NGC registry to no longer accept PCGS coins.

TwoKopeiki · January 18, 2012 10:30PM

News article from across the street is below. This will probably result in me abandoning at least 2 of my top Mexico sets, since I am not planning to pay NGC cross-over fees just to get the coins into their holders. At least they could've given collectors a grace period during which they would do free cross-overs for World Coins, but looks like they're trying to do a cash grab instead.

Disappointing.

<< NGC World Coin Registry Announcement
Posted on 1/17/2012

Effective January 31, the NGC Coin Registry for World coins will be NGC-exclusive.

The NGC Coin Registry is about to undergo what may be the most significant overhaul since it was started a decade ago. On January 31, the NGC Coin Registry for World coins will be NGC-exclusive, meaning that only NGC-graded coins will be eligible for inclusion. This change will result in a better experience for collectors with World coin Registry sets.

In the past few years NGC has become widely recognized as the leader in World coin grading, both in the United States and abroad. Collectors and dealers value NGC’s consistent and accurate grading, as well as the NGC Guarantee. NGC continues to expand globally and currently maintains a presence in China (Guangzhou and Hong Kong), Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore and Switzerland.

Most NGC World Registry Sets are already NGC-exclusive, so this change will affect relatively few users. Ultimately, it will allow us to create more accurate Registry Sets, streamline the process for adding coins to sets, and enhance the competition. All coins will continue to appear in your Collection Manager inventory. US Coin Registry Sets will be unaffected. We apologize for any inconvenience this change may cause. Thank you for your continued support of the NGC Coin Registry. >>

MacCrimmon · January 18, 2012 10:57PM

<< News article from across the street is below. This will probably result in me abandoning at least 2 of my top Mexico sets, since I am not planning to pay NGC cross-over fees just to get the coins into their holders. At least they could've given collectors a grace period during which they would do free cross-overs for World Coins, but looks like they're trying to do a cash grab instead.

Disappointing.

<< NGC World Coin Registry Announcement
Posted on 1/17/2012

Effective January 31, the NGC Coin Registry for World coins will be NGC-exclusive.

The NGC Coin Registry is about to undergo what may be the most significant overhaul since it was started a decade ago. On January 31, the NGC Coin Registry for World coins will be NGC-exclusive, meaning that only NGC-graded coins will be eligible for inclusion. This change will result in a better experience for collectors with World coin Registry sets.

In the past few years NGC has become widely recognized as the leader in World coin grading, both in the United States and abroad. Collectors and dealers value NGC’s consistent and accurate grading

, as well as the NGC Guarantee. NGC continues to expand globally and currently maintains a presence in China (Guangzhou and Hong Kong), Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore and Switzerland.

Most NGC World Registry Sets are already NGC-exclusive, so this change will affect relatively few users. Ultimately, it will allow us to create more accurate Registry Sets, streamline the process for adding coins to sets, and enhance the competition. All coins will continue to appear in your Collection Manager inventory. US Coin Registry Sets will be unaffected. We apologize for any inconvenience this change may cause. Thank you for your continued support of the NGC Coin Registry. >>

>>

Editorial comment added!

Zohar · January 18, 2012 11:55PM

Doesnt PCGS registry ban NGC coins as well?

worldcoinguy · January 19, 2012 12:03AM

Disappointing decision in the name of revenue.

I question the logistics of the new policy. If I have a set with 50 coins and 10 are in PCGS holders, does the set get deleted or do the 10 PCGS coins disappear? I know some people on this forum put some significant time into these sets and to have them potentially disappear is sad.

Another question that comes to mind is the impact it will have on population reports. If NGC is trying to drive PCGS coins into NGC holders then the sad consequence is that even a small change in populations will greatly skew some population reports on scarce material.

giorgio11 · January 19, 2012 12:16AM

<< Disappointing decision in the name of revenue.

I question the logistics of the new policy. If I have a set with 50 coins and 10 are in PCGS holders, does the set get deleted or do the 10 PCGS coins disappear? I know some people on this forum put some significant time into these sets and to have them potentially disappear is sad.

