To me, Registries are nice for organizing a set. The competitive aspect gets murky to me especially when point values get monkeyed with out of the blue.
Interesting. After a long time of not bothering to look at my sets on the NGC Registry I just went back to look. As many of you know, my favorite coins are toned business strike Franklins. I never assumed I'd have a top 10 set, as I could care less about FBL or (per se) technical grade. I created a set that originally ranked about 17 on the Franklin 1948 - 1963 circulation issue list. FWIW, 26 coins in my set are in PCGS slabs and 9 are in NGC slabs. Courtesy of gradeflation my Registry set has been trending backwards as to position in the Registry since I created it (I've upgraded a date/mm maybe twice over the last 10 years, but that's it). At the time of NGC's self mutilation regarding PCGS slabs in their Registry, my set was ranked 24th. In many cases I was offered Franklins that had a higher technical grade (and thus worth more Registry points) that I turned down as not being as good as what I had in my set, only to see them later in sets that were graded higher than mine.
Still, people can understand quality, and the old NGC Registry showed public "Views" of the assorted sets. Of the top 25 sets, my set had well over twice the amount of views as the next closest in views. It must have gotten somewhat frustrating for NGC, as, while at one point they kept the point values of the grandfathered PCGS slabs, they eventually at one point zeroed out the value of PCGS slabs dropping my set off the first page of the Franklin Registry, yet my set still continued to rack up views ahead of the top 10 sets. Here's a link to the set:
Like others, when NGC stopped accepting PCGS coins, I dumped NGC with only one set exception where all the coins were NGC anyway.
I see this as coming to terms with their "second place" mentality which I know many will disagree with but it is my opinion.
Would have made more sense if they crafted a deal with CAC like PCGS did, but once again, they are second fiddle and they know it.
“In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." - Thomas Jefferson
@WildIdea said:
To me, Registries are nice for organizing a set. The competitive aspect gets murky to me especially when point values get monkeyed with out of the blue.
I’m thankful that I don’t actively assemble registry sets so I don’t have to worry about which company certified the coins (if any) and instead focus on the coins themselves. Plus there’s less stress when a TPG decides to make a major change to their registry set.
Comments
I predict that prediction will not come to pass.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
To me, Registries are nice for organizing a set. The competitive aspect gets murky to me especially when point values get monkeyed with out of the blue.
Interesting. After a long time of not bothering to look at my sets on the NGC Registry I just went back to look. As many of you know, my favorite coins are toned business strike Franklins. I never assumed I'd have a top 10 set, as I could care less about FBL or (per se) technical grade. I created a set that originally ranked about 17 on the Franklin 1948 - 1963 circulation issue list. FWIW, 26 coins in my set are in PCGS slabs and 9 are in NGC slabs. Courtesy of gradeflation my Registry set has been trending backwards as to position in the Registry since I created it (I've upgraded a date/mm maybe twice over the last 10 years, but that's it). At the time of NGC's self mutilation regarding PCGS slabs in their Registry, my set was ranked 24th. In many cases I was offered Franklins that had a higher technical grade (and thus worth more Registry points) that I turned down as not being as good as what I had in my set, only to see them later in sets that were graded higher than mine.
Still, people can understand quality, and the old NGC Registry showed public "Views" of the assorted sets. Of the top 25 sets, my set had well over twice the amount of views as the next closest in views. It must have gotten somewhat frustrating for NGC, as, while at one point they kept the point values of the grandfathered PCGS slabs, they eventually at one point zeroed out the value of PCGS slabs dropping my set off the first page of the Franklin Registry, yet my set still continued to rack up views ahead of the top 10 sets. Here's a link to the set:
https://coins.collectors-society.com/registry/coins/SetGallery.aspx?PeopleSetID=8611
Needless to say, when NGC stopped accepting PCGS coins I went strictly to collecting PCGS coins.
U.S. Type Set
World sets are still not allowing PCGS coins. Too bad.
8 Reales Madness Collection
Like others, when NGC stopped accepting PCGS coins, I dumped NGC with only one set exception where all the coins were NGC anyway.
I see this as coming to terms with their "second place" mentality which I know many will disagree with but it is my opinion.
Would have made more sense if they crafted a deal with CAC like PCGS did, but once again, they are second fiddle and they know it.
“In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." - Thomas Jefferson
My digital cameo album 1950-64 Cameos - take a look!
Also the impossible task of ownership proof
[Ebay Store - Come Visit]
Roosevelt Registry
transactions with cucamongacoin, FHC, mtinis, bigjpst, Rob41281, toyz4geo, erwindoc, add your name here!!!
I want some of what you are smoking/drinking!
I’m thankful that I don’t actively assemble registry sets so I don’t have to worry about which company certified the coins (if any) and instead focus on the coins themselves. Plus there’s less stress when a TPG decides to make a major change to their registry set.