PCGS announces Full Torch designation for Roosies!!!

[Hoot]

Check it out: Full Torch and Fulllll Torchchchch

 

Oh no! I feel ambivalent! No NO! I don't! Wait! I can't make up my mind! Oh... but... wait... There! No! Yes! Another ploy to make money!

 

No written or imaged examples yet. (!)

 

 

So, waddaya think? Hey NGC, are you next? John? Dave?

 

Is this just the silliest thing you've ever heard of or is this the real deal? Roosie collectors? How much does the "full torch" have to do with the overall definition of the coin imparted by the strike? I know, for example, that for Jefferson nickels, "full steps" does not necessarily translate to "full strike!"

 

Hoot

[Sunnywood]

At the request of my esteemed friend Mr. Hoot , whose recent prolificity of excellent numismatic commentary would make even QDB blush, I herewith copy my post on the subject of "Full Torch" dimes from across the street:

 

All of these extra attributions (FBL, FSB, FH, etc etc) do absolutely nothing for the collector other than to arbitrarily skew the market. I oppose all of these designations, which create lots of resubmission grading fees, and particularly enrich any insiders who had prior knowledge and could hoard qualifying representatives of the series in question.

 

Why not just have ONE designation "FS" (FULLY STRUCK) for ALL U.S. series, or just forget the whole thing.

 

I, for one, always thought strike (like luster, cleanliness of surfaces, and yes, eye appeal) was an integral part of a coin's grade. I think that if you are going to break "strike" out as a characteristic, then you might as well start grading coins with multiple designations for luster, strike, eye appeal, and technical grade.

 

How about PCGS MS64 RT FS HL (64 technically for cleanliness, "rainbow toned," "fully struck," "highly lustrous") ... or PCGS MS64 I65 L65 S64 (technically 64, with eye appeal & luster 65, strike 64) ... or other such nonsense. At that point, the slab becomes useless except for sight-unseen transactions (which are stupid anyway, except for low-end product). And what would the pop reports look like !!!!!!!

 

Conversely, if you don't break strike out as a characteristic, then it should be impossible for a poorly struck coin to grade 65, or a medium strike coin to grade 67.

 

Another thing ... the characteristics are random. You can have an FH SLQ that doesn't have a full shield. And there's the Lib nickel ... full left corn? what about the obverse star radials? "FS" would cover EVERYTHING on the coin. Ditto for seated liberty coinage ... head, shield, but what about the top of the eagle's right (left-facing) wing or the obverse stars?

 

What a RACKET the whole thing is ... slabs, resubmissions, crackouts, crossovers, attributions, dipping, conserving, retoning, doctoring ... makes you think twice about spending large sums on coins ... be educated or beware !!!

 

Sunnywood

 

 

[jtryka]

I agree with you guys, and I think this is just a ploy to increase submissions. The only good that may come is a renewed interest in Roosevelts, which have been a long underappreciated series. Unfortunately, the increased interest will come as a result of what I consider pure hype, and one of the bad side effects it that this will likely result in the inflation of one of the last affordable sets available to common, young and more budget constrained collectors. I must admit, I own no certified Roosevelts, and I doubt this will get me to buy or submit any, though there are hundreds of modern dealers that at this moment have dollar signs in their eyes, as they see another series to lauch into the ludicrous price realm for common coins. I own a complete set of Roosevelts in BU (that's a technical term for roughly MS-63), including all the proofs, SMS and the Type 1 and 2s from 1979-80, and I paid about $300 for the set. This is the kind of set that even the yougest collector can build on a $5 weekly allowance, but again that may be a thing of the past. It really saddens me that so many forces (the grading services, dealers, modern hypsters et al) are really working to take this hobby away from the realm of young hobbyists. I honestly fear that we are destroying the future of this great hobby, and once the state quarters are done in 2008, we will go the way of stamp collecting. Sorry for the rant.

[nwcs]

I wonder if PCGS snapped up ACG's expired copyright/trademark for the term?

 

In any case, this is a way for the company to generate more revenue through designation reviews and resubmissions. And to generate more submissions through full torch advocates (must be some somewhere). From a business perspective, they're doing a very smart thing. As a collector, I question the value of it.

