Slot designated as Non-Competetive 0

[LTMcCord]

Why are the slots for the 1871 and 1873 Straits Settlements 20 Cents designated as non-competitive? Are the coins not legitimate? Just curious since I have the 73 and can't get credit for it.

[Revenant]

They aren't scored usually because they are so rare people usually can't get or afford them. They are removed to make it easier for people to compete. But I would imagine yours are real.

[Maribeth]

1 hour ago, LTMcCord said:

Why are the slots for the 1871 and 1873 Straits Settlements 20 Cents designated as non-competitive? Are the coins not legitimate? Just curious since I have the 73 and can't get credit for it.

Thank you for the inquiry. There are many factors involved when making the decision to mark a coin as non-competitive in an NGC Competitive Registry Set. These factors may include low mintage, difficulty in obtaining/purchasing the coin, and an unusually high price in relation to the other coins required to fill the set. These factors are considered when our senior numismatic team makes the decision, which is done on a coin by coin basis.

We aim to make 100% completion of any registry set attainable for our average collector. If a coin you own is marked as non-competitive, we do offer Custom NGC Registry sets as an option to display all of your coins in the manner in which you desire. If you are interested in an NGC Custom Registry Set, please let us know, and we are happy to assist you. You may reach us at registry@ngccoin.com.

[Revenant]

On 2/28/2020 at 4:00 PM, Maribeth - NGC Admin said:

We aim to make 100% completion of any registry set attainable for our average collector. 

This brings a thought / question to mind for me. I wonder what fraction of registry categories / set types have never had a 100% complete set in them. I would imagine that most US categories have had or currently do have 100% complete sets - with the exception of categories like the 1932 mint set, with that insanely hard to get double eagle (which, honestly, should probably be non-competitive based on the reasoning you provided). My family's 86% complete set is about as good as it gets there. In World categories I'd expect 100% complete sets to be much more uncommon except in some popular categories like the British Sovereigns, the French 20F coins, etc.

In the Netherlands 10G set I collect, to my knowledge, my set is the most complete set that has ever existed in the category and sits at 63% complete - I hope I can soon bring that up to 72%. The most complete set I'm aware of other than mine was about 36% complete.

Edited March 5, 2020 by Revenant
fixin' muh grammar!

[Crawtomatic]

On 2/28/2020 at 4:00 PM, Maribeth - NGC Admin said:

We aim to make 100% completion of any registry set attainable for our average collector.

I could be wrong, but I don't know if the average collector would be able to afford a 1916/16 5c DDO specimen.  With a G4 book value of $4k-$5k that might be out of reach of most collectors.  With 107 encapsulated by NGC and more by PCGS locating a coin shouldn't be difficult, just the price point.  Most available coins fall in the F/VF range which is roughly a $10k coin.

Would this be a good candidate to reconsider inclusion as a competitive coin in the associated Buffalo Nickels sets?

[BlakeEik]

On 2/28/2020 at 5:00 PM, Maribeth - NGC Admin said:

We aim to make 100% completion of any registry set attainable for our average collector.

Whoa! I think this claim may be a little misleading. There are many sets where NO ONE has been able to complete 100%, let alone the "average" collector.  But that is part of the competition, right?

I know NGC cannot honor everyone's requests, that would not be practical, and it's somewhat impressive that you try to honor any at all.  But honestly, sometimes its hard to make heads or tails of what you allow versus what you do not allow. @CRAWTOMATIC brings up one example, and others including myself have question certain inclusions as well.

...just my opinion....

[Revenant]

13 hours ago, BlakeEik said:

Whoa! I think this claim may be a little misleading. There are many sets where NO ONE has been able to complete 100%, let alone the "average" collector.  But that is part of the competition, right?

I think we need to acknowledge a few things here.

- Some categories have existed since the registry was created about 17 years ago while some new World categories are just months old. A 10-17 year old category never having a 100% complete set might indicate that it's hard to do - might. I 3 month old category never having a complete set is meaningless.

- The fact that no one has is no indication that it isn't doable.

- The fact that a set isn't on the registry doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

We also have to wonder who NGC imagines the "average" collector to be and we don't know what time frame they'd consider reasonable for accomplishing the task - "Sure. You can do it. It'll take 20 years but you can do it."