Home PCGS Set Registry Forum

2014-W Kennedy Gold stands in My way...and other Set Registry discrepancies

JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭
edited March 20, 2021 9:46PM in PCGS Set Registry Forum

I am trying without success to understand the two points outlined below...

1) The US Mint creates Proof Sets every year...some in Clad and some in Silver..as well as other issues

I have trouble understanding the inclusion of the 2014-W Kennedy Gold coin...because it was never included in any US Mint Proof Set

Since I only prefer to collect what I considered to be US Mint Proof Sets (in both clad and silver) and do not wish or care to collect gold coins...I cannot complete several Proof Sets because the 2014-W Kennedy Gold coin has been included

I fail to conclude with any logical reason for this coin to be a part of any Proof Set...since it is not a part of a US Mint issued Proof Set...The US Mint issues many different coins throughout each year and has done so for decades...not including them as part of the yearly Proof Sets

This one single coin is standing in the way of 100% completion for several of My Proof Sets...but only should belong in Kennedy Variety Sets

If the 2014-W Kennedy Gold truly belongs...why don't the other coins issued by the US Mint that are not part of the Proof Sets for the year get included too? The Commemoratives and the Medal coins are US Mint issues...but are not included in Proof Sets...as are the numerous specialty coins issued by the US Mint

Removing the 2014-W Kennedy Gold from Proof Sets won't hurt the Old Guard set owners at the top of those Set Rankings...but it would give those collectors who yearn to complete the true and logical Proof Sets an opportunity to rise in the rankings

2) I also believe that new year issues should result in immediate Proof Set creations...and filling those slots throughout the year should count toward Completion and Ranking...so newer collectors have a small window of opportunity to climb the rankings...even if only for a short time until the Old Guard collections at the top of every list get around to upgrading...prior to the 30-day window before Awards Deadline

Why is this important?

For a very short time earlier this year...specifically on February 8, ,2020...I was ranked Number One in a specific Proof Set...because I requested a New Slot for the 2018 North American $1 Reverse Proof (and for nearly 200 additional slots since then)

Being able to see My username sitting all alone at #1 for that Set...after just 40 days as a member of Set Registry...was all the incentive I needed to continue My quest for 100% completion on a journey to 100% perfection - and although I was the FIRST to complete it My set has fallen down the rankings because someone (several dozen of them) began registering their collection before I did

The future of Set Registry lies with younger and newer collectors...since in time the Old Guard sets at the top will fade away as the owners pass away - but if new collectors do not see a clear path they will not bother...and Set Registry may follow the Old Guard into history

I have seen and experienced Set Leader status...a feeling of being On Top Of The World...if only for a short time

I can only hope every new collector sees that path for themselves

Comments

  • illini420illini420 Posts: 11,403 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I understand your position, but here are some quick thoughts...

    Is the 2014-W gold coin a half dollar??? Yes...

    Is it a proof coin??? Yes...

    Coins of different metals are often included in the same set... whether it is 90% silver... 40% silver... copper-nickel clad... and now .999 silver with the new silver proofs. The 2014-W is just another Kennedy of a different metal... gold.

    There are many coins that are no longer part of the proof and mint sets issued by the US Mint (and I don't like this). All of the innovation dollars for example. Another example are the S-Mint quarters and the W-Mint quarters. Those are certainly part of a full set of coins in each series or a full set of US coins... doesn't matter if they are in the Mint Set... Same with some of the early Ike Dollars, they weren't in the sets from the Mint either... but certainly part of the Registry sets today.

    Of course just a few things to consider and I think this is a controversial area that isn't treated the same in each series. I would think having a separate sets w/ and w/o issues like the 2014-W gold would be appropriate.

    Similarly... the 2016-W gold Mercury Dime, SLQ and Walking Half could be argued to be part of the original sets by some (legally they are the same denomination and design, just a different metal composition)... but I would guess many collectors of those classic series wouldn't want to include those.

    Always collect what you like... not what someone else (the Mint or PCGS) tells you what needs to be in your set... that is why I think having more set options would be the best thing here... include it for those that want to include it.

    Good luck.

