• 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.

The registry and deemphasizing strike designations

Started by Hoot,

11 posts in this topic

Hoot

Hoot

Posted
Posted

I've been thinking (uh-oh blush.gif), wouldn't it make sense to split out series with strike designations into separate categories in the registry, especially for the complete sets? For example, for the full Jefferson nickel sets of 1938-1964 and 1938-date, why not have a set for coins that are not full steps and a set for coins that are? This would make a lot of sense, especially for leveling the playing field a bit between sets that are wonderful but with coins that did not get the FS strike designation, and sets with the strike designation. The sets would need to be partially segregated so that the FS sets allowed both FS and non-FS coins, and the non-FS sets allowed only non-FS coins, or gave no bonus to the FS coins and simply awarded points by grade.

 

The same would go for other series with strike designations: Roosies, Mercs, SLQs, and Frankies.

 

I think this would give these series each a shot in the arm in terms of collection effort, something they deserve. Right now, for example, a full set of 1938-64 Jeffs, each in MS66 condition, can be had for nearly a song. This can be quite a stunning set. But with the wierdness going about strike designations, this set would score rather poorly in the registry. Silly. So, why not have a set that more effectively rewards the effort?

 

Hoot

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hoot

Hoot

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Are there any other collectors out there who collect sets that have strike designations? How would you view the above idea?

 

What about NGC?

 

Hoot

Link to comment
Share on other sites
keithdagen

keithdagen

Posted
Posted

Interesting idea. One series that would really benefit from this would be SLQ's, where so much premium is placed on the head, and in my opinion, the nicer coins are the ones with a defined shield. I'm looking for coins with a full shield and at least 80% head for my Type set, but they garner few points compared to the coin with a 100% head and 50% shield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hoot

Hoot

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Exactly Keith! There has been so much discussion about great coins that do not get the strike designation, that it only makes sense to reward such sets and bring them into the fore.

 

Some great sets of coins with few (or relatively few) coins that have strike designations:

 

Jefferson nickels by Nickelhead

The "Midwest collection" of SLQs

Mercs by "The Collection"

"collectors" set of Franklins or Oldtrader's set of Franklins

 

(No good example yet for the Roosies)

 

These are all great collections that are very competative in terms of grade. The possibilities are great for the registry to "lift up" the collection of these series. I believe that many more people would compete in the non-strike-designated sets. This would be good for the hobby in general and would take emphasis off of the minute areas of the coins that are currently driving so many registry set collectors.

 

Hoot

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wihlborg

Wihlborg

Posted
Posted

I believe that many more people would compete in the non-strike-designated sets. This would be good for the hobby in general and would take emphasis off of the minute areas of the coins that are currently driving so many registry set collectors.

 

I agree, and think this is a great idea. There are many collectors who don’t give a ‘hoot’ (pardon the pun) smirk.gif about these strike designations.

 

John

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fairlaneman

Fairlaneman

Posted
Posted

Hi Hoot.

 

Not a bad idea at all. To some the strike designations mean everything and to others they are just a little more split in the bands on a Merc.

 

The only draw back I can see with Mercs is that the populations of the NB coins are quite small for some of the dates and just really hard to find. With some of the early dates it is impossible to find some of the coins. I do not know if collectors would have the patience to wait for years and years to finish a NB set. One guy across the street is doing just this and his success rate is very limited. Of course here he would have two different sources for his project.

 

Myself I look for the best I can afford and if it has FB so be it, if not I am pleased with the coin also. Some of the FB dates I just plain will not buy as I believe some are way over priced for that little extra split. Man how am I ever going to get the numbers with this attitude. smile.gif

 

Here are a couple of my NB coins that were not passed up because the slab did not say FB.

 

NB.jpg

 

and here is a NGC graded coin I received yesterday.

 

N45D66R.jpg

 

Myself I just do not see how a collector could pass on these just because of a designation such as FB.

 

Ken

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cladking

cladking

Posted
Posted

Yes. It makes sense to separate these sets from a collector's point of view.

 

Fairlaneman: Those are some spectacular dimes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oldtrader3

Oldtrader3

Posted
Posted

Thanks for the Kudos, Hoot. I will get new scans (pictures?) of this set up soon. The move to from California to Washington has been taking up all my spare time (and energy) for the past month or so.

175897-1958Franklin.jpg.e07a08da133dd3d4ec331a39cf835a6c.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hoot

Hoot

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks everyone of the support! I just hope that NGC can find it in themselves to energize the hobby this way. It's not like it would take a big effort, as all the registry information is already in place.

 

Ken, it is darn interesting to learn that finding a full set of Mercs without a few having the FB designation would be tough! This would also be true of Jeffs, especially a set that was 1938-present. (I doubt it would be all that hard for SLQs or Frankies!) And I totally agree that finding great coins, strike designation or not, is the KEY! That's why I suggest that the non-strike-designated sets should reward on grade alone. I think this would create an entirely different order of high scoring sets. It'd be fairly interesting and a lot more competative. Also, with the emphasis on great coins, we'd see much more interest in simply featuring great coins!

 

By the way, Ken, wonderful Mercs! And Charlie and Keith, you both have excellent sets!

 

Hoot

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fairlaneman

Fairlaneman

Posted
Posted

Hoot I think you would be able to find all of the Mercs without FB but finding them with the grade goal a person may have makes it much tougher. The guy I mentioned at PCGS wants his to be atleast MS65 and this really puts restrictions on the examples he can find.

 

Heck I do not want to get into the weighting factor. My guess is that some of the coins in all series are really undervalued and untill the collector demand increases for these coins they will stay undervalued and under appreciated. Shucks it is a little beyond me how a coin with less than 100 examples can sell for the price that some of these do. Then when you get down to examples with less than 50 its really insane.

 

Thanks for the comment on the Mercs. smile.gif

 

Ken

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing