Questions about the history of slabs and ACG

[mark]

I posted this thread across the street, but because there is a somewhat different set of collectors on this side of the street, I thought I'd post here, too. Plus threads over there are buried so fast, I hope that I might get more responses here. So, here goes:

 

Actually, these questions might be more about the history of slabbing companies. First off, though, let me preface this question with the comment that I was not collecting when slabbing companies were first emerging and so some of my "facts" might well be wrong. So, PLEASE correct any of my errors.

 

My understanding is that ACG (the Hagers) were the first to develop the concept of the encapsulated graded coin. Other groups encapsulated coins (the government with its GSA dollars) and other groups graded coins (ANACS with grade opinions and pictures of the coin) but ACG put both concepts together. It also is my understanding that PCGS paid ACG some money for the right to be able to encapsulate and grade coins.

 

OK, now my questions: Is it indeed the case that PCGS paid ACG money for these rights? What rights did PCGS buy? IF PCGS did pay money, did any of the other numerous slabbing companies ever pay ACG money for these rights? If not, how did they avoid paying money?

 

By the way, these questions have no bearing whatsoever about the current lawsuit involving ACG and many numismatists. My only comment on that lawsuit is that I have purchased only coins encapuslated by PCGS and NGC.

 

Thanks in advance for the insights any of you oldtimers ( ) can offer about the beginning history of slabbing companies.

 

Mark

[TomB]

I believe your recollections are essentially correct. There is a book on the history of slabs that has been published by a member of the NGC and PCGS boards, though he rarely posts at NGC. His name is Conder101 and he may have some copies of his book left.

[mark]

TomB:

 

I have that book and have read it. It's a good book--I strongly recommend it. But it doesn't answer all the questions I posed. In particular, I do not recall that it tells why other companies did not have to pay ACG. And this is a point that I have been wondering about.

 

Mark

[Dry]

It is my understanding that PCGS bought the rights for that particular holder, not the rights for slabbing coins.

[mark]

Dry:

 

Over on the other side of the street, David Hall posted "PCGS did not pay ACG or anyone anything for the coin holder idea...which had been used by Paramount for Redfield dollars in the 1970s and I guess you could even say the GSA for CC dollars earlier." Now I realize that he is perhaps not universally loved amongst posters on this side of the street, nonetheless I think his statement is interesting.

 

Mark