Another question that comes to mind is the impact it will have on population reports. If NGC is trying to drive PCGS coins into NGC holders then the sad consequence is that even a small change in populations will greatly skew some population reports on scarce material.

>>

Disappointing is too mild a term for me. I call it infuriating and have voiced my opinion LOUDLY ATS already this morning. I have virtually all of my coins, US and World, in PCGS holders, including some I crossed from NGC holders. It is absurd to think I will cross ANY of them back to NGC holders. This includes the #1 Canadian Silver Type Set, Circulation Strikes (1858-1967). (OK, it's not that big a deal, there are only three sets registered; but it's the principle of the thing.)

Having said all this, I think PCGS has an important opportunity here to capture a lot of former two-service Registry Set collectors. If they would move aggressively to get their pricing, CoinFacts content (now when you click a World Coin PCGS #, CoinFacts says it "doesn't exist"--DUH!, population reports, whatever else they can think of into competitive shape compared to U.S. coins, they could certainly go after a large and increasingly vibrant collecting market segment.

Unless NGC reverses its decision I am deleting ALL of my sets from NGC and refuse to extend my membership there.

JCMhouston · January 19, 2012 12:19AM

I probably would not have a problem with it if they decided NGC registered sets needed to have say 50% of the coins in NGC holders, the whole reason I used them was that it allowed people to collect coins instead of plastic. Now that they have joined the collect plastic crowd I won't be using them anymore.

DorkGirl · January 19, 2012 5:16AM

<< Doesnt PCGS registry ban NGC coins as well? >>

Yes, which is why a lot of collectors choose to use the NGC registstry where they could use both.

RobP · January 19, 2012 6:22AM

I fail to see the logic in NGC or PCGS or anyone else for that matter restricting collections to those that are only in the host slabs. Are any TPGs seriously of the opinion that only their slabs are worthy, which is the conclusion that should be drawn if they are unwilling to recognise other companies' product. All companies rely on subscribing customers who as a result of these restrictions are likely to be polarised, favouring one over the other. The question therefore arises, who is the highest regarded company? As one who does not subscribe to the "valued third party" opinion of my coins, I couldn't care less who it favours. But I can see a lot of US collectors in particular having to make decisions they would prefer not to contemplate. I note a few people on this forum who have a mixture of slabs, but for the life of me can not see why anyone would want to incur additional expenses just to satisfy the corporate ego part way through their collecting life. New collectors can embrace an existing situation, but established players just get p'd off.

As a detached bystander who would not consider having his coins slabbed, I think this will benefit PCGS because for British coins I have fewer historical issues with their grading or attribution and see them as the more consistent product. NGC will continue to be my favoured slabs for picking up misattributed rarities on the cheap.

marcmoish · January 19, 2012 6:49AM

Disappointing decision in the name of revenue. I question the logistics of the new policy. If I have a set with 50 coins and 10 are in PCGS holders, does the set get deleted or do the 10 PCGS coins disappear? I know some people on this forum put some significant time into these sets and to have them potentially disappear is sad. Another question that comes to mind is the impact it will have on population reports. If NGC is trying to drive PCGS coins into NGC holders then the sad consequence is that even a small change in populations will greatly skew some population reports on scarce material.

I really tend to agree - many have put in lots of effort into building sets with both services..this is a true ground changing move to many.

Re; pop - most know to deduct X of a percent towards crackout and all - a POP of 10 usually means 15% or more is null - anyone with more expertise in this can elaborate - I've found this across the board really - hard to tell on something with a POP of a few pcs but over 5-10pcs seems correct?

coinkat · January 19, 2012 8:13AM

Is there a grandfather clause for those PCGS coins that are already there?

Dabigkahuna · January 19, 2012 8:20AM

All of my NGC Registry Sets have have a mix of both PCGS and NGC coins. I will not be paying any extra money just to have my coins listed in some online registry. This is the most bogus idea yet from ATS!

