To designate, or not to designate... what's next, good, bad... ???

[DonHeath]

"Why are the current designations so important?"

 

The only purpose any of the designations (FBL,Cam,Dcam,FT, split-band, PL, DMPL, etc) serve is to assist in understanding the properties of a sight-unseen coin. Designators that aid the description seem positive to me (a short paragraph would be better). Not all designations are strike related. Sight seen, they seem relatively unimportant, but obviously affect valuation. Truthfully, I believe it near impossible to properly describe a coin in 20 characters, but I don't view a better description negatively. I'm sure I would if I owned a set of roosies. Anyone who constructed an expensive Franklin set before FBL would be sympathetic.

 

BTW - Fully struck would cover all series effectively.

 

[Wihlborg]

I never much cared about these designations anyway. If the coin has nice eye appeal I don't really care if it has full bell lines, full split bands, or some other detail that you need a loupe to see.

 

If you found a Franklin half or mercury dime with really nice toning and outstanding luster would you pass on it because it was not a FBL or FSB? If you do please let me know where to find it!

 

I know these designations are important to a lot of people, but I would rather have a coin with excellent eye appeal and no designation than a so-so coin with one. Now if you happen to find a nice coin with both eye appeal and full whatever... great! If you don't mind paying the premium buy it. I have at times.

 

But the one drawback to the registry as I see it is that a lot of people will add coins to their collections that may have a high technical grade but be very lacking in eye appeal (ugly, blotchy toning) just for the extra points. I would rather have a beautiful coin than an ugly one graded a couple of points higher.

 

 

John

 

[Hoot]

...designations (FBL,Cam,Dcam,FT, split-band, PL, DMPL, etc) serve is to assist in understanding the properties of a sight-unseen coin.

 

I agree with this. Unfortunately, however, that isn't how it has translated in the final analysis of transactions. The designators have become pivotal in scoring extrapoints in the registry, thus adding significantly to demand, thus increasing values quite a bit. It can be downright odd, since some coins - e.g., some MS67 Jefferson nickels - are far more rare in terms of grade than the full step counterparts, except for the designation! So even though we can accept that the designations help in some way, it seems that most folks would agree that they are not complete enough information. Still, when the price difference between one coin without and the same issue with the strike designation is fantastic (e.g. 1942-S MS67 vs. MS67FS Jefferson - around $80 and $1800, respectively), then something has gone haywire in the translation, but I guess that's the marketplace for ya.

 

I think Don is right that we may have too few designations for the kind of sight-unseen buying that is prevalent today!

 

Hoot

[Hoot]

Hey, what about this: Lots of designations that address obverse and reverse conditions and details and make way for them on a reverse-side slab label?

 

I may be sick. Hoot

[DonHeath]

.....Hoot, maybe they can just maintain a paragraph on the company website for each cert.

 

[Wihlborg]

You know I wonder where all this will stop? Are we someday going to have designations counting how many of Miss Liberty's nose hairs are visible on a Morgan dollar?

 

John

[bigd5]

Wihlborg,

I'd say that if the potential for increasing profits, coupled with collector demand, continues, then yes, you will see nose hair designations.......

[Wihlborg]

I agree. I believe that there are two main factors driving this. Profit for the dealers and people looking for more points in the registry.

 

I don't put too much of the blame on the grading services, they provide a service and are only reacting to consumer demand.

 

I think we are on a slippery slope though, if the dealers can continue to convince people that coins with these kinds of designations are more desirable than coins without them we will see more designations proposed by people looking for higher points for their registry sets.

 

Why do I say this? Because we were buying coins before the registry sets and before there were designations. We sought out nice coins. Coins that were sharply struck, with nice luster and eye appeal. What has changed since than? The arrival of the registry’s which fueled the fire of normal human competition.

 

John

 

[BillJones]

I made the point across the street that this new torch thing was really a rotten deal for those who had built top flight Roosevelt sets. As usual a bunch of the modern collectors over there acted like I had just shot their dog.

 

Still I understand what you mean, onlyroosies. Now in order to retain your position as a top collector you hqve to hqve your coins re-holdered if they qualify for the "torch," or you will have to buy new coins that have "torch." Your "no torch" coins will be worth less, and probably harder to sell.

 

That was the point I tried to make. I'd like know why collectors feel that they have to jump every time a grading service tells them to do so. To me collecting is a private joy that I structure to bring me pleasure, not to please someone else.

