a CBH or whatever they have the same so why be able to see it everytime you look at it?

 

the edge letering on these moderns is junk anyway!

 

 

[dean1345]

 

 

[realone]

Thanks for showing an example with a beautiful 1 cent in it, again the prongs are covering the rims where with the larger coins they don't appear to be doing that. And if in addition the prongs were completely clear then I would be satisfied. I got to believe if I were a fly on the wall in the meeting that set the course for these holders the dreamers there didn't take into account the affect of the giant prongs on all coin sizes ie the smaller ones, they showed what a morgan dollar would look like to win the necessary support, then when they signed the deal to manufacture the prongs, they requested proportionally different sizes but Qun Dong Fo Trading and Manufacturing told them varied sizes would be too costly, talked them into only one size fits all, maybe OJ Simpson was in on the sale. Any way what they are left with is a total abomination and if they would just come out and say ok , we tried and we will fix it all would be ok but that just seems to be such a hard request these days. Taking responsibility is no longer the manly thing to do it seems, dead silence or denials seem the wave of the future, thank you Bill Clinton and Hil.

[bartlesvilleok]

I have seen a lot of post on there about wanting different sets. Why not have a post for doing away with the pronged holders. Maybe once NGC sees the number of people that do not like it they will think differently. If not there is always PCGS

[Connecticoin]

Just to clarify, the Roosevelt dimes are NOT mine, they belong to CU board member "onlyroosies" who posted them on the PCGS Registry Forum (yes, exceptional coins, I WISH I owned them! )

 

Also, I agree with Pentagdragon, a large part of enjoyment of this hobby is display and sharing of coin images, and the prongs ruin that (especially on the large coins).

[EZ_E]

I have seen a lot of post on there about wanting different sets. Why not have a post for doing away with the pronged holders. Maybe once NGC sees the number of people that do not like it they will think differently. If not there is always PCGS

[coinman1794]

Connecticoin.

 

Good morning. I'm so glad that you posted your concern about the prongs in the NGC holders possibly covering up a flaw, ding or something. I had the same thought, but assumed that the NGC guys would disqualify a coin with a rim problem before placing it in the slab, hopefully.

 

2 beautiful dimes. Dumb question time...what is FT? Maybe "full torch" but I thought THAT designation was "full lines". I have a 1955 roosie, PCGS MS 66 marked "full lines". (Am I going to be embarrased when someone tells me what FT means?)

 

These acronyms are sometimes confusing when used for different reasons. Looks like PCGS opted to keep the FB designation for both the Mercury and the Roosevelt dime series while NGC differentiates the two, which to me, actually makes more sense.

 

Full Bands, FB (PCGS)

 

Term applied to Mercury (Winged Liberty Head) dimes when the central band is fully separated (FB). There can be no disturbance of the separation.

 

Also applicable to Roosevelt dimes that display full separation in both the upper and lower pair of crossbands on the torch.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Full Torch, FT (NCG) Roosevelt Dimes, full separation in both the upper and lower pair of crossbands on the torch.

 

Full Bands, FB (NCG) Mercury Dimes, meaning the central band on the fasces are visually split

 

Not to hyjack this thread (and I've already said my piece more than once on the prong-view slab), but FT (Full Torch), dues not mean full upper and lower bands. It means full upper and lower bands, and full virticle rods from top to bottom with no ticks breaking the continuum...very different than the PCGS FB designation.

[James_OldeTowne]

I think there should be only three prongs on the smaller coins, but I'm in the minority here. I think the coins look flat out cool. They remind me of jet turbines.

[awb]

Thanks for showing an example with a beautiful 1 cent in it, again the prongs are covering the rims where with the larger coins they don't appear to be doing that. And if in addition the prongs were completely clear then I would be satisfied. I go to believe if I were a fly on the wall in the meeting that set the course for these holders they dreamers there didn't take into account the affect of the giant prongs on all coin sizes ie the smaller ones, they showed what a morgan dollar would look like to win the necessary support, then when they signed the deal to manufacture the prongs, they requested proportionally different sizes but Qun Dong Fo Trading and Manufacturing told them varied sizes would be too costly, talked them into only one size fits all, maybe OJ Simpson was in on the sale. Any way what they are left with is a total abomination and if they just come out and say ok , we tried and we will fix it all would be ok but that just seems to be such a hard request these days. Taking responsibility is no longer the manly thing to do it seems, dead silence or denials seem the wave of the future, thank you Bill Clinton and Hil.

 

You must like Faulkner. Don't give Bill too much credit; the pussification of America is not just his to claim.

[PovertyRow]

I don;t collect coins anymore but enjoy reading the boards. I think this is hideous. Surely the brains behind NGC could have come up with a better anti-counterfeit solution if that is what it is.

 

Regardless, were I collecting maybe I would buy some of these but probably have them re-certified by another well known TPG. It is really ugly.

[RI AL]

Good morning, Woodenjefferson. Thanks for the FT explaination. So many initials, it sure would be great if the 2 TPGs would standardize their terminology. Life would be so much simpler...

[RI AL]

Yeah Toast.

 

That visible edge holder is really neat. I know that a couple of my bust half dollars have messed up "50 cents or half a dollar" on the rims and it would be neat to see these blunders again. Unfortunately, they are in "traditional slabs" so the edges are entombed.

 

Wouldn't it be neat if the edge view holders were somehow offered as an option by the TPGs.

[Conder101]

Wouldn't it be neat if the edge view holders were somehow offered as an option by the TPGs.

Offered as an option? It is the new standard holder at NGC.

 

What I find interesting is how when they first appeared some four or five years ago eveyone thought how wonderful they were and wished they were available for other coin series besides bust halves and high relief double eagles.

 

Then two years ago when they were introduced for the president dollars everyone thought they were wonderful and wished thy were available for all of the coins.

 

Then two months ago when they were introduced for all the coins they were greeted with much rejoicing.

 

Today in this thread they seem to be almost universally condemned. Be careful what you ask for, you may get it.

[MorganMan]

The simple fact of the matter is that they are TERRIBLE to try to photograph a coin with. Those gorgeous photos of a full face of a coin are now impossible with the new holders, especially on smaller coins.

 

The only option is to photoshop out the holder prongs, but who wants a fake photo.

 

I too will be going to another grader with my coins if they do not improve on the prongs covering up frontal area of the coin.

 

Or at least, give us an option of which type holder we want.

 

My own personal opinion of them is they detract from the coin with all the busy edges of the prongs.

 

As for counterfeit reduction, I bet there are already pronged holders ready to go somewhere in China. How can prongs stop counterfeiting?

 

MM

[Conder101]

It was alo very difficult to photograph small coins with the old holder as well because of the overhanging shadows from the deep well of a hole they sat in. There have ben plenty of complaints about how hard it was to photograph small coin in the old holders as well.

 

Do they stop counterfeiting of the holders? Heck no, and I would bet they are NOT counterfeiting the new holders yet. Why? Because the dies for making the injection molded parts are expensive and until collectors completely reject the old style holder because of too many counterfeits, it will work just fine. Once they can't sell coins in the old holders THEN they'll spend the money to make dies to counterfeit the latest generation holder.

[MorganMan]

Trust me. Chinese plastic parts are a dime a dozen.

 

http://www.xpicorp.com/made-in-china/custom-plastic-parts.php

 

http://www.ccmfg.com/capability.htm

 

Once again, I do not think the should do away with them (I mean where would you slab those Presidential dollar trinkets?)

 

But we should have a choice.

 

MM

[realone]

Wouldn't it be neat if the edge view holders were somehow offered as an option by the TPGs.

Offered as an option? It is the new standard holder at NGC.

 

What I find interesting is how when they first appeared some four or five years ago eveyone thought how wonderful they were and wished they were available for other coin series besides bust halves and high relief double eagles.

 

Then two years ago when they were introduced for the president dollars everyone thought they were wonderful and wished thy were available for all of the coins.

 

Then two months ago when they were introduced for all the coins they were greeted with much rejoicing.

 

Today in this thread they seem to be almost universally condemned. Be careful what you ask for, you may get it.

 

Conder,

what I was trying to say is that the prongs for some reason work great for big coins and the prongs seem to fit and hold the sides of the big coins differently than the smaller coins. So yes if you show only a big coin I assume all would rejoice, because all who rejoiced expected the prongs to be downsized and fit and hold the smaller coins exactly in the sam manner as the bigger coins. But something is vastly different on how the smaller coins are held and the way the prongs cover up the rim and intrude into the face of the smaller coins, this negative aspect does not take place with the larger coins. So in essence what NGC must have showed years ago because I am taking your word for it , I never saw it, could have only been putting their best foo t forward with the showing of the prongs with the larger coins. Please tell me I am wrong.

[coinman1794]

Wouldn't it be neat if the edge view holders were somehow offered as an option by the TPGs.

Offered as an option? It is the new standard holder at NGC.

 

The new hologram and shell are the current standard holder at NGC, and the prong holders are being slowly phaised in over time. It would be very easy for NGC to make them optional. Currently they alone decide which coins get prongs or not, on an invoice by invoice basis. There is no reason why we can't make that decision, especially considering how poorly the prong holders work on early US coinage, which is much thinner and does not sit right in the gasket (has anyone seen a large size Bust 25C in one of these...horror).

 

Also, the prong design isn't so much a part of the anti-counterfieting measures as are the new seal, label, and multiple new holograms.