Home U.S. Coin Forum

Maybe members can contribute to PCGS rather than grouse?

RogerBRogerB Posts: 8,852 ✭✭✭✭✭

In other threads some members comment and grouse/complain about several PCGS executives moving on to other things. While change is inevitable, maybe this is a good opportunity for members to let management know some of their ideas for improving PCGS.

What kinds of positive changes or products do you, as a board member, feel would be advantageous to PCGS and its customers?

«1

Comments

  • CoinstartledCoinstartled Posts: 10,135 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Return of the Regency holder.

  • morgandollar1878morgandollar1878 Posts: 4,006 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @TwoSides2aCoin said:

    Well an old friend of mine named Bob Osterholm (RIP) used to promote his soap company until it was bought out in '69 by the Arm and Hammer Co., with these cards/mailers. He told me he lost money on the promotion but it paid off in soap sales. His highlight in life was dealing with Aubrey Bebee.
    If PCGS would slab the cardboard and Coin together (I don't care about the grade as much as I care about preserving just a sliver of that history). It would be awesome. I know it's selfish thinking, but that's my thought.
    Now back to drama class.

    I like the idea, but since the coin can be removed from the holder there is no way to prove it was the original.

    Instagram: nomad_numismatics
  • BuffaloIronTailBuffaloIronTail Posts: 7,401 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @georgiacop50 said:
    The Variety Attribution department def needs some work!!

    What would you suggest?

    Pete

    "I tell them there's no problems.....only solutions" - John Lennon
  • RogerBRogerB Posts: 8,852 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Companies are (or should be) constantly looking for ways to improve the business and ultimately the "bottom line." When new people assume established roles in a company, they also can be open to new and different concepts, or ideas.

    For example: Are there ways PCGS can use existing resources to improve communication with customers? With secondary product buyers? With information providers? And so forth....

  • RogerBRogerB Posts: 8,852 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 16, 2018 9:56AM

    @BuffaloIronTail said:

    @georgiacop50 said:
    The Variety Attribution department def needs some work!!

    What would you suggest?

    Pete

    Here's a really short list:

    Let's assume georgiacop50's comment is correct, and BuffaloIronTail's request is reasonable.

    1st - Identify the perceived problems from the customer position. [Collect data]
    2nd - Analyze the problems to understand their relationship to customer perceptions and corporate perceptions.
    3rd - What are the independent and dependent controls?
    4th - What are the fixed and variable resources?
    5th - Determine relative costs/values to customers and the company.
    6th - Assign tangible and intangible benefits. [Outcomes]
    7th - Develop responses/modifications that improve customer experience and add to company benefits (i.e., workflow, profit, recognition, market acceptance, etc.) [Process improvement]

    This is all basic process improvement stuff that corporate executives deal with on a daily basis. However, it can become difficult for founder/executives to handle this because of the perceived "threat" to their creation. Here are some of the best BPM approaches ---

    5S
    Value Stream Mapping
    Kaizen (PDCA Cycle)

    Six Sigma/Lean Six Sigma variants --
    DMAIC
    DMADV
    Cause and Effect Analysis
    SIPOC Analysis
    Process Maps / Process Flowcharts
    BPMN Process Maps

    The bottom line to this little thread is: it is likely board members can make useful contributions to PCGS's operations if they will be specific rather than merely complain. :)

  • leothelyonleothelyon Posts: 8,349 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Let's add a superior symbol to the label for coins that have complete strikes/details the original sculptor intended in his/her design of a denomination/coin for a series for once and for that matter.....for all.

    Such a symbol might give CAC a run for its money as well

    Leo

    The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!

    My Jefferson Nickel Collection

  • RogerBRogerB Posts: 8,852 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Well, possibly management would like some productive customer and user ideas that could benefit the bottom line....?

  • ConnecticoinConnecticoin Posts: 12,470 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @morgandollar1878 said:
    Stop slabbing the GSA's in the big plastic holders. Put a wrapper around the GSA holder like NGC and ANACS so it will still fit in the original box. That would be a good start to something different.

    Agreed. Better yet, just put the grading label on the back like NGC does with Redfield / Paramount holders. Modify the grading guarantee if you have to, but those oversize tombs look horrible, and the fact that they do not fit in the original box makes the coins less marketable. I think this would put a sizable dent in the NGC GSA grading business, and would encourage crossovers.

    Plus, grade the Redfields in the holders as well, with label on back like NGC.

  • GRANDAMGRANDAM Posts: 8,353 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 16, 2018 10:37AM

    I am of the belief that LOWERING fee's would result in more revenue.

    Fee's have gotten so high you can't afford to grade the Modern Coins unless you submit in bulk orders and that leaves out us little guys.

    Heck, what did it cost to slab 1 Pallidum coin with shipping both ways?

    I would run the numbers but I am headed out the door, has to be close to $92 with shipping both ways, handling fee grading fee and 1st Strike Label.

    I am not suggesting lowering all fee's but please consider the pricing structure for Modern coins. Paying $18 for a 1st Strike label is one place prices could be lowered. What does a bulk submitter pay? $2 maybe?

    Lowering fees would increase submissions IMHO.

    GrandAm :)
  • ConnecticoinConnecticoin Posts: 12,470 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Or maybe even add a "super-economy" tier for sub $150 coins ($12 grading fee, perhaps?), then revise "economy" to $150 to $500 coins. With the overall decline in the coin market, many coins that used to be worth slabbing (especially with grading fees lower) are no longer worth it. At $22 a pop plus fees, IMO a coin needs to be worth at least $150 to make it worthwhile, and with the decline in the market, scads of potential submissions are falling below this threshold than previously.

  • Aspie_RoccoAspie_Rocco Posts: 3,259 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I will re-post this with edits. I have made these suggestions before.

    I have several ideas that could be beneficial to PCGS and collectors.
    Things regarding variety attribution and correction, additional services, preserving original generations of PCGS holders as an alternative to re-holder services.

    —————Members could submit any generation of holder for a few preservation and electronic updates to information and photography. For example a holder buffer service to remove scratches for older holders, variety correction or attribution information could be assigned electronically for registry purposes associated with the original certification number. This would be great for those of us playing the registry game

    These services could be charged a fee for in place of reholder services. And you might get the environmentally friendly spin of using less plastic and could even promote such services as a pro environmental initiative.

    ————Another concept is placing a holder around first and second generation holders to preserve them or to update/ add info/pics.
    Perhaps a slim case for “rattler” type holders that would allow them to fit traditional blue boxes.

    ————Another concept is applying a sticker or label to the back of the holder to update or modify certification and variety information.

    I am very interested in varieties of all US denominations and I have noticed several incorrectly attributed coins in PCGS holders. I realize with the sheer quantity of coins graded mixups can occur.

    ————-There is also the issue of coins sent for attribution that do not succeed, yet are in fact a listed variety. This has happened to me on several submissions and as the costs add up it got me thinking of ways this might be avoided. I do not have an immediate other idea for a solution to this problem, but I will offer my time and services to the variety assessment team as one method.

    ——————More frequent use of the “minor variety” designation could also creat an additional market and submission drive. I cross reference variety vista often to see the many other varieties not traditionally recognized by Pcgs. For variety enthusiasts like myself I would pay up for more variety recognition on labels even if it didn’t count towards an official registry place in a set.———

    ————— editing all of the incorrectly attributed Coins displayed in CoinFacts images.
    Anyone who knows their series, and examines the images of varieties will discover improperly attributed Coins here and there. I have noticed this in the Jefferson and Franklin series

  • Aspie_RoccoAspie_Rocco Posts: 3,259 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 16, 2018 12:01PM

    @GRANDAM said:
    I am of the belief that LOWERING fee's would result in more revenue.

    Fee's have gotten so high you can't afford to grade the Modern Coins unless you submit in bulk orders and that leaves out us little guys.

    Heck, what did it cost to slab 1 Pallidum coin with shipping both ways?

    I would run the numbers but I am headed out the door, has to be close to $92 with shipping both ways, handling fee grading fee and 1st Strike Label.

    I am not suggesting lowering all fee's but please consider the pricing structure for Modern coins. Paying $18 for a 1st Strike label is one place prices could be lowered. What does a bulk submitter pay? $2 maybe?

    Lowering fees would increase submissions IMHO.

    @Connecticoin said:
    Or maybe even add a "super-economy" tier for sub $150 coins ($12 grading fee, perhaps?), then revise "economy" to $150 to $500 coins. With the overall decline in the coin market, many coins that used to be worth slabbing (especially with grading fees lower) are no longer worth it. At $22 a pop plus fees, IMO a coin needs to be worth at least $150 to make it worthwhile, and with the decline in the market, scads of potential submissions are falling below this threshold than previously.

