New #1 set in Morgan Dollars??

[MarkW]

A "new" set has been registered in Morgan Dollars just in time to grab the #1 ranking for 2009. This set is owned by the "Stuppler Family of Clients", and based on this, seems to be a set with many owners. Is this legit? Should a dealer of high quality coins be allowed to build a set of his client's coins? I'll never get anywhere near the top in a category like Morgans, but I don't appreciate someone jumping to #1 with coins that may not belong to that collector. Barry Stuppler does deal in some very high quality and desirable coins. I've been a customer of Barry Stuppler Coins and if this set was registered in the manner that it seems, I'll move this dealer to my spam box and not deal with him again. If I am wrong, I'll change my viewpoint.

 

[cpm9ball]

 

5 More to go!!!

 

That's it for today. I have to save the rest for tomorrow.

 

Chris

[WinstonWare]

I believe that registry sets can be owned by many people. Did you ask in the “NGC Registry Forum?” They’re pretty good about getting back to people.

 

I wonder where that collection came from

[TomB]

I don't think this is within the spirit of the registry, though it might be within the rules. Have you sent a PM to Scott or Dena?

[bsshog40]

I agree with Tom. Registries should be a competitive collection among individual collectors, not many collectors ganging up on one category. JMO

[Schatzy]

IMO people that don't even have pictures shouldn't be able to even get to the #1 slot!!

[michael]

nothing fair or gentleman-ly about the registry set concept

 

just take a look at pcgs

 

it is all about the MONEY and the concept of all's fair in love, war and the registry set game

 

and as tomb said it might not be right or within the spirit of the registry as it was intended........................ but it is within the rules

 

 

[WinstonWare]

I agree with what everyone is saying but I still think that the registry proivdes a convenient portal for people to view some outstanding collections. It's not all about competition. I've probably viewed Tom and Victor's collection at least 5 times each and a number of other collections more than once. If there wasn't a registry it would be significantly more difficult to find everyone's collection and that's if they bothered to make a website displaying their collection.

[bsshog40]

Well I have to agree to disagree with you Winston. If the registry wasn't about competition, awards would not be given out. Personally I feel the registry shows an individuals accomplishments. Most of the top registries of course are aquired by those more finacially stable, but still, each registry shows the accomplishment of that peticular individual. I think they should be limited to a one collector owner. I have been offered slab numbers to fill one of my registries in the past. Although the offer was very much appreciated, my registries are an example of my determination and dedication to fill a collection. When I complete one, then I feel I have accomplished a great goal and it gives me pride regardless of the rank. JMO

[MorganMan]

While I agree with Bosshog about it being about individuals, it could work both ways I guess.

 

One really rich individual could just "buy" his way to number one.

 

Or it could also help some of us "lower income" folks to pool together our coins and have a #1 set.

 

NGC needs to have specific rules concerning this. They may already, I do not know.

 

But I do have to agree that multiple owners is not really in the spirit of what I think the registry should be.

 

MM

[jesbroken]

I cannot fathom that anyone would think the practice of several persons merging their set to form a registry set as anything but a sham! As far as its legality, only the two TPG's can answer that, but NGC in its description of its purpose of the registry set says "The goal of the Registry is to encourage coin collecting as a hobby, acknowledge the collectors who assemble truly remarkable sets, and inspire beginner hobbyists as they embark on the fun and rewarding hobby of building a coin collection" and that "Your set is ranked according to its true rarity".

Nowhere does it even allude to the practice of combining coin collections.

I feel this taints the registry just as the recent practice of giving away Nobel Peace prizes in cracker jack boxes to whoever has tainted this revered award.

The Registry was said to acknowledge the collectors not their lawyers or dealers for amassing great clients not even recognized as owners of the coins.

This, of course, is just my opinion.

Jim

[cpm9ball]

It shouldn't be allowed! The concept of the Registry has now been completely undermined, in my opinion. It could be likened to a 5-man amateur basketball team on the court against a 20-man pro basketball team. No way, Jose!

 

Chris

[MarkW]

The new "#1 set" now has a new "owner". It is now owned by "A Client of Barry Stuppler and Co". Down to ONE owner? Yeah, right. Does that mean A Client of Barry Stuppler (and Co) or A Client of (Barry Stuppler and Co)?

It is not my position to squawk to NGC, I really don't care. I'll never be in position to climb this ladder much higher. It is just that the approach seems a bit sneaky. I enjoy looking at great sets (in this case, I mean coins) and this set has some tremendous coins. Perhaps this change of "ownership" is actually saying this is one client's set. Will it stand the test of time? That will answer the question in my mind.