Pokermandude · January 19, 2012 8:28AM

<< All of my NGC Registry Sets have have a mix of both PCGS and NGC coins. I will not be paying any extra money just to have my coins listed in some online registry. This is the most bogus idea yet from ATS!

>>

I agree with the sentiment. But didn't this side of the street "start" this registry shenanigan?

FWIW I don't, nor will I ever, have a registry set on any site.

wybrit · January 19, 2012 10:54AM

Unless NGC reverses its decision I am deleting ALL of my sets from NGC and refuse to extend my membership there.

That's my plan as well.

RobP · January 19, 2012 6:35PM

<< Re; pop - most know to deduct X of a percent towards crackout and all - a POP of 10 usually means 15% or more is null - anyone with more expertise in this can elaborate - I've found this across the board really - hard to tell on something with a POP of a few pcs but over 5-10pcs seems correct? >>

It can be a lot more misleading than 10-15% for the rare items. I used to collect shillings and halfpennies as denominations. Of the latter, the NGC slabbed Victorian decimal halfpennies P2017 and P1983 no longer exist, so the pop is 0 in both instances. In the case of the P1983, it wasn't, and was in fact the unique Freeman 689A where the oak leaves in the reverse design face in the opposite direction. The MS65 (with wear!) 1673 halfpenny is also no longer in a slab, but was in any case an unrecorded 1675 over 3 over 2, with the 5 over 3 obvious to the naked eye without using a glass. One of the PCGS MS64s of the same date is again out of a slab, though the wear should have precluded an MS grade in the first place being no better than a decent British EF, and also a 5 over 3. Both these 1673s are from single digit populations and I'm not the only person who cracks them out. I could extend this list to many more pieces, but you should get the idea.

ccrdragon · January 19, 2012 11:16PM

the only registry sets that I have left are US birth-year sets that I have put together for ny children.

with this move from ats, I definitely will not be building any sets in the near future since the slabbed coins I do have other than the kid's sets are a mix from our host and ats.

classport · January 20, 2012 8:20AM

Disappointing but not surprising.

PCGS has long given World Coins second shrift. No price guides, no cameo designations for the most part and, sometimes, seemingly no interest in
developing that resource for collectors.

Still, they'll run pell mell into NEW market possibilities with the Asian crap that's dominating the markets now as example, at the expense of developing their sold base of world coin collectors
who badly need these resources.

NGC dominates the auctions because their clearly established "at least one point higher" grading system has made a mockery of honest grading standards-and the price
guides prove it.

But ANACS also cuts NGC in that same regard and look where they're sitting in collector interest now.

I love PCGS, have nearly all my coins in PCGS holders and have no plans to change.

But they have fumbled the World Coin Market away in my opinion and that's JUST TOO DAMNED BAD!

mrpotatoheadd · January 20, 2012 10:09AM

<< NGC dominates the auctions because their clearly established "at least one point higher" grading system has made a mockery of honest grading standards-and the price
guides prove it. >>

NGC is a different company from PCGS. Why should the two grading systems necessarily be the same? How is NGC making a mockery of anything because the systems are different? Why isn't it PCGS who's making a mockery of things? If I started a grading company and graded everything one grade lower than PCGS, would that mean PCGS is now making a mockery of honest grading?

Just wondering...

coinpictures · January 20, 2012 11:03AM

Disappointing, but not surprising. If PCGS can be exclusive, why can't NGC? No one rants and raves about those b*stards at PCGS because they won't allow NGC coins.

We've been lucky it lasted as long as it did.

That said, I just deleted my 5 Registry sets ATS. All my sets were mixed, and I have absolutely ZERO intention to play the crossover game in either direction.

In short, to hell with the registry game.

SYRACUSIAN · January 20, 2012 6:34PM

<< Unless NGC reverses its decision I am deleting ALL of my sets from NGC and refuse to extend my membership there.

