• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

New PCGS contract

104 posts in this topic

Seems the dealer could easily get around the contract by setting up a side LLC either in his name or his wife's or kid's name to handle the stickering of coins. That way Dealer entity #1 is compliant, while entity #2 is free to do as it pleases as it is not subject to the PCGS agreement.

 

I think PCGS would be smart enough to see through it in about 2 seconds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems the dealer could easily get around the contract by setting up a side LLC either in his name or his wife's or kid's name to handle the stickering of coins. That way Dealer entity #1 is compliant, while entity #2 is free to do as it pleases as it is not subject to the PCGS agreement.

 

I think PCGS would be smart enough to see through it in about 2 seconds.

 

Not all wives carry their husband's last name; thus, PCGS wouldn't really be suspicious enough to search public records (or do you think I am underestimating them)?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect their purpose is to protect their brand integrity. This can be a very big issue for a company that has invested years of effort in establishing their own brand. To have that compromised by anyone, for any reason, could cost PCGS credibility = money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can certainly see how CAC/PQ/Snow or anyone else that grades the graders can hurt not only PCGS but also NGC.

 

Ive heard there are some people that no longer want just PCGS coins - they only want PCGS coins that are CAC approved. If thats true and that sentiment grows that will certainly erode PCGS's market share.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems the dealer could easily get around the contract by setting up a side LLC either in his name or his wife's or kid's name to handle the stickering of coins. That way Dealer entity #1 is compliant, while entity #2 is free to do as it pleases as it is not subject to the PCGS agreement.

 

I think PCGS would be smart enough to see through it in about 2 seconds.

 

Not all wives carry their husband's last name; thus, PCGS wouldn't really be suspicious enough to search public records (or do you think I am underestimating them)?

 

 

Regardless of how a separate entity is set up to skirt the contact provisions, if a dealer ends up with a lot of stickers on his holders, he will eventually be closely scrutinized.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is like Ford controlling its Authorized Ford Dealers. I can put a bumper sticker on my Ford but my Authorized Ford Dealer can't. If I sell my PCGS slab to a PCGS dealer, does he or she have to remove the sticker? What if it's a CAC sticker?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of how a separate entity is set up to skirt the contact provisions, if a dealer ends up with a lot of stickers on his holders, he will eventually be closely scrutinized.

 

I can see it now... the CAC police doing rounds at coin shows looking in dealer's cases for little stickers. Dealers hiding the CAC stickers on the back of the coin so as not to get busted...

 

Stickereasy coin shops opening up in cities all over the US to get around the sticker prohibition... passwords needed to get in... an underground distribution chain to trade in illegal CAC/PCGS coins...

 

lol... Who would be the Al Capone of coins ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I spoke with one of the state's leading dealers, Mr. Harold Kritzman, who was behind the "full split bands" designation on Mercury dimes, and other such designations, regarding the PCGS contract today in person and he was concerned about how the contract says that dealers can't quibble with whether such designations are accurate or not but that such coins are required to be re-submitted under the guarantee provision if there is a concern. If someone could provide a link to the new contract it would be clearer what he was talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ive heard there are some people that no longer want just PCGS coins - they only want PCGS coins that are CAC approved. If thats true and that sentiment grows that will certainly erode PCGS's market share.

I've heard and/or read such claims as well. However, I have talked to literally hundreds upon hundreds of active collectors in just the last six months, and not even a single one has ever told me they will buy only coins with some kind of "approval" sticker.

 

That there is some tiny little segment out there that does demand stickers, I am sure.

 

On a side note, there ARE collectors who say they will buy ONLY certified coins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I sell my PCGS slab to a PCGS dealer, does he or she have to remove the sticker? What if it's a CAC sticker?

The rule says the dealer can't affix a label to the slab, it says nothing about having to remove stickers that are on the slab when he buys it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I sell my PCGS slab to a PCGS dealer, does he or she have to remove the sticker? What if it's a CAC sticker?

The rule says the dealer can't affix a label to the slab, it says nothing about having to remove stickers that are on the slab when he buys it.

So the ones who bought them with the labels modifying or refining the grade on the slab are at an advantage over the ones who didn't buy them with the labels modifying or refining the grade on the slab. In that case, I bought mine with the labels modifying or refining the grade on the slab.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I looked but I couldnt find a thread ATS about this issue...