 

[ant]

happened very fast since noticed now that it changed names already, it makes it look more fake. maybe this is just the regestring of the coins he has sold. but without pics how can it be number one. thats like walking into a dance competition and just saying "i can dance" and leaving the stage.

 

its like when you were little saying you had something but didnt. just to be cool!

[ant]

also if you have the money to buy these coins, wouldnt you want to image them or show them off some how. people dont buy rolls royce just to look at it!

 

any set should have pictures! no pictures, no being voted on!

[$ilverHawk]

I cannot fathom that anyone would think the practice of several persons merging their set to form a registry set as anything but a sham! As far as its legality, only the two TPG's can answer that, but NGC in its description of its purpose of the registry set says "The goal of the Registry is to encourage coin collecting as a hobby, acknowledge the collectors who assemble truly remarkable sets, and inspire beginner hobbyists as they embark on the fun and rewarding hobby of building a coin collection" and that "Your set is ranked according to its true rarity".

Nowhere does it even allude to the practice of combining coin collections.

I feel this taints the registry just as the recent practice of giving away Nobel Peace prizes in cracker jack boxes to whoever has tainted this revered award.

The Registry was said to acknowledge the collectors not their lawyers or dealers for amassing great clients not even recognized as owners of the coins.

This, of course, is just my opinion.

Jim

 

NGC we are patiently awaiting your anwser. At face value the offering of this set is a sham. The purported shift of this set to a single owner is an affront to all that assemble sets. Show some backbone. It's crunch time--make a decision.

[$ilverHawk]

I have bought 2 coins from Barry Stuppler. You will never get another purchase from me due to your totaly unprofessional, ungentlemenly conduct in this situation.

[cpm9ball]

I cannot fathom that anyone would think the practice of several persons merging their set to form a registry set as anything but a sham! As far as its legality, only the two TPG's can answer that, but NGC in its description of its purpose of the registry set says "The goal of the Registry is to encourage coin collecting as a hobby, acknowledge the collectors who assemble truly remarkable sets, and inspire beginner hobbyists as they embark on the fun and rewarding hobby of building a coin collection" and that "Your set is ranked according to its true rarity".

Nowhere does it even allude to the practice of combining coin collections.

I feel this taints the registry just as the recent practice of giving away Nobel Peace prizes in cracker jack boxes to whoever has tainted this revered award.

The Registry was said to acknowledge the collectors not their lawyers or dealers for amassing great clients not even recognized as owners of the coins.

This, of course, is just my opinion.

Jim

 

NGC we are patiently awaiting your anwser. At face value the offering of this set is a sham. The purported shift of this set to a single owner is an affront to all that assemble sets. Show some backbone. It's crunch time--make a decision.

 

Hawk, maybe you haven't been around long enough to learn that NGC almost never "chimes in" on touchy subjects such as this. You can be fairly sure that someone in Sarasota is reading it, but their thought processes and decisions are not discussed in an open forum.

 

Chris

 

PS. I would hasten a guess that someone will probably raise the issue at the NGC luncheon at FUN in January.

[$ilverHawk]

Chris, yes, I'm fairly new. I know what a level playing field is. I will be at FUN and will have no problem with bringing up this subject if the brass at NGC allow this sham to continue.

 

NGC had better understand that we individual collectors do have a say in how and where we spend our money and efforts. Yes, the big inside dealers have alot of leverage, but the totality of the members of the Collectors Society can make the brass understand the difference between right conduct and fast cash.

 

 

[lehigh96]

also if you have the money to buy these coins, wouldnt you want to image them or show them off some how. people dont buy rolls royce just to look at it!

 

any set should have pictures! no pictures, no being voted on!

 

Couldn't agree more and I have stated so in the introduction of my registry set (see below)

 

I am a collector who covets eye appeal first and foremost. Without eye appeal coins become generic in my eyes. While an untoned coin can still display a measure of eye appeal based on strike and luster it just can’t approach the unique appearance that a rainbow toned coin can offer. Having said that, toning is not the end of eye appeal, rather it is just the beginning. Without luster, the colorful toning loses the vibrancy that yields the eye popping appearance.

 

Registry sets are typically all about grade, the number on the plastic, and points, the number on the screen. The majority of the registry participants simply list their coins in the appropriate slot never bothering to photograph or describe their coins. There is no doubt that the highest grade should be rewarded, but just as toning is only the start to eye appeal; grade is only the start to a great coin or collection. A great collection must have it all. Each coin should be superlative in one way or another, whether it is a top pop with blazing luster, a monster toner with undeniable eye appeal, or a hammered strike on a normally weakly struck issue, it must be special. Regardless of what attributes make the coin special, a number can never describe a great coin. I wouldn’t even know how to evaluate a collection without photos & descriptions.