  • coinpalicecoinpalice Posts: 2,169 ✭✭✭✭✭

    i had 2 - 2014-W Kennedy gold coins i bought directly from the mint, i got them both graded from the host, one come back 69 and the other 70. it took a very long time to sell them both, maybe like 3 months, both at fixed price auctions. i remember what a relief it was to sell them, now i wish i had them both back with the current price of gold

  • davewesendavewesen Posts: 3,864 ✭✭✭✭✭

    since the coin was sold alone, I do not feel it should be in any set

    the 'same logic' would include the gold mercury, SLQ, and WLH in the 2016 sets and their respective series... are they?

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭
    edited July 13, 2020 9:51AM

    @davewesen said:
    since the coin was sold alone, I do not feel it should be in any set

    the 'same logic' would include the gold mercury, SLQ, and WLH in the 2016 sets and their respective series... are they?

    Perhaps as part of a Kennedy Variety Set - but any logical reason to include it in the 2014 Proof Set is something I cannot understand

    Would the same logic mean that the Silver Eagles need to be part of the Proof Sets too?

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭
    edited November 20, 2020 5:58AM

    PCGS advises that the Gold Kennedy is "special" by some standard...and will remain in the 2014 Proof Set

    Therefore...those at PCGS who have "special" designation authority should also consider each and every commemorative and medal coin ever issued as part of that yearly Proof Set too

    And the new basketball dollars need a place in the 2020 Proof Set !!

    Just WHO is PCGS to decide what is special or not special with regard to US Mint coins authorized by the United States Congress? Do they have a special designation that allows them to override the US Government? Perhaps they have permission from the Universal Overlord and Galactic Supreme Court?

    If it is called a Proof Set - it should follow that only coins included in the yearly Proof Set from the US Mint be included...and anything else belongs in a denomination or variety set

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭

    From 1983-1997 the US Mint issued a series known as the Prestige Proof Sets in an effort to bolster the commemorative and medal coinage

    No Set Registry Proof Set between 1983-1997 contains those comm/medal coins - yet the non-inclusion of the 2014 Kennedy Gold in the US Mint 2014 Proof Set somehow qualifies it for inclusion in the Set Registry 2014 Proof Set

    "It's a special coin" doesn't really explain

  • @JonJet if you have questions about a set or suggestions we would encourage you to contact the Set Registry team directly at [email protected] they also have a dedicated number which is 877-888-1318.

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭
    edited November 21, 2020 2:27PM

    @PCGS_SocialMedia said:
    @JonJet if you have questions about a set or suggestions we would encourage you to contact the Set Registry team directly at [email protected] they also have a dedicated number which is 877-888-1318.

    I have submitted My concerns...with little to no valid answers or explanations other than rejection

    I'll continue to point out flaws and errors where coin slots have been added/refused so the PCGS Membership can make up there own minds - as You may see from earlier posts by others...I am not alone in this quest for equal treatment

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭

    Here's another bit of Proof Set history...

    In 1971 and 1972...the US Mint Proof Sets were 5 coins

    In 1973...the US Mint added the Eisenhauer Dollar to the Proof Set

    Why are the 1971/1972 Eisenhauer Dollars required? They were NOT part of the US Mint-issued Proof Set!

  • GoldminersGoldminers Posts: 1,993 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Were Eisenhower proofs sold by the Mint in 1971?

    If the answer is yes, then they need to be included in the Registry set composition that is for all US proofs minted in 1971.

    How the proof coins were sold individually, in 2 coin, or 5 coin sets, etc. is irrelevant.

    National Commemorative Medals of the U.S. Mint:
    https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/alltimeset/195526

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭
    edited November 23, 2020 7:01PM

    @Goldminers said:
    Were Eisenhower proofs sold by the Mint in 1971?

    If the answer is yes, then they need to be included in the Registry set composition that is for all US proofs minted in 1971.

    How the proof coins were sold individually, in 2 coin, or 5 coin sets, etc. is irrelevant.

    OK...so using Your reasoning...all the proof coins minted during the year should be part of the Proof Set?