 

Is anyone ATS even discussing this ? It seems to me it would be a huge issue for the cool-aid drinkers and the CAC lovers...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rest assured, this is about money.

Please elaborate.

It's simple. These stickers on their holders dilute their trademark.

 

How does it effect their trademark ? I agree its about PCGS losing money but how to you attribute that to the trademark being damaged as opposed to a loss of regrading fees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rest assured, this is about money.

Please elaborate.

It's simple. These stickers on their holders dilute their trademark.

How does it effect their trademark ? I agree its about PCGS losing money but how to you attribute that to the trademark being damaged as opposed to a loss of regrading fees.

Well sure it does. Take a PQ dealer sticker. Better still, take a CAC sticker. How long do you think it's going to be before collectors start looking for those on the slabs, expecting them? If the slab doesn't have a PQ dealer sticker or a CAC sticker, there's something wrong with the grade, right? They've already got collectors believing if the coin is "uncertified," there's something wrong. Think about it. That's watering down their trademark. It's not as strong as it once was. It can't stand on its own. It needs an assist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Additionally, the owner of the CAC'd or PQ'd or EagleEye'd coin might be less likely to send the coin to PCGS for a regrade (hence the loss of revenue to PCGS) because the sticker adds its own value, and why lose that for the chance to get an upgrade? This is especially true where CAC only issues its green bean sticker, but I the market seems to pay extra for a gold sticker, so I suspect most don't want to lose those to a regrade either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a novice collector I wonder how many stickers will be available in a few years from companies trying to replicate CAC's (apparent) success in increasing coin values?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Additionally, the owner of the CAC'd or PQ'd or EagleEye'd coin might be less likely to send the coin to PCGS for a regrade (hence the loss of revenue to PCGS) because the sticker adds its own value, and why lose that for the chance to get an upgrade? This is especially true where CAC only issues its green bean sticker, but I the market seems to pay extra for a gold sticker, so I suspect most don't want to lose those to a regrade either.

I didn't get it the first time around when TonerGuy mentioned it, but I get it, now. I guess that's a big reason, too, for sure.

 

As a novice collector I wonder how many stickers will be available in a few years from companies trying to replicate CAC's (apparent) success in increasing coin values?

I wouldn't doubt it. The TPGs ought to make smaller slabs, that way they cut down on the number of stickers that can fit, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ode to a slab with a sticker..........................

 

why oh why does this teeny tiny little piece of sticky paper bother you sooooo much?

 

tender slab

 

is there a problem :devil:

 

are you worried that one specific ms65, xf45, ms63, pr66, dcampr64, fine12 au55 is (MUCH) different from another specific coin of the same grade hm

 

should it even have been holdered at all :makepoint:

 

please dont fret or worry over differing quality and eye appeal within a specific grade

 

just do the right thing and buy back all the problematic/off-quality holdered coins

 

be gentle with collectors; they want a fair shot too

 

be more careful/CONSISTENT in grading and REGRADES/MAXING OUT COINS IN HOLDERS; spend more time with certain more harder to evaluate/expensive coins

 

 

 

this way you will have much less liability and not fret about sticker service's evaulating slabs for quality within a grade/rejecting coins that dont meet approval

 

the rabbit is now out of the hat and the mess is just starting to hit the fan.................................................

 

please try to do the right thing....................................................................

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well sure it does. Take a PQ dealer sticker. Better still, take a CAC sticker. How long do you think it's going to be before collectors start looking for those on the slabs, expecting them? If the slab doesn't have a PQ dealer sticker or a CAC sticker, there's something wrong with the grade, right? They've already got collectors believing if the coin is "uncertified," there's something wrong. Think about it. That's watering down their trademark. It's not as strong as it once was. It can't stand on its own. It needs an assist.

 

I see your point. Its tenuous at best though. What you are referring to is dilution and usually the infringer has to be using the protected TM or something very similar to it for it be considered dilution. A PQ or CAC sticker is not similar enough to PCGS though.

 

There's nothing that says a competitor cannot purposefully damage your trademark by offering a superior service or product. Thats just plain'ole competition. And that is exactly why PCGS changed their dealer contract - to avoid the situation you just pointed out.