 

 

[Coindude]

Well, I'll have to say that at least this thread is still here. If similar were posted ATS it would most definitely have been erased by now.

[cpm9ball]

In my opinion, the staff at NGC is the greatest. They listen, they care! You don't have to play hardball with them, but they don't make rash decisions. You would be better served by simply making your feelings known in a sincere, rather than threatening, manner.

 

This will be my 6th consecutive year in attendance at the NGC Luncheon at FUN, and I always look forward to the discussions.

 

Changing the subject.................I live in Cape Coral. Where in South Florida do you live?

 

Chris

[$ilverHawk]

Chris, may cool heads prevail. I'll do a little research on set qualification parameters as defined by NGC. I'll also look up some recent history on past winners/qualifiers to see if group submission has been allowed in the past.

 

You're right, in all of my interactions with NGC staff they have always been caring and attentive.

 

I may start a thread in the NGC Registry forum on the subject.

 

I live in Loxahatchee. It's a rural area in NW Palm Beach County.

[cpm9ball]

I live in Loxahatchee. It's a rural area in NW Palm Beach County.

 

Ah,so! I haven't been in that general area for many years. I used to go pool tournaments of the old Florida Tour in West Palm during the 80's & 90's.

 

Chris

[gpnyc]

I don't think this is very different from someone with very deep pockets putting up a # 1 set with no pics, no notes, etc. Just a collection of NGC and PCGS serial numbers. I don't like that and I don't like this cobbled together set. Both may fit the parameters of the NGC sets but they certainly don't fit the spirit.

[MarkFeld]

Chris, yes, I'm fairly new. I know what a level playing field is. I will be at FUN and will have no problem with bringing up this subject if the brass at NGC allow this sham to continue.

 

NGC had better understand that we individual collectors do have a say in how and where we spend our money and efforts. Yes, the big inside dealers have alot of leverage, but the totality of the members of the Collectors Society can make the brass understand the difference between right conduct and fast cash.

 

Instead of making accusations without having all of the facts, why don't you call or email NGC and ask them?

[MorganMan]

Let me also add that I think it is very unethical of Mr. Stuppler to do this just a few days before the awards.

 

But as always, there are 2 sides, I am sure there are quite a few out there that bought that one last coin to move their set up just before the awards.

 

After thinking it over for a few days, I think we just need to leave it alone, and enjoy our coins.

 

There will always be the guy that can buy his way to the top, but will NEVER have the enjoyment of working his way to the top.

 

I admire the ones here who have worked over the years to put together beautiful, matched sets of coins. Much more so than the top sets. Those perfectly matched VF30 sets of CB halves will never make a top set, but surely are beautiful to look at.

 

I have one top set, my Eagles. I was lucky to have 5 of them 70's from the mint. I worked and was able at that time to purchase the one 70 I needed for the set for only 150 more than I sold a 69 for(gold). It took me 6 months to do it. And I also photographed each one and made comments on them.

 

And that set is one of the easiest to collect in top sets. I would not have even done the registry on them if I had not got the 5 70's on the first submission. And I am still much fonder of my little gold type set I am building than I ever will be of the AE set.

 

MM

[$ilverHawk]

Mark, I will post the reply I receive from my email to NGC.

 

Carl

 

 

 

 

 

[$ilverHawk]

Here is the initial response from Scott and my reply. The thread starts at the bottom.

 

You’re welcome to post my earlier email (and to call me Scott). I’m running out of the office now, but I should be able to read your email more thoroughly to respond to your questions in the morning. Regards, Scott

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

From: shawdog@bellsouth.net [mailto:shawdog@bellsouth.net]

Sent: Monday, December 14, 2009 4:45 PM

To: Scott Schechter

Subject: Re: Contact form filled out

 

 

 

Mr. Schechter,

 

 

 

Thank you for your quick response. As background, I will direct you to the Collectors Society Chatroom NGC/Numismatic Tangents. The thread is entitled "New #1 set in Morgan Dollars?? by MarkW.

 

 

 

There is effectively no way for NGC to determine true ownership of coins assembled into a Registry Set. Common assumptions would be an individual or family. Descriptions on the web site clearly emphasize the individual collector. I see no problem with true family being included, in fact that is within the spirit of fostering increased awareness in numismatics.