    I really love these ideas. As a collector and not a dealer, it becomes more difficult each year to spend $1,000 or more on grading and attribution to build my set, each year. I recognize that I make the choice to join and submit but also recognize I could have completed my set already, with the money I have spent on grading and fees. As my collection is my main focus in numismatics, it becomes progressively more difficult to continue submitting coins for grading, as opposed to just buying them.

    Also FULL STEP designations on nickels is inconsistent. If I have coins with obvious full steps, and they do not get FS suffix, I would really like to see uniform consistency with this. It make a big price difference in the end.

    Reassurance that every coin sent for attribution will be examined would be a great improvement also. SIX out of my last TEN orders have had Coins that I paid for attribution, the coins were not examined, I assume since the varietys are somewhat obvious, I was charged $9 each anyhow for those. More than 10 coins have been overlooked. This could be improved with better quality assurance or final checks.

    Having multiple coins (same variety) on the same line of order form seems to always end up with one or more coins completely overlooked. :( the instructions say this is ok to do, multiples, but I have experienced difficulties every time.

    I also think Quarterly Specials could be more customer friendly, like

    reduced crossover fees (all great coins should be in Pcgs slabs)

    Reduced attribution fees.

    Reduced fees.

    Reduced fees on modern Coins

    The current fee structure is making many modern and low cost coins completely obsolete and a money losing scenario to have graded. This seems like it will lead to even less submissions. The current fee structure seems to be pricing out all common lower value coins out of the market from my perspective. Very few modern business strikes are even worth $20 each unless they are top population grade.

  • hchcoinhchcoin Posts: 4,825 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I know a bunch of posters are probably going to slam me for this but I feel the number one thing grading companies could do is draw a line in the sand right now and create definitive grading standards that are static. One of the things that bugs me the most about the coin industry is that they keep changing the grading standards for something they call market grading vs. technical grading. I think that is absolutely nuts. I would much rather have the industry say this is how we are going to grade and it is not going to change from here on out. I cringe every time I hear someone post that grading is really tight or loose at any given time. Can't we just grade one way and stick to it?

    I think PCGS could lead the way on this because they are an industry leader. Why can't they publish a reference manual on grading that gives exactly what they are looking for at each grade level for each denomination. Heck, they could publish them as a series over time to generate revenue. Start with the cents and work up to the gold coins. This would be an in depth guide on how to grade, how to detect common problems, explanations on how to differentiate grades, and super clear non toned pictures with written explanations why they made the grade they did. Then once it is published, don't change your standard. If they switch to a 100 point scale, maybe it would be the time to do this as well.

    Eye appeal, luster, etc.... explain exactly how this will increase or decrease a grade if you are going to keep doing that as well. Instead of acting like you are protecting the secret recipe for Kentucky Fried Chicken or Coca Cola, publish your standards so we all can get on the same page.

    Before someone tells me this is impossible, I am here to tell you it can be done. I have worked in industries that have much more difficult standards to follow than coin grading and they have found a way to make it happen.

  • Insider2Insider2 Posts: 14,452 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @georgiacop50 said: "The Variety Attribution department def needs some work!!"

    @RogerB said:
    "Let's assume georgiacop50's comment is correct, and BuffaloIronTail's request is reasonable.
    1st - Identify the perceived problems from the customer position. [Collect data]
    2nd - Analyze the problems to understand their relationship to customer perceptions and corporate perceptions.
    3rd - What are the independent and dependent controls?
    4th - What are the fixed and variable resources?
    5th - Determine relative costs/values to customers and the company.
    6th - Assign tangible and intangible benefits. [Outcomes]
    7th - Develop responses/modifications that improve customer experience and add to company benefits (i.e., workflow, profit, recognition, market acceptance, etc.) [Process improvement]

    This is all basic process improvement stuff that corporate executives deal with on a daily basis. Cause and Effect.
    The bottom line to this little thread is: it is likely board members can make useful contributions to PCGS's operations if they will be specific rather than merely complain."

    IMO, everything after #1 is Gobble-gook! I'll bet they have the professionals (Jay was hired away from a TPGS). I'll bet they have the library and access to the Internet. So, fixing this does not take #2 to #7. It is much simpler.
    What they need is a Trinocular Stereomicroscope (w/camera) and a double tube Jewelers florescent desk lamp. If they do not have/are not using this equipment, IMHO this situation may continue!