 

That horse is already out of the barn and I dont think PCGS can put her back in. The issue now becomes how does NGC handle this. Do they follow PCGS lead or do they welcome the opportunity to for more submissions ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just do not understand the whole sticker thing. The price says more about what the

 

seller feels about the grade. Which has a higher value a 66 with a gold bean or a 67 with no bean,

 

A 66 with a green bean or a 66 + ?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This no PQ sticker clause was in their old contract that I signed 6+ years ago. It also had a clause that said dealers can't promote one style of slab over another as being special or some wording that basically was "don't say old slabs are more conservatively graded".

 

I highly doubt that PCGS has ever enforced this provision. It's really stupid for a company to drive their customers away, especially over something so meaningless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This no PQ sticker clause was in their old contract that I signed 6+ years ago. It also had a clause that said dealers can't promote one style of slab over another as being special or some wording that basically was "don't say old slabs are more conservatively graded".

 

I highly doubt that PCGS has ever enforced this provision. It's really stupid for a company to drive their customers away, especially over something so meaningless.

 

Ahhh so this has all been much to do about nuthin' !!! Okay well nothing to see here I guess...

 

Moving on....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well sure it does. Take a PQ dealer sticker. Better still, take a CAC sticker. How long do you think it's going to be before collectors start looking for those on the slabs, expecting them? If the slab doesn't have a PQ dealer sticker or a CAC sticker, there's something wrong with the grade, right? They've already got collectors believing if the coin is "uncertified," there's something wrong. Think about it. That's watering down their trademark. It's not as strong as it once was. It can't stand on its own. It needs an assist.

I see your point. Its tenuous at best though. What you are referring to is dilution and usually the infringer has to be using the protected TM or something very similar to it for it be considered dilution. A PQ or CAC sticker is not similar enough to PCGS though.

 

There's nothing that says a competitor cannot purposefully damage your trademark by offering a superior service or product. Thats just plain'ole competition. And that is exactly why PCGS changed their dealer contract - to avoid the situation you just pointed out.

 

That horse is already out of the barn and I dont think PCGS can put her back in. The issue now becomes how does NGC handle this. Do they follow PCGS lead or do they welcome the opportunity to for more submissions ?

Ah, I don't know. Think of it like this. It used to be a PCGS slab. Now, it's a CAC slab. Isn't that how the public sees it? Or, it's an Eagle Eye slab. And we haven't even yet addressed that second component of dilution, namely, tarnishment, by virtue of that QUACK sticker on the slab. And why limit it to just those two or three stickers? What about ten stickers? How important, then, is PCGS on that slab? Then, the placement of the stickers. That PQ dealer sticker is covering up a part of PCGS. No, it's actually covering up the whole thing! The value of the PCGS mark is being diminished by these stickers hitching a ride on the slab. If I'm PCGS, I don't think I like that a lot. CAC, get your own slab. This slab is the single-source identifier of PCGS. Period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well sure it does. Take a PQ dealer sticker. Better still, take a CAC sticker. How long do you think it's going to be before collectors start looking for those on the slabs, expecting them? If the slab doesn't have a PQ dealer sticker or a CAC sticker, there's something wrong with the grade, right? They've already got collectors believing if the coin is "uncertified," there's something wrong. Think about it. That's watering down their trademark. It's not as strong as it once was. It can't stand on its own. It needs an assist.

I see your point. Its tenuous at best though. What you are referring to is dilution and usually the infringer has to be using the protected TM or something very similar to it for it be considered dilution. A PQ or CAC sticker is not similar enough to PCGS though.

 

There's nothing that says a competitor cannot purposefully damage your trademark by offering a superior service or product. Thats just plain'ole competition. And that is exactly why PCGS changed their dealer contract - to avoid the situation you just pointed out.

 

That horse is already out of the barn and I dont think PCGS can put her back in. The issue now becomes how does NGC handle this. Do they follow PCGS lead or do they welcome the opportunity to for more submissions ?

Ah, I don't know. Think of it like this. It used to be a PCGS slab. Now, it's a CAC slab. Isn't that how the public sees it? Or, it's an Eagle Eye slab. And we haven't even yet addressed that second component of dilution, namely, tarnishment, by virtue of that QUACK sticker on the slab. And why limit it to just those two or three stickers? What about ten stickers? How important, then, is PCGS on that slab? Then, the placement of the stickers. That PQ dealer sticker is covering up a part of PCGS. No, it's actually covering up the whole thing! The value of the PCGS mark is being diminished by these stickers hitching a ride on the slab. If I'm PCGS, I don't think I like that a lot. CAC, get your own slab. This slab is the single-source identifier of PCGS. Period.