    What about the Silver Eagles? They are Proof coins

    Point is...the 71 and 72 Eisenhauer's were NOT part of the US Mint's Proof Set...starting in 1973 they were included

  • GoldminersGoldminers Posts: 1,993 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Silver eagles are considered by most to be a bullion coin, compared to the Eisenhower series.

    Totally agree with you the 71-72 Eisenhower's were not sold as a Proof set. but they are considered 1971 proof coins by convention. I am simply trying to explain to you why they are included in the 1971 proof registry set. There was a reason for doing it.

    Maybe there could be a new Registry set created that meets your specific criteria of just "as issued" proof sets, but there seem to be a lot of sets to manage for modern proofs already.

    National Commemorative Medals of the U.S. Mint:
    https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/alltimeset/195526

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭
    edited November 24, 2020 11:46PM

    @Goldminers said:
    Silver eagles are considered by most to be a bullion coin, compared to the Eisenhower series.

    Totally agree with you the 71-72 Eisenhower's were not sold as a Proof set. but they are considered 1971 proof coins by convention. I am simply trying to explain to you why they are included in the 1971 proof registry set. There was a reason for doing it.

    Maybe there could be a new Registry set created that meets your specific criteria of just "as issued" proof sets, but there seem to be a lot of sets to manage for modern proofs already.

    Most modern Set Registry Proof Sets are just fine...but there are numerous exceptions and inclusion of coins that just defy common sense

    Take the 2018 Rev Proof coins...they were originally denied as New Slot Requests in a couple of Year-to-Current Proof Set collections...until I pointed out that the reason was a celebration of the 50th Anniv of the San Francisco Mint - AND the fact that the US Mint actually issued them in a Proof Set

    My convention adheres to the US Mint's term - Proof Set - and the PCGS Set Registry uses the exact same terminology

    It goes without saying that Set Registry should follow the US Mint issued Proof Sets

    And occasionally there are comments in this and other discussions that agree...so I'm not alone

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭

    Another item regarding Set Registry denomination Proof Sets...

    The denomination Proof Sets we see in Set Registry for many years have both Clad and Silver coins...dimes - quarters - halves etc etc

    But the Silver Proof denomination sets only contain Silver coins...there are no Clad-only denomination Proof Sets

    However...the US Mint issues both Clad Proof Sets and Silver Proof Sets ( and even included nickels and pennies to make them complete so collectors had a choice)

  • GoldminersGoldminers Posts: 1,993 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I am quite happy the Registry gives collectors a choice in many cases. Ever since 1971 there have been modern silver proofs and the Registry has done a great job separating them from the clads as specialty yearly proof sets by precious metal.

    I have no desire to ever collect any clads which probably helps you in your quest for top sets that require them. :)

    National Commemorative Medals of the U.S. Mint:
    https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/alltimeset/195526

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭

    @Goldminers said:
    I am quite happy the Registry gives collectors a choice in many cases. Ever since 1971 there have been modern silver proofs and the Registry has done a great job separating them from the clads as specialty yearly proof sets by precious metal.

    I have no desire to ever collect any clads which probably helps you in your quest for top sets that require them. :)

    My collection has every Proof Set coin issued since 1957...regardless if it was minted in Silver - Clad - Nickel or Copper

    It's simply another example of how PCGS is deviating from the options the US Mint offers collectors

    And by the way...the proof sets from 1971 thru 1991 only had one year where there were silver quarters and dimes...the 1976 Bicentennials

    Anyone who collects the yearly PCGS Proof Sets has no choice but to get the clad coins as well as the silver...and there is no option to collect just the silver coins that started in 1992

    So if You decide to collect silver only...You are missing quite a few years and Registry options are slim-to-none without the clad coins included

    As collectors of US Mint Proof Sets discover graded coins and come to PCGS.com to register them...they are going to be quite surprised at how different the Set Registry Proof Sets have become from what they may well have been collecting for decades

    I am simply pointing out those differences...without ever referencing the additional variety options

  • GoldminersGoldminers Posts: 1,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 29, 2020 9:34PM

    Congratulations on all your collection. It is quite a lot of effort to go after all proofs, including these outliers you mention, since 1957.