That's my plan as well. >>

Sorry guys, but I don't see it happening. It simply won't make any sense.

Are any TPGs seriously of the opinion that only their slabs are worthy, which is the conclusion that should be drawn if they are unwilling to recognise other companies' product.

Yes, PCGS thinks it is. DH has publicly announced several times, that the average crossover percentage of NGC slabs to PCGS is 70-75%, but in reality it's lower, unless we count resubmissions too.

Collectors and dealers value NGC’s consistent and accurate grading ,

Why are you laughing Mac? They are consistent: always worse.

n short, to hell with the registry game.

coinkat · January 20, 2012 9:54PM

While NGC can do what it wants with its Registry, it is clear that the end result thus far has lead to a general discussion that really has no redeeming benefits to the hobby.

I think the real question I have are as follows:

What events have transpired and what is the rationale that truly justifies a change in the NGC World Coin Registery now?

I do not see any reason for change so perhaps someone can enlighten me...

wybrit · January 20, 2012 10:46PM

The only communication I saw from an insider on the large number of threads over there is this:

There are several reasons for excluding PCGS coins from World Registry Sets. Unlike United States coins, there are hundreds of thousands of World types, and NGC and PCGS often use different terminology and attributions. It's become difficult to expand our Registry to include more World coin sets when they all have to account for these differences.

Registry users with PCGS coins have to wait for the coin to be approved to add it to a set, and the approval process can be difficult, if not impossible, for some World coins when a PCGS-graded coin's attributes do not match those of an NGC-graded coin. The process is very straightforward for US coins, but for World coins this is just not the case.

After examining the World Registry Set stats, we realized that only a handful of people have PCGS-only World sets, and the vast majority of World Registry users are either NGC-only or very close to it. It's a change that will make the Registry experience better for many people and will remove coins from relatively few sets.

In other words, "it's hard" and they don't want to tie up their resources attributing world coins.

I can't say what I really think here, but I have, a little bit, over there.

RobP · January 21, 2012 1:29AM

<< 
There are several reasons for excluding PCGS coins from World Registry Sets. Unlike United States coins, there are hundreds of thousands of World types, and NGC and PCGS often use different terminology and attributions. It's become difficult to expand our Registry to include more World coin sets when they all have to account for these differences.

Registry users with PCGS coins have to wait for the coin to be approved to add it to a set, and the approval process can be difficult, if not impossible, for some World coins when a PCGS-graded coin's attributes do not match those of an NGC-graded coin. The process is very straightforward for US coins, but for World coins this is just not the case.

After examining the World Registry Set stats, we realized that only a handful of people have PCGS-only World sets, and the vast majority of World Registry users are either NGC-only or very close to it. It's a change that will make the Registry experience better for many people and will remove coins from relatively few sets.

In other words, "it's hard" and they don't want to tie up their resources attributing world coins.
>>

The question of different attribution between companies wouldn't be a problem if attribution was consistent. Using d for penny as the natives do would be a good start. p has been used in the UK since decimalisation, so there's an instant correlation with reality. PCGS use d, NGC use p. Looking at the list of NGC categories, it appears to have been simpified somewhat which is a good thing. I have a recollection of seeing one of the TPG's lists of slabbed coins using 1797 SOHO and 1797SOHO (no space) for essentially the same items, which needless to say showed up as different types. I can't find this at the moment, so if anyone has slabs with the different attribution it would be helpful (JCM?). This is ironic for a system claiming to offer a standardised service.

From the above, it appears that the problem is not different terminology because that could be solved by a simple concordance encompassing all grading companies, rather it is the inconsistent recognition of the type in hand together with the variation in assigned grade. It has been said in discussions on several forums in the past that adequate knowledge of world coins by the two majors is questionable due to the sheer quantity of types of material that need to be covered. Most would expect them to identify US coinage accurately and be good at it, but if you want to accurately identify foreign material, you need someone that is fully conversant with a particular country's coinage. Many people outside the US (and some within) fail to be convinced that this base is covered due to the large number of misattributions which in turn must impact upon the difficulties experienced by the grading companies in crossing over coins.