 

The slab which is being covered up belongs to the coin's owner, not to PCGS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well sure it does. Take a PQ dealer sticker. Better still, take a CAC sticker. How long do you think it's going to be before collectors start looking for those on the slabs, expecting them? If the slab doesn't have a PQ dealer sticker or a CAC sticker, there's something wrong with the grade, right? They've already got collectors believing if the coin is "uncertified," there's something wrong. Think about it. That's watering down their trademark. It's not as strong as it once was. It can't stand on its own. It needs an assist.

I see your point. Its tenuous at best though. What you are referring to is dilution and usually the infringer has to be using the protected TM or something very similar to it for it be considered dilution. A PQ or CAC sticker is not similar enough to PCGS though.

 

There's nothing that says a competitor cannot purposefully damage your trademark by offering a superior service or product. Thats just plain'ole competition. And that is exactly why PCGS changed their dealer contract - to avoid the situation you just pointed out.

 

That horse is already out of the barn and I dont think PCGS can put her back in. The issue now becomes how does NGC handle this. Do they follow PCGS lead or do they welcome the opportunity to for more submissions ?

Ah, I don't know. Think of it like this. It used to be a PCGS slab. Now, it's a CAC slab. Isn't that how the public sees it? Or, it's an Eagle Eye slab. And we haven't even yet addressed that second component of dilution, namely, tarnishment, by virtue of that QUACK sticker on the slab. And why limit it to just those two or three stickers? What about ten stickers? How important, then, is PCGS on that slab? Then, the placement of the stickers. That PQ dealer sticker is covering up a part of PCGS. No, it's actually covering up the whole thing! The value of the PCGS mark is being diminished by these stickers hitching a ride on the slab. If I'm PCGS, I don't think I like that a lot. CAC, get your own slab. This slab is the single-source identifier of PCGS. Period.

The slab which is being covered up belongs to the coin's owner, not to PCGS.

And when it's in one of your auctions and being offered to the public as a CAC or an Eagle Eye or a QUACK slab, it still belongs to the owner, and the intellectual property issues are still there, you just don't see them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, I don't know. Think of it like this. It used to be a PCGS slab. Now, it's a CAC slab. Isn't that how the public sees it? Or, it's an Eagle Eye slab. And we haven't even yet addressed that second component of dilution, namely, tarnishment, by virtue of that QUACK sticker on the slab. And why limit it to just those two or three stickers? What about ten stickers? How important, then, is PCGS on that slab? Then, the placement of the stickers. That PQ dealer sticker is covering up a part of PCGS. No, it's actually covering up the whole thing! The value of the PCGS mark is being diminished by these stickers hitching a ride on the slab. If I'm PCGS, I don't think I like that a lot. CAC, get your own slab. This slab is the single-source identifier of PCGS. Period.

 

Can you show me some case law that supports your decision. Im not saying your wrong, I just dont know of a case that would support such a claim under dilution or tarnishment.

 

I get what you're saying. I dont disagree on the legal issue, I just dont think it rises to the level of being actionable under the Lanham Act. I would prefer this case as an unfair business practice cause of action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, I don't know. Think of it like this. It used to be a PCGS slab. Now, it's a CAC slab. Isn't that how the public sees it? Or, it's an Eagle Eye slab. And we haven't even yet addressed that second component of dilution, namely, tarnishment, by virtue of that QUACK sticker on the slab. And why limit it to just those two or three stickers? What about ten stickers? How important, then, is PCGS on that slab? Then, the placement of the stickers. That PQ dealer sticker is covering up a part of PCGS. No, it's actually covering up the whole thing! The value of the PCGS mark is being diminished by these stickers hitching a ride on the slab. If I'm PCGS, I don't think I like that a lot. CAC, get your own slab. This slab is the single-source identifier of PCGS. Period.

Can you show me some case law that supports your decision. Im not saying your wrong, I just dont know of a case that would support such a claim under dilution or tarnishment.

 

I get what you're saying. I dont disagree on the legal issue, I just dont think it rises to the level of being actionable under the Lanham Act. I would prefer this case as an unfair business practice cause of action.

I hope I don't sound too greedy, TonerGuy, but I'm accustomed to getting paid when I go into that kind of detail. I know, I know, I started it. Well, but look at the forum. This isn't a bar list.

 

PS: Now, PCGS cares to retain me (hint hint)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites