Post Should Be Here.

Fairlaneman

The Bummed Out Fairlaneman Posted too the Wrong Forumn. Here Now I Think

braddick

Have you also linked this to the NGC site? If so, prepare to be flamed.

Fairlaneman

Pat:

I Posted Over There. Flame as They May. I still think it is BS. It was Stated on the Coin Board Here by a Collector that He Had a Sub Set that Grades Out at Over MS67 but the Early dates were too Expensive. If He can Afford MS67 Late Dates He Can Afford Respectable MS64 Early Dates if He Can Find Them.

Heck I am Much More PO'ed about This Than Any of The Minor Squabbles We have Had.

Ken

dbldie55

Still lost, what did NGC do that upset you? From what you wrote, they have three different sets instead of just one like we have here. Am I reading this wrong?

Fairlaneman

Its a Combination of the Way they Rank Sets and Now Creating Sub Sets for The Obvious Reason just to Attract Collectors to a Basically Dead Registry Program.

As You Know Hard work goes into Putting a Complete Set of any Series Together. They by Splitting the Merc Series into 3 Different Sets IMO does not Reward a Collector for this Hard Work too Put a Complete Set Together. IMO a Series Collector Collects the Whole Series, not just Part of the Series. Thats How the Registry was Set Up over there and that is the Way it Should Stay IMO.

I Guess what Really has got to Me is that Now a Person can go out and Buy a Bunch of COMMON Merc Dimes and Be Rated #1 in a Set Catagory instead of Being Rated toward the Bottom of the Pack in a True Set. Maybe I am Too Sensitive About this But Right Now this is How I Feel about Sub Sets in a Registry Program.

tradedollarnut

Hmmm - so a serious collector of twenty cent pieces absolutely should collect the 76-CC as it is part of the set. Never mind the fact that most collectors can never own that coin - if they are serious about collecting then they have to have it. So why is PCGS breaking the set into two subsets - one with the 76CC and one without? That would seem to cater to "impure" collectors - those who choose to collect subsets.

Your choice to pull your sets is yours alone. Personally, I fail to see the logic about what angers you. No offense intended, but it just doesn't make sense to me. If you really loved your series you would welcome the chance to bring new collectors into the series - one day a newbie that started out on a dreaded subset just might fund your retirement by purchasing your early coins!

Fairlaneman

TDN:

By No Means would I Discourage a New Collector.

Let me Ask You a Question. When You Started Collecting You Trade Dollars Did They All just fall into Your Hands at Once or Did You Start at the Bottom and Put Much Hard Work into Assembling that Beautiful Set ??

The NGC Registry is Less than a Year Old and They Keep Changing Rules. This Bothers Me and Really I have had Enough of it. I was thier Before Any of the People that Post too the Forumns Now and Have had Some Discussions with NGC Personnel before Any One Else even Knew the Place Exisited. When I First Saw The One Dime Roosevelt Set Blowing Away Full Sets I Contacted David Lange and Questioned Thier Logic About It. Of Course I was Just Blown Off Untill the Masses Forced them to do Something About the Problem. This is Just One Instance where Very Little thought was put into thier Registry. If they Would Have Started Out with Three Mercury Sets Heck I would Have No Beef at all.

Now They are Making Sub Sets where a Collector Can Max Out One Set Then Move to Another without Starting at the Bottom of the Main Set as Most Collectors Do in this Registry Game. This Bothers Me. A Set to Me is the Complete Series and Not Sub Sets in the Registry Game. Most registry Participants Start at the Bottom. NGC now has Made it Possible, talking the Whole Series, to come into the Registry with a 50 % Complete Set.

Hope this Explains Some. Bottom line is That I am Just Discouraged with NGC and the Lack of Planning they Put into the Registries in the Beginning. This Last Change Just Finish Them Off for Me.

tradedollarnut

I bought them one at a time as they became available, much like you are doing with your dimes and like a newbie would do on a short set. Some people like collecting short series. I am collecting three series right now and they are all short - trade dollars, twenty cents and reeded edge halves. Those are all very short sets and probably appeal to someone with a short attention span like me!

The only way NGC could have had no changes to their registry would have been to copy an existing registry (if then). It's a work in progress, much like PCGS still is after 5 years!!! Seems to me a little much to ask them for no changes when PCGS is still changing after all this time.

DIMEMAN

I think I agree with TDN. PCGS hasn't even made these new sub-sets yet. If they do we can play too. We already have all those dates and as I understand they can be used in as many different sets as you want. This could give us a reason to upgrade the later dates. Or not. Everyone knows it is much harder to collect the whole Merc series as opposed to the short sets. I don't think this deminish(sp) the accomplisment of our complete sets. IMHO.

Jon

tradedollarnut

Forgot to mention that I own a Walking Liberty half set. It is in a Whitman album and is complete - if you count the Whitman album short set 1941-1947 as a complete set. Hmmm - PCGS does!

tradedollarnut

Here's the updated weighting que at PCGS:

Jefferson Nickels - Basic Set CS 1938-1965
Jefferson Nickels - with Varieties CS 1938-1965
Jefferson Nickels - Basic Set PR 1938-1964
Jefferson Nickels - with Varieties PR 1938-1964
Jefferson Nickels - Basic Set CS 1965-Present
Jefferson Nickels - with Varieties CS 1965-Present
Jefferson Nickels - Basic Set PR 1965-Present
Jefferson Nickels - with Varieties PR 1965-Present

Should all the Jefferson nickel collectors quit the PCGS Registry because there are subsets?