As for slabbing hammered coins, don't get me started as the potential problems are an order of magnitude worse and should not even be contemplated, let alone attempted.

coinkat · January 21, 2012 3:01AM

If attribution is the reason that no PCGS coins can be now no longer be in the NGC Registry, then why not then just limit coins with attribution issues to NGC graded coins. Most of the NGC Registry sets start at or are after 1800 and varieties/attributions in terms of the percentage of possible Registry coins is quite limited... if fact so limited that if this is the reason, it really just does not pass the straight face test.

classport · January 21, 2012 7:11AM

All I know is that our grand kids are going to end up with PCGS Registry Sets; like it or not.

If they want to spend a lot of money and devalue the coins by placing them in NGC holders; or those of any other grading service (Hell there are some where they'd ALL be MS 69 or better) then
that's their problem but I guarantee I'll be rolling over in my grave.

I've seen, done and witnessed it TOO MANY TIMES over the past 30 years or so.

NGC grading was designed to take advantage of PCGS's stricter standards, deliberately and mercenarilly set at least one point higher to make NCGer's "feel good" and think they have a better coin.

Thankfully the marketplace knows better.

And so do I. Too many times down that dusty road, too much first hand experience-and evidence......

coinkat · January 21, 2012 7:26AM

As much as TPG is there to help collecting, it seems that we are loosing sight of what it is that is being collected and that is truly sad

Zohar · January 21, 2012 7:30AM

To be honest, from my experience, I have seen inconsistencies in grading from both services so I would not involve grading standard but rather approach to free competition.

Instead of creating an open playing field where creative themes and registries are presented having collectors choose where to present their sets, we are seeing an isolationist approach from both grading services.

If you look at this world collectors forum as an example - it has become active with very interesting posts. I dont see that in the NGC side while it is an open forum as well. Competition is a very good thing to get the best result.

We as collectors and clients should decide in my opinion.

FilthyBroke · January 21, 2012 7:35AM

<< 
NGC grading was designed to take advantage of PCGS's stricter standards, deliberately and mercenarilly set at least one point higher to make NCGer's "feel good" and think they have a better coin.

Thankfully the marketplace knows better.

>>

No disrespect intended or anything like that... but I always felt that PCGS deliberately graded conservatively to save themselves on their buyback guarantee.

JCMhouston · January 21, 2012 8:15AM

<< NGC grading was designed to take advantage of PCGS's stricter standards, deliberately and mercenarilly set at least one point higher to make NCGer's "feel good" and think they have a better coin. >>

I'd really have to take strong exception to that. NGC has been grading world coins for much longer than PCGS and has many thousands of more coins in the market. While both make mistakes I think this statement is just so much baloney. I have some overgraded PCGS coins myself, as well as NGC, which is why you should buy coins not plastic.

coinpictures · January 21, 2012 9:11AM

<< NGC grading was designed to take advantage of PCGS's stricter standards, deliberately and mercenarilly set at least one point higher to make NCGer's "feel good" and think they have a better coin. >>

Seriously?

"The Kool-Aid is strong with this one."

Personally I've seen plenty of PCGS misgraded world coins. For many series, NGC is the holder of choice over PCGS.

I know that at least on the Lightside all we hear on this side of the street is "PCGS GOOD! NGC BAD! *grunt*" but IME that doesn't apply anywhere near as much in world coins.

mudskippie · January 21, 2012 11:26AM

<< Personally I've seen plenty of PCGS misgraded world coins. For many series, NGC is the holder of choice over PCGS. >>

This is very true!

classport · January 21, 2012 2:49PM

Sorry guys.

All I have to back up my statement is EVIDENCE-at least 50-60 attempted crosses over the year or so when I thought it might
make some sense.

After several holdered attempts, in order to get possible "holder bias" out of the way, I submitted raw and, yes, I do know how to grade a coin as long
as we're talking about consistent standards.