    National Commemorative Medals of the U.S. Mint:
    https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/alltimeset/195526

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭

    In addition to the Set Registry issues above...I have noticed another discrepancy

    Kennedy and Washington Proof Sets have Basic and Silver options...

    But the Roosevelt Proof Sets do not

    There is no option for Roosevelt Silver only...but Washington and Kennedy collections have them

    Anyone else ever question this and get an honest answer?

    I honestly believe there should be Clad and Silver (only) options...as that is exactly the way the US Mint marketed the Proof Sets it sold

    Why should a collector be forced to buy Both Silver and Clad just to fulfill the Basic Proof Set requirements?

    What should they do with the extra nickels and pennies?

    Make one collection Clad - the other just for Silver - and satisfy everyone who wishes to choose

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭

    @Goldminers said:
    Congratulations on all your collection. It is quite a lot of effort to go after all proofs, including these outliers you mention, since 1957.

    It's been a fun journey...started several years ago before I discovered the Set Registry

    And every single coin has been purchased on eBay...many from the same PCGS Auth Dealer in California

    Had I started here back then...I'd have alot more sets nearer to the top of the rankings

    I just happen to be a keen observer...which is why I am pointing out differences in the logic used by PCGS to determine the content of Proof Sets - and thus far I have been greatly disappointed by the answers

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭
    edited March 20, 2021 9:25PM

    @davewesen said:
    since the coin was sold alone, I do not feel it should be in any set

    the 'same logic' would include the gold mercury, SLQ, and WLH in the 2016 sets and their respective series... are they?

    Since I do not pursue coins minted prior to 1957 (My Birth Year) I am a bit out of sorts with the Merc/SLQ/WLH series

    If You would care to elaborate on the specific Sets involved and the discrepancies You have noticed...please do so...

    Because the more reasons we have to revisit those issues the more likely it is that it will happen

  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 27,009 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 20, 2021 9:34PM

    @JonJet said:
    Just WHO is PCGS to decide what is special or not special with regard to US Mint coins authorized by the United States Congress? Do they have a special designation that allows them to override the US Government? Perhaps they have permission from the Universal Overlord and Galactic Supreme Court?

    It’s the PCGS Registry Set so they get to choose what goes into it. It’s fine to have a different opinion. I’d just suggest you be careful regarding your tone with our forum hosts.

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭

    Tongue-In-Cheek "tone" aside...

    There are distinct differentiations in various Proof Sets that defy all logic

    And the decline answers I am getting when I ask for changes do not resolve with plausible explanation

    "I can't find the rule but that's how it was set up and that's how it will stay"

    "It's been discussed and decided no changes will be made"

    So in effect...they are recognizing My points as valid...but do not know how to implement them...or who it might offend

    If the US Mint had the foresight to create options for collectors...I struggle to understand why PCGS is making such terrible choices based on the content of US Mint Proof Sets to include non-set coins and fails to provide choices for anyone who prefers Clad over Silver or vice-versa

  • Tom147Tom147 Posts: 838 ✭✭✭✭✭

    There is a hole in my set where the 2014 Gold Kennedy goes. I to don't believe our hosts should make a part of the circ. strike & proof collection. However, as I don't see PCGS changing anytime soon, I'm saving my money and watching the gold spot. It's holding me back two or three spots in the Registry

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭

    @Tom147 said:
    There is a hole in my set where the 2014 Gold Kennedy goes. I to don't believe our hosts should make a part of the circ. strike & proof collection. However, as I don't see PCGS changing anytime soon, I'm saving my money and watching the gold spot. It's holding me back two or three spots in the Registry

    I have 6 Proof Sets held up by the 2014 Kennedy Gold...and it's My feeling it should only be the Kennedy collection that is affected

    The more we spread the word...the more popular our sentiments will become

    Greater numbers will lead to better recognition of the issue

  • davewesendavewesen Posts: 3,864 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @JonJet said:

    @davewesen said:
    since the coin was sold alone, I do not feel it should be in any set

    the 'same logic' would include the gold mercury, SLQ, and WLH in the 2016 sets and their respective series... are they?

