Report that NGC registry is changing its policy for future sets?

[CSdot]

http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=907605

 

There is a report over at collectors universe that "NGC Chairman Mark Salzberg told FUN attendees today at the NGC luncheon that all future NGC registries will be restricted to NGC-graded coins only."

 

I couldn't make it to FUN this year, so I can't confirm the above quote.

[physics-fan3.14]

Yes, it is true that he said that.

 

Hopefully, there will be such an outcry from the collectors that we can change Mark's mind.

 

I am STRONGLY opposed to this idea. I think it is a terrible idea. The whole reason that I enjoy and participate in the NGC registry is because I can add my PCGS and NGC coins to it - and that is why I am loyal to NGC. If NGC changes this policy, I really have no reason to be loyal to either company.

 

Mark - hear the pleas of your collectors: DO NOT DO THIS!

[wdrob]

Yes, it is true that he said that.

 

Hopefully, there will be such an outcry from the collectors that we can change Mark's mind.

 

I am STRONGLY opposed to this idea. I think it is a terrible idea. The whole reason that I enjoy and participate in the NGC registry is because I can add my PCGS and NGC coins to it - and that is why I am loyal to NGC. If NGC changes this policy, I really have no reason to be loyal to either company.

 

Mark - hear the pleas of your collectors: DO NOT DO THIS!

 

x2

 

I always thought NGC's position was that people collect COINS and not SLABS, and for this reason they allowed PCGS Certified coins to be in the registry. If they go through with this change then that, in my opinion, just goes further to demonstrate that the TPG's could care less about coin collecting and more about slab collecting.

 

 

 

 

[RWB]

It’s a reasonable business decision, but….

 

This will only emphasize the divisions between NGC and PCGS. Sorry to see the increased polarization - there seems to be enough business for both companies.

 

[Coinbuf]

First and foremost before everyone is calling out the linchmob keep in mind that this policy is for future, lets say that again FUTURE sets. All the current sets are unaffected by this and really just how many new US coin sets are created each year. This will only affect any new design (perhaps the qtr after the ATB program) or denominations and specialty coins that the mint puts out for revenue purposes. I think the current situation where registry awards are given out for overall and only NGC coins was perfect, but I really do not see this as a big "change" to current registry members and do not see it as a threat in any way.

 

Registry competition is fun and it also provides a very nice organized place to keep track of the coins and approx valuations of ones collection. If NGC restricted all sets to NGC only that would be a change that would upset many. Personaly I hate to see sets with only PCGS coins on the NGC registry and am a big supporter of the NGC only awards that are given out.

[CSdot]

I am curious to know the rationale behind the corporate decision to make all future sets (presumably those set options that are not currently on the list of registry sets a collector can choose) NCG only?

 

I am glad the change is not applicable to my existing sets, and like other here have stated, I appreciate the ability to participate in a registry that allows coins graded by both companies.

[dimefreak]

Congrats to NGC! I feel its a wise move... As long as collectors showcase stays NGC or pcgs

[jpcienkus]

Yes, it is true that he said that.

 

Hopefully, there will be such an outcry from the collectors that we can change Mark's mind.

 

I am STRONGLY opposed to this idea. I think it is a terrible idea. The whole reason that I enjoy and participate in the NGC registry is because I can add my PCGS and NGC coins to it - and that is why I am loyal to NGC. If NGC changes this policy, I really have no reason to be loyal to either company.

 

Mark - hear the pleas of your collectors: DO NOT DO THIS!

 

+2

 

Couldn't have typed it better myself. I don't like the restrictive policies of PCGS and I thought NGC was more accommodating. I hope Mark does read this thread.

[CSdot]

NGC has a button you can push so that your NGC set is ranked only as to NGC graded coins. I don't use that feature, but the ability is there for those folks who want their sets to compete on the basis of NGC graded coins only. The fact that the NGC only feature is already there is another reason why yesterday's news came as a surprise.

[Tradedollarnut]

It's fine .... at least it's more clearcut. No need to wonder any more why a great set doesn't get recognition.

[Tyler N.]

One of the reasons I chose NGC over PCGS is because I can buy whatever coin I like and not worry about the plastic its in (for registry purposes).

 

Is there an independent registry? One not affiliated with any grading companies, has a large following/many users, and only accepts NGC and PCGS coins? When HA was auctioning the domain name "numismatics.com" I was thinking how great of an idea it'd be if someone started an independent registry that had all of the features/discussion we enjoy here and ATS.