Maybe 35% were holdered by PCGS at the same grade, 1 higher which really rocked me, the rest at least one, some two points lower.

Same with ICCS, in fact worse since ICCS doesn't downgrade for the endemic clouding on Canadian coins from the cellophane wrapping on the PL sets.

MUCH better success with ANACS coins, but much harder to locate since they get much fewer submissions. Lower grading standards I suppose.

I do love KOOL AID though. But I quit drinking it when I was about 10.

coinkat · January 21, 2012 9:35PM

Folks-

-Its about the coins and not the plastic

-Grading is subjective and TPG is an opinion.

-Standards and consistency with respect to grading is obviously important, but the subjective component measures factors that are often a matter of taste and there are just no set standards that really apply universally. That subjective component can change based on market conditions among other considerations.

OnlyGoldIsMoney · January 26, 2012 8:27AM

I wonder if this change is the prelude to NGC banning PCGS US coins from their registry.

My registry sets at NGC contain only PCGS graded coins.

giorgio11 · January 26, 2012 9:16PM

<< I wonder if this change is the prelude to NGC banning PCGS US coins from their registry.

My registry sets at NGC contain only PCGS graded coins. >>

Mine too but I am deleting everything if this comes about, US and World. I vote with my feet and my wallet, and NGC never gets another dime from me.

wybrit · February 2, 2012 1:41PM

My 18 #1 sets over there are but a distant memory now.

SYRACUSIAN · February 3, 2012 4:23AM

The question of different attribution between companies wouldn't be a problem if attribution was consistent. Using d for penny as the natives do would be a good start. p has been used in the UK since decimalisation, so there's an instant correlation with reality. PCGS use d, NGC use p.

Even though this is correct, I don't believe that NGC's attributes referred to the minor "spelling" difference of British pennies, halfpennies and farthings. For instance, I have personally handled, or owned, or still own, at least a dozen of Greek coins and a couple of dozen of North African coins, that NGC grades as Proof ,but PCGS will only grade them as Specimens. In most cases of the Greek coins, NGC has it right, because the coins are indeed proof, mostly unrecorded, or simply rare presentation coins, minted by different dies than the circulation coins and not some sort of first strikes.

Here's another example that NGC grades as proof and PCGS as specimen. These are ex Heaton coins, and I've owned quite a few Egyptian ones as well, again with the same difference. PF for NGC, SP for PCGS. Unlike Greek coins, I just don't know if these are proofs or specimens.

SYRACUSIAN · February 3, 2012 4:31AM

And here's a rare proof coin with cameo, that isn't properly imaged (cameo not showing, coin is full white), where my desire to have it in a PCGS holder cost me the PF grade.

Edited to add: I don't mind that this 2d is now in a SP holder. I know what the coin is, and I do not intend to sell it. However, I own a very rare 1828 phoenix, perhaps the finest known graded example,an NGC MS 65 PL. There is not a chance in the world that PCGS would ever cross this coin as MS 65 PL, so even if they were willing to compensate by adding a numerical point, I simply refuse to have that (unique in a phoenix) PL taken away, just to have it in a PCGS holder like 95% of my coins.

coinkat · February 3, 2012 8:09AM

What happens if one just waits and leaves them there?

Would that be considered the last possible act of defiance?

coinkat · February 3, 2012 8:20AM

Did anyone here ever see the film The Great Race? This Blake Edwards' 1965 classic film is a very funny that features Natalie Wood, Tony Curtis and Jack Lemon among others... excellent cast.

This whole registry thing reminded me of the ending of that film- If collectors continue to leave the registry, the leaders will be there by default- similar to Professor Fate- I suppose we my need alittle humor in the event that there is no change in policy- FTR, its not too late for a Coke Classic move here instead of a Pan Am move

SYRACUSIAN · February 4, 2012 6:53AM

<< Did anyone here ever see the film The Great Race? This Blake Edwards' 1965 classic film is a very funny that features Natalie Wood, Tony Curtis and Jack Lemon among others... excellent cast.