    Since I do not pursue coins minted prior to 1957 (My Birth Year) I am a bit out of sorts with the Merc/SLQ/WLH series

    If You would care to elaborate on the specific Sets involved and the discrepancies You have noticed...please do so...

    Because the more reasons we have to revisit those issues the more likely it is that it will happen

    the 2014-W gold Kennedy is a mint 50th anniversary issue
    the 2016-W gold Mercury, Standing Liberty, Walking Liberty are mint 100th anniversary issues

    here is a link to the set registry for them - you could argue the gold Kennedy should be in this set

    https://pcgs.com/setregistry/composite/6349

  • winestevenwinesteven Posts: 1,434 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @JonJet , by chance are your Registry sets under the name aj5831?

    A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!

    My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
    https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭
    edited March 21, 2021 9:26PM

    @winesteven said:
    @JonJet , by chance are your Registry sets under the name aj5831?

    Nope...all under My username

  • WAYNEASWAYNEAS Posts: 1,687 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @JonJet said:

    @winesteven said:
    @JonJet , by chance are your Registry sets under the name aj5831?

    Nope...all under My username

    And some nice sets may I add.
    Wayne :)

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭

    Noticed another oddity recently...

    A few eBay sellers have a habit of offering the cert number immediately after a purchase is made...

    In blatant violation of the "coin in hand" understanding that most collectors follow

    It's a likely possibility that a particular recently added Set and it's ATF Rankings will be adversely affected by those actions...much to the dismay of a handful of honest collectors vying for an ATF Top-5 spot over the next few days/weeks

    (Just in case our Hosts read this and want details - I have seller and listing change info)

  • WAYNEASWAYNEAS Posts: 1,687 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @JonJet said:
    Noticed another oddity recently...

    A few eBay sellers have a habit of offering the cert number immediately after a purchase is made...

    In blatant violation of the "coin in hand" understanding that most collectors follow

    It's a likely possibility that a particular recently added Set and it's ATF Rankings will be adversely affected by those actions...much to the dismay of a handful of honest collectors vying for an ATF Top-5 spot over the next few days/weeks

    (Just in case our Hosts read this and want details - I have seller and listing change info)

    I know your pain @JonJet. :(

    This is another reason that I would like to see registry sets and slot locations be determined by the time stamp and the tracking number. This gives everybody a chance at a number #1 set and #1 slot location. It is extremely hard to do when the big boys do a massive dump of coins into their registry set at once on day one availability to do so.
    >
    If we trace a coin from release to a registry set, it goes something like this:
    >
    Proof coin year 20XX minted in San Francisco Mint on the west coast.
    >
    It gets released by the mint and a dealer / buyer purchase the coins and then sends them to PCGS for grading.
    Again a west coast transaction.
    >
    PCGS grades the coins and sends them back to the dealer who submitted them.
    >
    If this dealer is located in the west coast, it takes a few days at maximum to receive them, if it is an east coast dealer, it will take up to a week or more to get the coins.
    >
    Meanwhile the west coast dealer can now list his coins up for sale on an internet site way ahead of the east coast dealer.
    >
    When the west coast dealer sell their coins, a lot of them will provide the cert# to the buyer so that they can enter it into their registry set without actually having the coin in hand. "keeps the buyer happy so he buys from them again".
    >
    This is an extreme advantage for those in the west coast areas and definitely a disadvantage for those in the east coast areas.

    As dealers you know that there are people who will purchase the item at the very first listing and will pay the premium ask price.
    Wayne >:)

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭
    edited March 30, 2021 3:32PM

    In addition...I collected many of the 2020 coins during the year...and absently dismissed the Innovation dollars while I concentrated on other Proof Sets

    The 2020 Proof Set was added just in time for the Annual Awards deadline...but had it been there 1/01/2020 like the 2019 Proof Set was...I would have likely been at the top of the ATF list for the better part of the year

    Now I need to find a single coin to complete it...and having a tough time locating one in time to make the ATF Top-5 and the 2021 Annual Awards - Edited: FOUND on Amazon 3/30/2021

    Lesson learned...but a hard pill to swallow - Activity alerts may have reminded Me to complete the 2020 as the coins became available...but since it was not there I just kept on keeping on with other Proof Set completions

  • If a coin was sold privately or in an auction it would be a courtesy to release the coin ASAP since money has changed hands and the new buyer or winning bidder has paid for the item. A valid auction or transaction should be honored.