 

 

 

As I read and participated in the online discussion several issues emerged. One, the registrant name was quickly changed from "Stuppler Family of Clients" to "A Client of Barry Stuppler". The second registrant name had existed since September 2009 and contained the top rated St. Gaudens set. So the issue is why the rapid name change? Was it to hide that the coins in the Registry Set were actually owned by several of Mr. Stupplers clients? This set was entered days before the deadline for Registry Awards.

 

 

 

The second issue that comes from the thread was that it seems the direct participation by a large dealer makes for a decidedly lopsided competition, especially if he is using his clients coins to assemble a Registry Set. The recognition in the Registry Awards would go to Barry Stuppler not an individual or family. Are the owner/s of the collection members of the Collectors Society? This behavior violates the spirit of the Registry.

 

 

 

 

 

In regards to the unanswered question for NGC, I have no problem with a group of friends getting together to build a great collection. There are numerous examples of high valued coins and collections having shared ownership. For all we know a great many of the top ranked Registry Sets may in fact have several owners. This does open a Pandora's box--most Registry Award participants operate as individuals. To assemble competitive sets for their own enjoyment and recognition. Going forward are we going to see more collectors getting together and pooling their individual coins to form higher valued Registry Sets? Are we going to see more Dealers actively working with their clients sets to build a single higher valued set?

 

 

 

 

 

The spirit of the Registry is centered around the individual collector. The work and satisfaction that comes with assembling a top rated collection and the knowledge gained along the way. As I see it, at least circumstantially, the set in question violates that spirit.

 

 

 

Scott, I ask your permission to share with my fellow Collectors Society forum participants your email reply. I will not share without your expressed permission.

 

 

 

Sincerely,

 

 

 

Carl Valentovic

 

----- Original Message -----

 

From: Scott Schechter

 

To: Shawdog@bellsouth.net

 

Cc: Amy Lorenzo

 

Sent: Monday, December 14, 2009 1:22 PM

 

Subject: RE: Contact form filled out

 

 

 

Hi Mr. Valentovic:

 

 

 

Although I have not discussed this with Mr. Stuppler directly, I believe that the registrant name, “Stuppler Family of Clients” was chosen because, using this account, he registers competitive sets on behalf of his customers. While sets in different categories belong to separate individuals, I was not aware that multiple owners owned any one single set. I believe that the name was changed to reflect that each set is owned by only one customer.

 

 

 

The Registry seeks to recognize achievement in collecting. At present, there are no formal rules regarding who or what entity may own a set. I am aware that two brothers are actively working together to build competitive Registry sets. There are countless examples where fathers and sons or husbands and wives collect in concert. NGC certainly encourages this type of collecting.

 

 

 

The case that you present suggests that two collectors have been united solely for “Registry glory” and may share no other connection other than buying from the same dealer. NGC certainly would not want to encourage that type of Registry participation. The role of the dealer, in this scenario, appears more important that the role of the collector. Awarding such a set would rightly be objectionable to the majority of collectors participating in the Registry.

 

 

 

Before being assigned a major award to such a set, NGC would need to better understand the circumstances. In the past we awarded a set registered in the name of a family trust—the name suggested pooled assets. The collecting, however, was directed and funded by a single individual.

 

 

 

The unanswered question for NGC, I think, is the case where two friends set out to build a great collection together and their combined resources make it possible for them to build a top-ranked set. What are your thoughts concerning this type of collection?

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

Scott Schechter

 

Vice President, Sales and Marketing

 

Certified Collectibles Group

 

NGC, CGC, PMG and NCS

 

www.collectiblesgroup.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

From: Shawdog@bellsouth.net [mailto:Shawdog@bellsouth.net]

Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2009 12:02 PM

To: NGC Customer Service

Cc: jxie@market-sense.com

Subject: Contact form filled out

 

 

 

Someone filled out the contact us form at http://coins.www.collectors-society.com/ContactUs.aspx

 

Message: Collectors Society, A current thread in one of the chat boards raised an issue that I would like to get clarified. A Registry Set in the Morgan Dollars 1878-1921 was very recently entered as "Stuppler Family of Clients". The set name was then changed to "A Client of Barry Stuppler". On the surface, it appears that this set is from a pooled group of owners--why else would the original name include "Family". Does NGC/Collectors Society encourage the pooling of individual collections into a single registry set for competitive purposes? Is the concept of the Registry Awards to recognize the coins of an individual owner or multiple owners?

 

Submission Date: 12/12/2009

 

Name: Carl Valentovic

Email: Shawdog@bellsouth.net

Address: 14537 72nd Court North

 

[MarkFeld]

Thanks Carl. Hopefully you feel better about the situation it now, even though it is not crystal clear.