[Wihlborg]

Bill,

To me this is the whole point of collecting anything. Collect what brings pleasure to you!

 

I collect the coins I like. I buy the best that I can afford. I know that I will never have the top set in almost any of the series that interest me because there will always be someone who is willing or able to out spend me.

 

I will give an example. I have complete sets of modern commemorative half dollars and dollars. All of the coins are graded MS-69 except one of the half’s and one of the dollars which grade MS-70. Both of the MS-70 coins I made myself. That is the only reason I have them. I personally do not believe that the price difference between MS-69 to MS-70 is worth my money, money that I would rather spend on other coins.

 

What it really comes down to is that the registry is really more of a competition over who can spend more money, because we would all love to have the best coins if we could afford them.

 

I look at the registry more as a way that I can share some of the coins that are so important to me with others that might appreciate them also, rather than a competition.

 

John.

 

[BillJones]

Hi Wihlberg!

 

It's great to hear from a kindred spirit.

 

I got on the NGC registry at first because I wanted to see what it was like. As a dealer I wanted to experiece what a potential customer might find if he or she because a registry person. I entered my type set of old commemorative half dollars and made the top ten with a fairly modest set. Since then I have put up my gold type set and my silver, copper and nickel type set. I'm number 5 on the U.S. Type set and number 6 on the gold type set.

 

For both I've got my right arm tied behind me because most of my coins are not certified and can't be entered. I have all but one of the type coins that are on the two lists (No 1796-7 half dollar because the one I would put in my collection costs more than $20,000. If I can only afford a junky coin to fill a hole, I'd just a soon leave the hole.). I'm getting some coins certified now because I'm moving and I have a dealer friend, whom I trust, who is submitting the coins for me. I'll put more coins up as I get them back for slabbing, but I'd never waste my money on a slabbed Sackie dollar just so I'd have something put up in a registry. Give me a break!

 

When it coins to modern commemoratives I'm even more independent that you. I collect only the sets that have a gold piece in them, and I like them only in the original mint packaging with all the papers. No slabs for me there!

 

BTW I gaive you a 5 star rating to boost your score. The rating business is kind of foolish, but I think that one star ratings should be reserved for crooks and low-lifes. If I had my way every REAL collector would have at least three stars!

[jtryka]

Billjones, I take my modern commems one step further than you, I leave them all in the original packaging with all the paper work, and I only collect the ones that I don't think are absolutely ugly! That may lead you to believe that my collection must be small, but I am pretty conservative in jusdging a new commem as unworthy to be owned!

 

As far as all this registry business, I have sets in there so I can share them with people who appreciate what I appreciate. I'll probably never get a plaque from either service for my winning set, but I wouldn't expect that unless they changed the ratings to perfectly match my taste in coins.

 

As far as designations and the sight unseen market, eventually they will probably just forget the coins and sell slabs with a grade and list of designations. That way it eliminates all the grading debate and makes it just like the lottery (which is how many people actually view this game if they were really honest with themselves).

[Wihlborg]

Bill,

You know it's kind of funny, I never intended to have complete collections of the modern commemoratives. Over time I haphazardly bought the coins with designs that I found pleasing. A lot of them in the original sets. Before I knew it, I had a good number of them so I decided to complete the sets.

 

Most of my coins are also not certified, so I only have those series that are in the registry.

 

Thanks for the rating; I have done the same for you.

 

John

 

[BillJones]

Hi jtryka!

 

Since you don't collect most ugly modern commems, I know that the Capital Visitor Center half dollar must NOT be in your collection. That has got to be the ugiest coin in the modern series, and it would be among the finalists for the most homely U.S. coin EVER to get beyond the pattern stage.

 

I bought the set because it had a gold coin in it. When I got the set, I thought that the half dollar was damaged or a mint error. Then I looked at it and could not believe what I was seeing. I understand the symbolism, but the coin is still UGLY. And I can't believe that it took TWO artists to design the reverse which is nothing but words.

 

[BillJones]

Hi John,

 

The thing that really get me about some of the registry people is that they never post a picture or a comentary about their coins. All you see is a grading service and a grade listed. It seems really sterile to me and not at all interesting.

[gmarguli]

The thing that really get me about some of the registry people is that they never post a picture or a comentary about their coins. All you see is a grading service and a grade listed.

 

Bill, some people might not get your sense of humor.