    PS Previously, I got a warning (from Don) for revealing I used a 3K+ Nikon Zoom "Trinock" on my desk. I hope HB agrees that this is a constructive suggestion for the PCGS attributors. :)

  • koynekwestkoynekwest Posts: 10,048 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Connecticoin said:
    Or maybe even add a "super-economy" tier for sub $150 coins ($12 grading fee, perhaps?), then revise "economy" to $150 to $500 coins. With the overall decline in the coin market, many coins that used to be worth slabbing (especially with grading fees lower) are no longer worth it. At $22 a pop plus fees, IMO a coin needs to be worth at least $150 to make it worthwhile, and with the decline in the market, scads of potential submissions are falling below this threshold than previously.

    Agreed! And this would be certain to increase business. Shipping fees should also lowered since these coins are worth less.

  • RogerBRogerB Posts: 8,852 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 16, 2018 8:56PM

    Insider2: Business Process Re-engineering (BPR) is a distinct discipline within overall business management "best practices." These can be applied to organizations of every size and complexity. The goals are better quality, lower costs, and improved innovation. The "Gobble-gook" will be understood by those with background in corporate executive and governance functions. The "Gobble-gook" was included for those interested in such things and possibly as a gentle "jog" for readers to help formulate positive suggestions. :)

  • PTVETTERPTVETTER Posts: 5,880 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MWallace said:
    Allow non-members to have coins in damaged slabs reholdered, even if at a slightly higher fee than members. A friend took a coin of mine to the last ANA to have it reholdered for me because of a cracked slab. He was told that it couldn't be done unless he paid the $69 membership fee.

    I am sure some dealer at the ANA would have helped if only asked,
    This is a perfect example of why dealing with dealers as opposed to the internet can benefit a collector.

    Pat Vetter,Mercury Dime registry set,1938 Proof set registry,Pat & BJ Coins:724-325-7211


  • messydeskmessydesk Posts: 19,642 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @BuffaloIronTail said:

    @georgiacop50 said:
    The Variety Attribution department def needs some work!!

    What would you suggest?

    Pete

    Outside consultants. Most of the people that are variety specialists are already established in their careers, either as dealers or in other fields, and would not be serving the hobby best if they were locked in a grading room. The rest are retired.

  • koynekwestkoynekwest Posts: 10,048 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @messydesk said:

    @BuffaloIronTail said:

    @georgiacop50 said:
    The Variety Attribution department def needs some work!!

    What would you suggest?

    Pete

    Outside consultants. Most of the people that are variety specialists are already established in their careers, either as dealers or in other fields, and would not be serving the hobby best if they were locked in a grading room. The rest are retired.

    This is also an excellent idea! Tho I haven't had any problems with this others here have.

  • Aspie_RoccoAspie_Rocco Posts: 3,259 ✭✭✭✭✭

    🇺🇸 Rocco for Variety attribution apprentice intern 2018 🇺🇸

    @messydesk said:

    @BuffaloIronTail said:

    @georgiacop50 said:
    The Variety Attribution department def needs some work!!

    What would you suggest?

    Pete

    Outside consultants. Most of the people that are variety specialists are already established in their careers, either as dealers or in other fields, and would not be serving the hobby best if they were locked in a grading room. The rest are retired.

  • CoinscratchCoinscratch Posts: 7,807 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Tighten up some more. Where you used give a 67 give it a 66+. Then the 67's in the market would see a huge price inflation which would add to the craze and draw new comers. Obviously, you would lose some customers and a lot of upgrade tries. But, in the end it would only increase the value of the PCGS Slab and make the competition look even weaker.

  • 1Mike11Mike1 Posts: 4,414 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Aggressively attack ALL counterfeit coin sellers. In particular the coins in PCGS slabs. Maybe if the sellers are tied up in court they will hesitate to continue to do it.

    "May the silver waves that bear you heavenward be filled with love’s whisperings"

    "A dog breaks your heart only one time and that is when they pass on". Unknown
  • ReadyFireAimReadyFireAim Posts: 1,800 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @philographer said:
    Address the population census. Too many years of crack outs have skewed the numbers.

    There must be some automated way of doing this with True-View that wouldn't cost a fortune in time.

  • MrScienceMrScience Posts: 725 ✭✭✭

    Antireflective coatings on the slabs to reduce glare when viewing and photographing coins...