>>

I did. At least 3 times. Movies could have easily been my hobby of preference if it weren't for the coins, and I wouldn't have had to put up with so much grief and sickening competition.

coinkat · February 4, 2012 11:04AM

Apparently the last act of defiance was met with the PCGS coins being removed for me... at least I did not have to do that-

Sticking with film examples, its official in that the total points obtained/earned in at least one of my sets now match a reknown Faber College student, Senator Blutarski's grade point average at 0.00.

This is a numismatic accomplishment for the ages... LOL

Bubblehead · February 4, 2012 4:09PM

What events have transpired and what is the rationale that truly justifies a change in the NGC World Coin Registery now?Text

Yas... That IS the question!

morgandollar1878 · February 15, 2012 5:45AM

I guess my sets ATS will go bye-bye then. Oh, well. I really could care less, because they give their own branded holders more weight anyway.

mozin · September 6, 2012 3:09AM

I attempted to start three World Gold Registry Sets with NGC. One set would have been by far the number one set. The other two would have been number two sets. When I could not see any way to enter my PCGS coins, and the first mentioned gold set would have been all PCGS, I emailed NGC Registry. Eventually, I was told that PCGS coins are no longer allowed in the NGC Registry World coins. I deleted all three sets immediately. No way I will have a Registry set at NGC that does not include all my coins in the series.

Guess I should have visited this PCGS World Forum to learn what is going on these days.

LochNESS · September 6, 2012 9:47PM

FWIW, it'd been so many months since this thread began, that I'd forgotten all about the issue (most of my stuff is PCGS so I rarely visit the NGC website). Anyway I enjoyed re-reading everyone's comments. So thanks, Archie, for bringing it back to the surface

TwoKopeiki · September 6, 2012 11:42PM

Hehe, i remember this post. Let's recap what happened since:

1. NGC bans PCGS coins from competitive world sets - many set owners are upset, NGC is deaf to their comments
2. PCGS proactively capitalizes on the news by offering an on-going cross-over special to capture dissatisfied customers
3. NGC realized their mistake of not addressing the issue when the change was announced and reacted by introduced their own cross-over special
4. TwoKopeiki moved 99% of his NGC coins into PCGS slabs and got rid of the 1% that wouldn't cross.

Have to give PCGS props on this one - quick thinking with the cross-over special. Would be interesting to quantify these decisions, but that kind of submission volumes data is not available to anyone outside of the TPG's.

bidask · September 7, 2012 7:26AM

<< Hehe, i remember this post. Let's recap what happened since:

1. NGC bans PCGS coins from competitive world sets - many set owners are upset, NGC is deaf to their comments
2. PCGS proactively capitalizes on the news by offering an on-going cross-over special to capture dissatisfied customers
3. NGC realized their mistake of not addressing the issue when the change was announced and reacted by introduced their own cross-over special
4. TwoKopeiki moved 99% of his NGC coins into PCGS slabs and got rid of the 1% that wouldn't cross.

Have to give PCGS props on this one - quick thinking with the cross-over special. Would be interesting to quantify these decisions, but that kind of submission volumes data is not available to anyone outside of the TPG's. >>

Hey, I was only 2 for 8 in my crossover attempts to PCGS.

Zoins · September 7, 2012 8:03AM

<< While NGC can do what it wants with its Registry, it is clear that the end result thus far has lead to a general discussion that really has no redeeming benefits to the hobby.

I think the real question I have are as follows:

What events have transpired and what is the rationale that truly justifies a change in the NGC World Coin Registery now?

I do not see any reason for change so perhaps someone can enlighten me... >>

My guess is that there's been an increasing number of world coins in PCGS slabs and this change was made to try to stem that change.

PCGS has the same restriction on their registry which encourages all-PCGS collections, so ATS is probably thinking why not do the same thing.

NGC registry to no longer accept PCGS coins.

Comments