 

Personally, I do not value the designation, but I can see it creating debate when it comes time to sell. I have four really nice certified silver roosies and about 40 really nice raw ones. I ain't gunna do a submission for that.

 

Good thing that it hasn't taken long for me to figure out that I should only buy coins that I really really like. And forget the speculation, slab designation, and other such things. Even if it means I'll have coins that won't make it into a registry...

[GP_]

makes me glad all my roosies are NGC

[keithdagen]

Strike designations are lame, in my opinion, because they focus on a specific feature of the coin, and do not impart that the entire coin is fully struck, just one aspect.

 

Yes, a fully struck head is nice on a SLQ, but most FH's are missing or have two very weak shield rivets. The real gems are the ones with both the full head and the full shield, and creating an arbitrary value based on a designator is bad for the hobby, in my opinion.

[EVillageProwler]

I don't like any of these strike-based grade designations. FBL, FH, FT, FSB, FS -- you know what they mean to me? Full of Shhhhhhhh...

 

Why not have a Full Horn or Full Pelt for Buffs? Or, Full Denticles for ED's? Or, Full "You-Know-What" for KINGKOIN's Urinating Minuteman SQ?

 

Why don't I like this type of designation? Because it causes the slab buyers to focus on the insert instead of the actual coin. These slab buyers will pay more and more for a coin that has 100% full designation than one that just missed it, and that also indulges the cottage industry for doctoring coins.

 

How about Full Wreath for Seated half dimes? Or, Full Denom for the C and D mint gold dollars?

 

 

EVP

 

[gmarguli]

EVP, those are great suggestions. We'll get right on it.

 

Our goal is to add a new designation to a series every time submissions of that particular series slows down.

 

- Kenya

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[EVillageProwler]

Thanks, Kenya ... er, I mean, Greg.

 

 

EVP

 

[Hoot]

HomerunHall has not answered my question that I posted on the PCGS boards: Homerun - Why allow only those who are top in the registry to resubmit for free designation? Why not have a reasonable time period - say 1 year - where anyone with a PCGS slabbed Roosie prior to your institution of this designation (I'm sure your database records the date they were slabbed) can submit for the FT designation? Only seems fair. The link to Homerun's statement about this is Here

 

Here's what I had to say about this on the other board:

 

Jom and Sunnywood hit the nail on the head. And TomB is correct that the FT designation will not translate to full strike. I collect Jefferson nickels and I prefer those with full steps, but it's only a preference and it does not imply full strike! Anyone who seriously collects and studies the coin knows this. It also does not tell you anything about eye appeal! It's a rather minor designation and I participate with it because I choose to focus on the definition it gives that area of the coin. So what. Is it rare with certain Jefferson nickel issues? Yup. But in the end, it's a preference, and a rather minor one at that. (I sometimes feel foolish for having such a wild hair for FS Jeffs ) So, if it turns the crank of Roosie collectors to have the FT designation, fine, but I think that at this stage of the game, and with the general sense of disagreement over the designation as well as the obvious overtones of profiteering, it seems to be a bad idea.

 

I agree with Jeff (above) that this will make a wreck of collecting this series affordably. This will have its greatest impact on new and young collectors. As with any of the series that have special designations, it will be a clear signal to "watch out!" you might lose your on somethings that has little bearing on the overall beauty and appeal of the coin.

 

Hoot

[nwcs]

I'm hoping that NGC doesn't knee-jerk to add this designation. It will only continue the assumption that they are followers in this industry behind PCGS. I think a bolder statement for NGC to make is to do what others have suggested, have a designation for full strike and leave it like that. In the wars of designations, I think that would win out over the long run. In this scenario, I would be willing to send coins to NGC whereas I am not willing to submit to either for FT or other designation. And imagine the premium for a MS 67 FS * coin! It'd have to be super awesome monster.

 

Neil

[EVillageProwler]

Neil,

 

I prefer the notion of "well struck" over "fully struck". Both are opinions, but "fully" seems to absolute in a situation where absolutes have no part. "Grading is an art, not a science."

 

Replace FH, FBL, FSB, FS, etc., with WS, where WS implies close to being fully struck. I agree this is also subjective, but every aspect of grading is.