  • HemisphericalHemispherical Posts: 9,370 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @koynekwest said:

    @messydesk said:

    @BuffaloIronTail said:

    @georgiacop50 said:
    The Variety Attribution department def needs some work!!

    What would you suggest?

    Pete

    Outside consultants. Most of the people that are variety specialists are already established in their careers, either as dealers or in other fields, and would not be serving the hobby best if they were locked in a grading room. The rest are retired.

    This is also an excellent idea! Tho I haven't had any problems with this others here have.

    I thought they were already doing the outsourcing for certain attributions. I may have interpeted something I read incorrectly and now I cannot find my resource. 😕

    Well, if not, then I agree there should be some outsourcing.

  • WingedLiberty1957WingedLiberty1957 Posts: 2,960 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 17, 2018 5:36AM

    I wrote this up years ago and never got anywhere with it. Maybe new management might find a few nuggets in here to mull over?

    Suggestions for PCGS

    Has PCGS ever considered sticking with sequential Cert Nums? They seemed to be sequential for a while … a few years back they went from 3xxx to 8xxx … is there a reason to skip over all those numbers? I like sequential cert numbers because it gives you a rough idea of how long ago the coin was slabbed.

    Why isn’t there an option (that can be turned on or off) for ALL coins that you submit to pcgs be automatically added to your inventory (even GENs). You still don’t have to make them public or add them to a showcase or registry, but it would be nice not having to type in all those cert nums by hand (which can be tiring on big subs).This is best as an OPTION that can be turned on or off – as some dealers and people that submit for others def would not want this option turned on.

    Consider adding PCGS Coins that were added to a Showcase Only -- provide Ownership information in the Cert Verif page. Currently, Only coins listed in official Registries are listed in the ownership area of the Cert Verif page. It would be nice to show both Registry and Showcase ownership on the Cert Verif page.

    Why don’t we have more control over which columns we choose to display in our Showcases and Registries. I don’t like the TOTAL POP and TOTAL POP HIGHER columns as they are confusing, and would like the option not to show those columns. Allow Registry and Showcase players more options to customize their display. Allow owners to default the number of coins displayed on the 1st page that loads in the Registry. It currently defaults to 50 and I'd like mine set to default to ALL (which isnt that many more than 50 in most cases)

    Another useful option would be for owners of pcgs graded coins an option to provide contact info if they were open to taking high offers for coins they owned (they could always ignore or decline). People should have the option to show if they are willing to field offers for coins they own. What a great way to drive sales and interest. I’ve seen a lot of coins on the Cert Verif page that I would have loved to make a highball offer on (multiples of guide) – but there is no way to get in touch with the owner. This could be TURNED OFF so if someone doesn’t want to be bothered with offers (people that don’t sell ever) they don’t have to be.

    Why isn’t there an option to automatically SORT showcases by denomination and date

    Shouldn’t coin order always be chronological … even with varieties. In the Price and Population Guides, as well as the Registries, why is the 1909 VDB listed after the 1909? Same issue with the 1960 Small Date listed after the Large Date.

    Why aren’t BN and RB proof Lincolns listed in CoinFacts between 1951 and 2013 ? It’s odd that PCGS separates out a subset of coins, and then summarily dismisses them (omits them) from Coinfacts. And why START relisting BN and RB proofs starting in 2013 and moving forward (they are even more rare that late).

    Why not add a REHOLDER option to KEEP an old green label. Then people could order a brand new plastic slab but reuse the old label (which are the same size and could be easily reused). Many people don’t want to give up old green label’s but that option could allow for many old monster coins to be TV photo’d out of the slab and given fresh new (unscratched) slabs, while keeping valuable old OGH labels.

    Why not an ADDED FEE option for a 1 line NOTE from the graders on why they assigned a grade. For $30 to $40 extra dollars I would love to have some explanation on what they were thinking – valuable info – esp on some coins where one might have question on why a graders decision was made.

    Digital album awards should ONLY go to those that use all PCGS trueview photos … allowing home grown photos leads to too many chances for over saturation and digital editing.

    PCGS should combine the POP report and the PRICES report into a single table (just add extra rows) I would find it useful to see the POP and the PRICE at one fell swoop. One option would be Row 1 POPS then row 2 PRICES for those same dates. PCGS could color code the price rows in green or something.

