Is this new slab label a good idea?

[Keigwin]

What are your thoughts?

Lance.

 

Top 100 modern coins

[jesbroken]

No, what's the point and what if the ranking changes? Just more titles to drive up prices.

Jim

[coinman_23885]

What are your thoughts?

Lance.

 

Top 100 modern coins

 

I find the label distracting; it looks like some of the junk sold on QVC (no throw off to NGC).

[mrkim-migration]

Will it make a difference in price of the coin?

[physics-fan3.14]

Its marketing, pure and simple. Just like the early release and first day slabs. I don't like it, think its distracting, and would not pay a premium for it. Coinman, it certainly does look like junk that would be sold on QVC, because that's what it is. Its a marketing ploy to try and sell more. NGC is a company, and I can certainly understand marketing to make a profit - that's their job.

 

And because this is NGC, I can say that.

[HiHoAudio]

It may attract new collectors, however I am old and don't really care for it.

[James_OldeTowne]

I think it's awfully silly. But I also think that every one of those "100 Greatest" books are awful and silly, and are utter garbage, with no numismatic value whatsoever. How absurd to rank coins in terms of greatness, as if two people in a hundred would assign the same ranking!

 

Does anyone actually BUY those books?? I have a couple only because they were given to me, and they are so worthless that I have them boxed and put away. Seriously, I should just throw them away, but don't want to fill up valuable landfill space. Those books are the most worthless, ridiculous waste of perfectly good trees in the history of numismatics. I am not joking. You can guess what I'd think of a slab that references such nonsense.

[Vistula-migration]

I personally don't care for the look of it. I gives it a cheaper look.

But as a newbie, I'm confused with the amount of labels that already exist.

[Schatzy]

Now are they going to make 100 greatest set!!

[bsshog40]

I agree, makes the slab look cheezy & slab looks distracting. What if the numbers change, would this then turn into an error slab or a venue for a seller to hurry and off-load it if this coin happens to drop off the list. Statistics always change, but to put a permanent statistic on a slab I think is a mistake.

[cpm9ball]

I think it's awfully silly. But I also think that every one of those "100 Greatest" books are awful and silly, and are utter garbage, with no numismatic value whatsoever. How absurd to rank coins in terms of greatness, as if two people in a hundred would assign the same ranking!

 

Does anyone actually BUY those books?? I have a couple only because they were given to me, and they are so worthless that I have them boxed and put away. Seriously, I should just throw them away, but don't want to fill up valuable landfill space. Those books are the most worthless, ridiculous waste of perfectly good trees in the history of numismatics. I am not joking. You can guess what I'd think of a slab that references such nonsense.

 

I agree with James completely. It would have about as much value as a book written about The 100 Greatest Doritos Chips of All Time.

 

Chris

[James_OldeTowne]

I agree with James completely. It would have about as much value as a book written about The 100 Greatest Doritos Chips of All Time.

Yep. Or, The 100 Greatest Nose Grease Thumb Jobs.

 

I HATE these stupid attempts at ranking things that are so nebulous as to defy definition. They don't even define what criteria were used to evaluate "greatness".

[cpm9ball]

I agree with James completely. It would have about as much value as a book written about The 100 Greatest Doritos Chips of All Time.

Yep. Or, The 100 Greatest Nose Grease Thumb Jobs.

 

I HATE these stupid attempts at ranking things that are so nebulous as to defy definition. They don't even define what criteria were used to evaluate "greatness".

 

It's just someone's attempt to make a living writing books about things people don't care to know unless a book is written about it. I wouldn't be surprised if this author chose to write a book about the "100 Greatest Coins Sold on Coin Vault".

 

Chris

[dimefreak]

I actually thought it was kind of cool.Although, the label is kind of cheesy it will be cool to have all100. I cant wait to see where the 1996W Dime ranks!

[physics-fan3.14]

I'll agree, most of the "100 greatest" books are really dumb. The rankings are completely arbitrary. However, I do enjoy the "100 greatest errors" book that I won in the trivia contest. The rankings are ridiculous, but the descriptions and photographs are really awesome, and the coins themselves are very cool. I can't imagine that 100 modern coins would hold my interest much past the introduction. What a useless book.

[Conder101]

I put these into the Novelty slab catagory.

[michael]

good marketing tool

 

but not for me as if it was my coin i dont want this little box thing in the upper right hand corner of the ngc tag

 

 

[Scott_Schechter]

I agree with James completely. It would have about as much value as a book written about The 100 Greatest Doritos Chips of All Time.

Yep. Or, The 100 Greatest Nose Grease Thumb Jobs.

 

I HATE these stupid attempts at ranking things that are so nebulous as to defy definition. They don't even define what criteria were used to evaluate "greatness".

 

It's just someone's attempt to make a living writing books about things people don't care to know unless a book is written about it. I wouldn't be surprised if this author chose to write a book about the "100 Greatest Coins Sold on Coin Vault".

 

Chris

 

Since I co-authored this book with Jeff Garrett, I'm happy to share some observations. And for those of you who don't know me, I have a sense of humor and this thread had me rolling (although I might ban some of you from the boards ).

 

This book definitely wasn't written for the money. Although the 100 Greatest books are among the best-selling of all numismatic books, I really don't think I could earn a living on the proceeds from 100 Greatest U.S. Modern Coins or by writing similar books.

 

The notion of greatness may be a bit nebulous but it's not arbitrary. As dimefreak wrote, it's obvious to him that the 1996-W deserves a place on the the list and a good ranking. (It's number 21.) We certainly tried to describe the criteria in the introduction and then to relate each coin to this in its own entry.

 

Since modern coinage is such a significant part of the coin industry, the few books written about modern coins is a palpable paucity. We're quick to associate these coins with Coin Vault in part because they are the most visible and public champions of these coins, but also because most of us don't know much about modern coins. We couldn't read books to learn more if we wanted to -- they really just don't exist.

 

Jeff and I both felt that the 100 Greatest format would be great for modern coins because it allowed us to cover the full spectrum from circulating coins, to commems, to bullion... We also thought that it would be a great "jumping off" point for discussion of these coins. While someone else's ranking may be of limited value, any ranking is a great way to generate discussion about these coins -- and from that standpoint we believe this work has legitimate numismatic merit. The text of the book is meant to be engaging and informative as well, and I know you'll agree once you've read it.

 

As far as NGC's label goes, it looks really neat in hand. A few of the dealers that Jeff and I spoke with when we were compiling the list of the 100 greatest suggested the label to me. They said it would be a really fun way for their customers to collect these coins. When I shared the label concept with my colleagues at NGC, we all liked it.