 

Of course that is all there is to registry set collecting. You get to upgrade your number on a piece of plastic and move up a position. It's probably really nice for most of them since they don't have to worry about the actual condition of the coin.

 

[Wihlborg]

Bill,

This is another thing about the registry that sort of bothers me. If the registry is supposed to be a showcase for the best sets, how can we know if one set is really better than another if the owner does not post photo’s?

 

By the score? I don’t think so. We have all seen coins that may have a very high technical grade but are down right ugly! Coins with black, dark brown, streaky, or blotchy tone. It seems some people are willing to add this type of coin to their sets just for the extra points in the registry.

 

Now in my mind if there are two sets competing in the registry and one has some coins that are graded higher technically, but these are ugly coins with no eye appeal and the other set has all PQ coins with very high eye appeal than IMO the higher graded set with the ugly coins may not necessarily be the best set. I know that would not be the set I would want to own.

 

There are even sets on the registry that are hidden. If you click on the set you get the following message; sorry the details of this set are not available at this time.

 

Now I know that not everyone has a digital camera or a scanner, or even the time to add images and descriptions if they have a large set. But it does cloud the water when there is nothing to compare but scores.

 

And to be honest, some of my own sets do not have photos or descriptions yet due to the amount of time it takes. But over time I will be adding them.

 

John

 

[Architecht]

"Now in my mind if there are two sets competing in the registry and one has some coins that are graded higher technically, but these are ugly coins with no eye appeal and the other set has all PQ coins with very high eye appeal than IMO the higher graded set with the ugly coins may not necessarily be the best set. I know that would not be the set I would want to own."

 

That's true. It is tricky in that one. Of course, ultimately the highest possible set would be composed of all star-grades, and thus should be composed of all attractive coins WITH high grades.

 

Arch

[BillJones]

I have seen some amazingly ugly coins in MS-68 holders. Most of the time they were "old" commemorative half dollars. It is quite possilbe that the coins did not look that way when they were slabbed. They may have been dipped and then gone very bad because the dipping solution was not properly rinsed.

 

At any rate these coins were certainly not MS-68 coins now, and from what I could see dipping them would not fix them.

 

I could see where someone could buy these fairly cheap and get a lot of registry points for something that could only now be called numismatic junk.

[jtryka]

I still say that the Shriver dollar has to be the ugliest commem ever! There are a lot of coins that aren't a part of me collection, like the 78 issues for the 96 Olympics (what was that about?) and the 84 olympic eagle (could the have done something besides use Kennedy dies for the reverse?). I've been tempted on the eagle though just because it's the only one in that denomination, though there is supposed to be another eagle this year for Lewis & Clark, or the Wright Brothers or some such thing.

 

Regarding the registry, I try to put photos and descriptions for all my coins, but it's an ongoing process. I have my Saint set finished with both photos and descriptions, but the rest will come eventually. I would encourage everyone to add these to their registry sets, it helps you enjoy them more, and allows others to share. Nothing makes you examine the reasons for owning a coin like writing a paragraph to describe it!

[Wihlborg]

Nothing makes you examine the reasons for owning a coin like writing a paragraph to describe it!

 

How true!

 

When I started adding descriptions to my early silver comm. set I had to look at the coins again. I found myself getting excited all over again about coins I have owned for years!

 

John

[onlyroosies]

Hi Bill, You want pictures...Well here you go.

My Registry Set

[Wihlborg]

Nick,

You have a wonderful set of Roosevelt dimes! The toning on some of the coins could not be any better.

 

John

[TomB]

I agree with those who lament the lack of descriptions and images in some Registry sets. I have three sets registered at NGC and none at PCGS. The reason for this was because I thought NGC made a better effort in the Registry scoring and so I wanted to support them for it. Of course, in two of my sets I have never listed a coin, however, in the third set I am currently adding one coin per week. Each coin has a written description and the best and most accurate image I could get of it. I also have higher graded coins that will not be in my Registry set simply because they are not as nice to look at.

[Wihlborg]

Tom,

Each coin has a written description and the best and most accurate image I could get of it. I also have higher graded coins that will not be in my Registry set simply because they are not as nice to look at.

I admire the approach you are taking with your registry set.

 

I have no problem with people adding these ugly types of coins to their sets if it is the kind of set they want. But people should be proud of their sets or why else bother to put them up.

 

I just believe that if you take the time to add your set to the registry you should be proud enough of the coins to show them.

 

John