[mtnstyne]

One of the reasons I chose NGC over PCGS is because I can buy whatever coin I like and not worry about the plastic its in (for registry purposes).

 

+1

 

I am not sure I agree with the thought that this is a wise business decision. I chose the NGC registry because it allows for both PCGS and NGC coins.

 

If I have to chose between one or the other I would likely focus a lot more on PCGS coins and I think it will increase the spread on NGC coin values. Granted I am just a small time collector, but I for one would hate the decision.

 

Yes they say on future sets but that can change at the drop of a hat.

[Tyler N.]

I am not sure I agree with the thought that this is a wise business decision. I chose the NGC registry because it allows for both PCGS and NGC coins.

 

Agreed that it's not a sound business decision. It was just one of the many factors I considered.

An independent registry would be ideal.

[wdrob]

 

First and foremost before everyone is calling out the linchmob keep in mind that this policy is for future, lets say that again FUTURE sets.

 

Why does this make it a conciliatory approach? Maybe I do not clearly understand what you mean by saying "Future Sets".

 

If you are saying that it will only pertain to an existing competitive registry set that I create - after - this policy were to go into effect then it would still leave a collector in the position of only being able to search for a coin to fill a slot in their set to NGC, even though there maybe a much better (at the same grade) example available in a PCGS slab.

 

It would essentially force someone to buy the slab instead of possibly the best coin for the money, unless they are willing to routinely pay the fees to cross over a coin. I do not see how this is good at all.

 

 

[joeyuk]

I guess they liked the test run they did on world sets being NGC exclusive. This made sense to me because I am very focused on an area of world coins and have seen many coins side by side of the same grade and the NGC coins were nicer and sold for more.

On U.S. coins it seems PCGS coins of same grade sell for more then NGC for the most part. You also have to consider the designations like 5 or 6 steps to be full step for nickels or what makes full bell lines. Another aspect is at/nt with PCGS having the "sniffer" for PCGS Secure holdered coins.

So I guess it is not an apples to apples thing so perhaps the registries should be separate. My world coins will be crossed eventually to NGC because they will be more marketable.

[Crruisercharlie]

I must be a minority of 1. I've been exclusively NGC since 2006. I've always wondered why there were PCGS coins here anyway. PCGS has their own Registry and people can list their PCGS coins there. Going to NGC coins only seems like a good idea to me.

[mkman123]

I think this is a good idea but an alternative for what they can do is let those who have over 51% PCGS coins in the registry be ineligible for awards. Makes no sense for a set to have 100% pcgs coins win a award.

[CSdot]

I think this is a good idea but an alternative for what they can do is let those who have over 51% PCGS coins in the registry be ineligible for awards. Makes no sense for a set to have 100% pcgs coins win a award.

 

I agree that it makes no sense for the NGC registry to award top prize to a set with 100% PCGS coins. Whether the same should be true for sets with PCGS slabbed coins totaling 90% or 75% or even 51% is worth discussion as well.

[Tradedollarnut]

What was the highest % PCGS to win a top award this year? Ever?

 

Trust me, there's already an unwritten rule ...

[CSdot]

What was the highest % PCGS to win a top award this year? Ever?

 

Trust me, there's already an unwritten rule ...

 

First two I checked just now are in the Saint Gaudens Double Eagle series.

 

Zeus Holdings was awarded 1st Place for 2013 in both the 1 per year series and the full set category. I am sure he has beautiful sets, but both sets are 100% PCGS.

 

http://coins.www.collectors-society.com/registry/coins/SetListing.aspx?PeopleSetID=117300&Ranking=all

 

http://coins.www.collectors-society.com/registry/coins/SetListing.aspx?PeopleSetID=133817&Ranking=all

 

Honestly I'd rather see a requirement that those competing for a prize must post photos than a requirement that they be 100% NGC.

[Tradedollarnut]

That's a best in category - means nothing. The top awards are best classic sets and best modern sets

 

A quick glance at the five top classic set winners reveals that three of them are 100% NGC and the other two are appx 75-80% NGC [that's a wag just from absorbing the look of the various cert #s ... I did NOT calculate it]

[BillJones]

My view is that this is a very anti collector move. It will not enhance NGC's image, and probably decrease my participation.