    PCGS should never allow date/mint slots with POPs GT 0 to have NO LISTED PRICE …. Like the 1922-D MS66BN Lincoln that has POP = 2 but no price listed. Why leave us in the dark like that? If there is a pop of at least 1, then list an estimated price. (note that this was fixed for the 1922-D in July 2016 – however there are many more coins where this is still a problem)

    PCGS often IGNORES RB and BN Lincolns in the price reports … there should be no gaps. If it’s less than $1 list as $1.

    Does PCGS actually CHECK market prices of high grade BN and RB coins … sometimes a MS66BN Lincoln can sell for many multiples of an MS66RD Lincoln on the auction sites (due to the 66BN being rarer and often showing nice color). PCGS seems locked into the paradigm that BN < RB < RD with prices – the reality of the marketplace does not bear that out. Recently a pop 3 1923-S MS65BN lincoln auctioned on ebay for $3250. The underbidder was $3200. There were a number of bids above $2000. Yet the price guide still lists that coin as $1500.

    PCGS should adopt a “First IN First OUT” Grading policy instead of RANDOM order as it is now. Customer service often claims it's FIFO grading, but i have hard evidence that its random.

    PCGS should consider dropping the + grades since they cannot even consistently grade the same coin to the same whole number (there is just not that much skill in grading and it’s really a lot more subjective and fluid than most realize). I believe 18 grades of MS and PR from 60 to 70 is way too many grades. Submit the same coin 10 times and you will likely get a spread of graded which typically cover 2 whole grades from MS63 to MS65 for example. Giving a coin a grade of MS64+ implies more skill and consistency than is really possible. (Really you can tell 18 different gradations of MS or PR?)

    PCGS should get a better handle on color classes. Red (RD) does not mean red but copper. PCGS often gets confused with bright red or pink toned and calls them Red RD when they should be RB or in some cases BN.

    Allow a RECONSIDER option to fix Color Class definitions. Sometimes I get a MS66RB that really should be MS66BN. Allow collectors that love the BN color class to have coins with NO COPPER COLOR to be properly assigned the BN color class.

    Allow Cert Verification pages to show OLD CERT NUMBERS … so the provenance of a coin can be traced back to former Cert Numbers.

    Add the DATE GRADED to the Cert Verification page. Useful info. Esp if you insist on not using chronological cert numbers.

    Allow users to DELETE duplicate listings (the same coin with different cert nums (from resubmissions) in CoinFacts. Sometimes the same coin is shown 10 times with different grades and slightly different photos.

    On TrueView photos make more of an effort to properly LEVEL a coin. Sometimes the coins are skewed (rotated) by as much as 5%. Which just looks sloppy.

    Allow collectors to show MULTIPLE TRUEVIEWS for a given Cert Number. I sometimes get 3 or 4 different photos taken and with toned coin it often takes a number of photos to properly show off a coin. Why should we have to “Pick a single photo”.
    Submissions should never be mailed back to us until AFTER the TrueView photos are posted. Sometimes we might want a tweak done to the shoot.

    I always thought it would be really helpful if PCGS could figure out a way to combine the POP chart with the PRICE chart. That way you would not have to flip back and forth between 2 web pages to compare POPs with PRICEs.
    Maybe 1 line for prices followed immediately with 1 line for pops (perhaps in a different color to aid viewing)

    I'd like to be able to SEARCH the Cert Verification pages. For example what If I wanted to see all the 1922-D Lincolns that graded MS66BN. If I could do a search on that and get a listing of all the Cert Numbers that matched my query, that would be really helpful in cases where members want to track down coins. The current listings in coinfacts is rarely complete.

  • BuffaloIronTailBuffaloIronTail Posts: 7,401 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @RogerB said:
    Well, possibly management would like some productive customer and user ideas that could benefit the bottom line....?

    That hits the nail on the head, Roger.

    PCGS IS a business after all.

    Pete

    "I tell them there's no problems.....only solutions" - John Lennon
  • RogerBRogerB Posts: 8,852 ✭✭✭✭✭

    There are some very thoughtful and customer-oriented ideas in these posts. It is hoped that marketing and other PCGS/CU managers will give them ample consideration.

  • woogloutwooglout Posts: 200 ✭✭✭

    @BuffaloIronTail said:

    @georgiacop50 said:
    The Variety Attribution department def needs some work!!

    What would you suggest?

    Pete

    Hire me for starters!

  • giantsfan20giantsfan20 Posts: 1,373 ✭✭✭✭

    On the Resources Section. Books could you add your PCGS Guide to Grading and Counterfeit Coins First Edition .

    Or better yet publish an updated version since last 2005.