 

EVP

 

[cladking]

There's more to a coin than the strike of a small section of the reverse, and there's more to this move than the additional submissions. This is merely a reaction to demand. True the demand may not have been great, but it will be best judged by the increased number of submissions. How can something that increases awareness of the coins be detrimental and how can something that increases the importance of any grading characteristic be harmful? There will always be entry level coins in circulation and generally coins of recent manufacture have been inexpensive even in uncirculated condition. This is not likely to change in the near future. This move will tend to reward the newbies who have been paying attention to strike. The increased value of some of their coins will eventually manifest itself in some form.

 

Most of the choice unc Roosys are not going to soar in price just because they are FT, so this is not going to have a dramatic effect except on the higher grades and even here the primary effect will be on the silver issues.

[keithdagen]

cladking,

 

I think that a lot of the problem will occur in the next year as populations creep up and relative rarities for the better struck pieces are only known by a few who have dedicated themselves to the series, especially on the silver side.

 

Prices for some MS-67 coins may triple overnight, but then shoot back down as the fact that the 67FT's are not as rare as first thought becomes apparent. Conversely, people who have been seeking these out for a long time and hoarding them are going to make a killing selling the newly designated pieces into the market.

[BankNote1]

Is the full torch something Rosy collectors look for? Is there a demand for such grading?

[cladking]

Keithdagen: Good point. I hadn't thought of it in these terms.

 

Knowledge will generally end in profit anyway though. Of course, it isn't reall right that some people will grossly overpay for coins about to plummet. Perhaps much of the solution here is the same as ever. Buy the book before the coin and do your homework. To a great extent the book is being written now and even those who aren't knowledgeable sense an opportunity. It will certainly get me looking at my Roosys again.

[Android]

Is the full torch something Rosy collectors look for? Is there a demand for such grading?

It is my feeling that this is something dealers have wanted more than collectors. Although I am not opposed to the FT designation, I do question the motives behind it. Mr. Salzberg very eloquently explained that the focus of NGC is to better the hobby of coin collecting. Is a FT designation on Roosevelts bettering the hobby? Or is PCGS's decision solely based on the new revenue stream that it will generate to help meet next quarter's financial dictates by CU's Board of Directors? I can't honestly answer that question, but it is certainly worth asking. I just don't get a very good feeling about it all. If NGC decides it is in its and its customers best interest to have FT, I will understand that it must play "Keep up with the Halls".

 

I agree with others who have posted that an all encompassing "full strike" (FS) or "well struck" (WS) is preferable to an ever increasing number of specialty designations. I would highly recommend that NGC persue such a path.

 

Andy

[PQSeated]

I must say it is kind of pathetic on PCGS' part, and nothing more then a ploy to increase revenue. Simple as that. Personally, I think that strikes should be part of the grade, why add extra junk on the label, when you can just integrate it in to the grade? The only extra designation that I truly like is Full Steps for Jefferson Nickels, simply because I think they look better with full steps, and it would be hard to integrate steps in to the grade.

[IrishMike]

I thought it was a joke at first, guess not. Someone please give me a good reason for this.

[cladking]

Man has always sought to separate the wheat from the chaffe. We organize, collate, shuffle, and deal. Collectors are even more determined to organize their collections into various slots. FT as seen in this light is mere evolution.

[BankNote1]

Could someone post a scan of what a full torch looks like? A picture of both a FT and a nonFT would be better. I am sure I am not the only one that doesn't know what to look for. Thanks.

[keithdagen]

Monty,

 

PCGS has not told us what the standard is, so at this point, no one knows what a Full Torch Roosevelt will look like.

[IrishMike]

cladking, I said a good reason, I don't need a FT designation to tell if a coin is struck up, do you?

[cladking]

This isn't the best way to separate the wheat from the chaffe, but it's still a way. One step at a time.

[fcloud-migration]

Maybe they need to keep up with some lower level grading companies

[goose3]

I also thought that the post was in jest when I first read it. If you ask me, there are already too many designations on silly things such as this.

 

Nothing more than a decision based on $$$$$$$$$$$

[clackamas-migration]

I don't believe that "all" the designations are BS and anyone who puts them "all" in one big BS bin is indeed full of BS. The FS designation has been around for Jefferson collectors even before the advent of grading services and its not a BS designation.