 

I buy coins, not holders. At the FUN show I spent almost $12,000 at the auction on two coins. That's not much by some people's standards, but both coins were NGC graded. I buy both brands depending upon which coin I prefer. I have spent time ATS urging collectors to look at both brands and keep NGC viable in the U.S. Coin market. If I can't use the registry to build sets with both brands, I will not bother with the registry

[A.Phillips]

I am standing on top of thin edge between bad idea or good idea about the NGC new policy because some of you on this post got the good points. If the policy for NGC registry has changed, we may lost some buddies (PCGS owners) who tend to come in on this forum to show us their coins or talking in general with us. As I said that some of you got the points: NGC still give an award to winner who has 100% PCGS in his/her set, which it makes no sense. I assume that some collectors or investors rather to collect the PCGS because PCGS is more valuable than NGC (price guide). NGC or PCGS holder doesn't matter to me, I just want to collect them and keep it.

 

P.S. Please excuse my grammar (English is my second language).

 

[Coinbuf]

First and foremost before everyone is calling out the linchmob keep in mind that this policy is for future, lets say that again FUTURE sets.

 

Why does this make it a conciliatory approach? Maybe I do not clearly understand what you mean by saying "Future Sets".

 

If you are saying that it will only pertain to an existing competitive registry set that I create - after - this policy were to go into effect then it would still leave a collector in the position of only being able to search for a coin to fill a slot in their set to NGC, even though there maybe a much better (at the same grade) example available in a PCGS slab.

 

It would essentially force someone to buy the slab instead of possibly the best coin for the money, unless they are willing to routinely pay the fees to cross over a coin. I do not see how this is good at all.

 

 

Baised on what I have read about this (I was not at FUN so I am only making interpertations baised on what has been posted) this change will not affect any of the hundreds (thousands?) of sets that are currently in use. But rather will only pertain to newly defined sets, as an example; whatever the design for qtr's will be after the ATB series finishes would be a new registry and would then be under this new NGC only restriction. But because the Lincoln 1909 - 1958 registry is already availible any new set could be started without requiring NGC only coins.

 

So as I said I really only see this as impacting new designs and/or new speciality coins that would be released by the mint in the future and has no impact on any of the already defined sets in the registry. It would seem that many are thinking that if say next year that you decide to start a Washington qtr set (1932-1964) it would now have to be NGC only, and I am saying that I do not beleive this to be the way it will work. So before everyone breaks out their pitchforks I think it would smart to wait untill a full announcement is made that fully outlines how this new policy will affect the currently defined registry going forward.

 

Overall I prefer the current system where NGC gives awards baised on a combined set score and one baised on NGC coins only. This gives recognition to both. It's also important to keep in mind that it is the NGC registry not the backup PCGS registry, perhaps NGC feels that this move will strenghten their brand in the marketplace.

[wdrob]

Thank you for that clarification on what you understand it to be. I hope that is indeed the case. I see that position as being a reasonable one, and one I could live with just fine. The pre existing sets suit my collecting goals very well.

 

 

 

 

[copper toning]

Glad I collect coins

 

And do not bother with the registry

 

Collectors and the market will do what they will just collect quality coins for your money and don't worry

[mkman123]

Maybe NGC could do something on their registry set that you cannot add more than 49% PCGS coins on a registry set. So if the lincoln reg set has 100 holes in there, if you already added 49 PCGS coins, you can't add anymore. The rest needs to be NGC. It still allows PCGS but to a limited degree. Look at it this way, PCGS registry allows 0 NGC coins.

 

A analogy could be imagine going to Burger King and buying nothing but bringing in your mcdonalds food there and eating it, not cool at all.

[jpcienkus]

My view is that this is a very anti collector move. It will not enhance NGC's image, and probably decrease my participation.

 

I buy coins, not holders. At the FUN show I spent almost $12,000 at the auction on two coins. That's not much by some people's standards, but both coins were NGC graded. I buy both brands depending upon which coin I prefer. I have spent time ATS urging collectors to look at both brands and keep NGC viable in the U.S. Coin market. If I can't use the registry to build sets with both brands, I will not bother with the registry

 

Can you take a few minutes to expound your thoughts on this subject? I'm interested to get your opinion/thoughts on this as I'm still learning.

 

I know that PCGS coins typically sell for more than NGC graded coins, but I've been trying to examine the coin and determine whether I want it or not, regardless of the holder (PCGS or NGC).

[CSdot]

Last year it was the World coin collectors only and we were upset, but let it pass since it did not affect us directly. This year it is only applicable to collectors of future sets and we are upset, but some are already saying they can live with it because it doesn't affect us directly. Next year, when the final piece of the plan is in place and only NGC slabbed coins are allowed, we will be upset because it will affect us directly.

 

Give it some thought.

[messydesk]

Eventually, a company like Heritage will develop a registry and attract participants from here and ATS.