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭

    I just has a GREAT IDEA while reading Your comment... @WAYNEAS

    How about...a PCGS Authorized Dealer in the Mid-West?

    Maybe somewhere north of Texas but just south of the Canadian Border?

    Perhaps somewhere in the state known for the Geographical Center of the NA Continent?

    A large city perhaps...south of Winnipeg and north of Sioux Falls?

    All we would need is enough shares sold to create initial investment for the Dealership !!

    IPO anyone?

  • WAYNEASWAYNEAS Posts: 1,687 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @JonJet said:

    How about...a PCGS Authorized Dealer in the Mid-West?

    Maybe just a PCGS grading house somewhere in New England. At least this way we could get the Philadelphia coins graded faster than the California people. Have you ever noticed that there are no major PCGS coin shows in the New England area?
    This would help if they did so. This would allow us to submit coins at the show for grading.
    Wayne :)

  • mrcommemmrcommem Posts: 1,050 ✭✭✭✭

    The Kennedy Gold Half dollar is a Kennedy Half dollar. Quit whining and fork over the cash and but it.

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭

    @mrcommem said:
    The Kennedy Gold Half dollar is a Kennedy Half dollar. Quit whining and fork over the cash and but it.

    Read the entire thread...and see all those that agree it's got no place other than in Kennedy Sets

  • mrcommemmrcommem Posts: 1,050 ✭✭✭✭

    I don't see where it is any different in design than any other Kennedy Half. Only difference is that it is gold. There are other series that have different metallic compositions in the same set. This is no difference. It doesn't matter that is was not issued in a proof set, it is still a proof.

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭

    @mrcommem said:
    I don't see where it is any different in design than any other Kennedy Half. Only difference is that it is gold. There are other series that have different metallic compositions in the same set. This is no difference. It doesn't matter that is was not issued in a proof set, it is still a proof.

    Nobody ever said there was a design difference...the difference is in the Proof Set created by the US Mint

    Those coins IN the Proof Set must be removed from the Mint cases - then graded to become part of the Proof Set

    THE 2014 GOLD COIN WAS NEVER INCLUDED IN THE PROOF SET CREATED/SOLD BY THE US MINT

    It's a Kennedy - and only belongs in a Kennedy Set

    If what You say is true - then the 2015-P dimes and halves should also have the accompanying Chronical coins included in the 2015 Proof Set - because they were sold together

    The 90's era Proof Sets should include the Comm Coins that were included in the Prestige Proof Sets too

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭

    Why aren't the 35 years of Silver Eagles included? They are Proof - and it says $1 in the upper right corner of the label

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭

  • WAYNEASWAYNEAS Posts: 1,687 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Jon,
    If Set Registry adds the ASEs to the annual proof sets, we are all gonna go bust trying to get all the varieties in PR70 DCAM or Pr70. :o I still agree with you that the there is no rhyme or reason why one coin belongs and others do not. It reminds me of who gets the top billings in a registry set and who does not and for what reason, especially when a set has a new composition requirement. There is no consistency.
    Keep the faith.
    Wayne :)

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭

    @WAYNEAS said:
    Jon,
    If Set Registry adds the ASEs to the annual proof sets, we are all gonna go bust trying to get all the varieties in PR70 DCAM or Pr70. :o I still agree with you that the there is no rhyme or reason why one coin belongs and others do not. It reminds me of who gets the top billings in a registry set and who does not and for what reason, especially when a set has a new composition requirement. There is no consistency.
    Keep the faith.
    Wayne :)

    And for that very reason...we need to keep this thread going to point out the wide variety of issues from one set to another and the various coins that make no sense in certain sets

  • JonJetJonJet Posts: 201 ✭✭✭

    I guess it pays to keep on trying...

    Resolution of the Title Issue of this thread has come to pass and I now have a #1 Ranked 2014 Proof Set

    @WAYNEAS Keep The Faith is an understatement, Sir !!

Sign In or Register to comment.