  • morgansforevermorgansforever Posts: 8,428 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @1Mike1 said:
    Aggressively attack ALL counterfeit coin sellers. In particular the coins in PCGS slabs. Maybe if the sellers are tied up in court they will hesitate to continue to do it.

    Couldn't agree more, and educate buyers about counterfeit coins and slabs. The only reason fakes exist is because the demand for them. If the demand decreases to nothing the counterfeiters will vanish.

    I would like to see a going back to the basics slab. Get rid of all these inserts, FS, FDOI, etc. just grade the coin for what it is.

    World coins FSHO Hundreds of successful BST transactions U.S. coins FSHO
  • BustDMsBustDMs Posts: 1,563 ✭✭✭✭✭

    A more scratch resistant holder would be nice.

    Q: When does a collector become a numismatist?



    A: The year they spend more on their library than their coin collection.



    A numismatist is judged more on the content of their library than the content of their cabinet.
  • KudbegudKudbegud Posts: 4,735 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @GRANDAM said:
    Slab and grade Dan Carr items,,,, and BIG MAC Tokens :o:o:o:o:o

    Ditto !

    Why give all that business to the other guys? Every Carr coin you accept doesn't go ATS.


  • ReadyFireAimReadyFireAim Posts: 1,800 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 19, 2018 12:03AM

    Pick your own number @ one dollar per digit.
    Use letters & numbers that equal 8 characters total.
    I could buy FRA00001 to RFA00099 and use them for future submissions.

  • shishshish Posts: 1,098 ✭✭✭✭✭
    1. Improve customer service, provide a contact number and email to someone who can make decisions or can quickly communicate with a decision maker to solve problems and complaints in a timely manner.
    2. Remove the multitude of duplicate images from CoinFacts.
    3. Provide and advertise an incentive for people to return inserts.
    4. Increase the maximum value for economy submissions to $500.
    5. Add a reholder option to keep an old green label.
    6. Add PL designations to ALL coins that meet your standards.
    7. Add the date graded on the Cert Verification page.
    Liberty Seated and Trade Dollar Specialist
  • TwoSides2aCoinTwoSides2aCoin Posts: 43,794 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @RogerB said:
    Companies are (or should be) constantly looking for ways to improve the business and ultimately the "bottom line." When new people assume established roles in a company, they also can be open to new and different concepts, or ideas.

    For example: Are there ways PCGS can use existing resources to improve communication with customers? With secondary product buyers? With information providers? And so forth....

    Pondering this for a moment, I am reminded that I once set up an inventory list with the coins I was submitting on this site (for my site and resell, of course).
    I got lazy over time and did not continue to list all the coins, but that said; some years later, one of those coins sold. Someone collecting through the registry program tried unsuccessfully, to list their new coin into the registry. I only know this because PCGS sent an email inquiring as to the whereabouts and ownership of said coin. Thus, I had to update inventory page, so the collector could register the coin. That's one of the protections we get with submitting (if we opt to), and one easy way to track the item.

  • BlindedByEgoBlindedByEgo Posts: 10,754 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I prefer grouse to partridge - but that's just me. Chukkar is good, too.

  • messydeskmessydesk Posts: 19,642 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MrScience said:
    Antireflective coatings on the slabs to reduce glare when viewing and photographing coins...

    A slightly concave surface would also accomplish this, although the inside would also have to be shaped such that you weren't creating a lens with non-zero diopters.

  • LincolnCentManLincolnCentMan Posts: 5,347 ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 13, 2019 6:47PM

    "Does PCGS actually CHECK market prices of high grade BN and RB coins … sometimes a MS66BN Lincoln can sell for many multiples of an MS66RD Lincoln on the auction sites (due to the 66BN being rarer and often showing nice color). PCGS seems locked into the paradigm that BN < RB < RD with prices – the reality of the marketplace does not bear that out. Recently a pop 3 1923-S MS65BN lincoln auctioned on ebay for $3250. The underbidder was $3200. There were a number of bids above $2000. Yet the price guide still lists that coin as $1500."

    I was the winner of this coin. It's purchase ended a search that spanned much of my adult life. I can assure you, the second highest bidder was no were close to my max bid. I was so happy with the coin that I wrote a letter to the seller, thanking him for making it available on ebay and not ending the auction early. It would be interesting to see what one of the other two would hammer for in a auction. I doubt it would be $1500.

    Lincolncentman

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file