Quick registry question :)

PQpeace · July 4, 2002 1:38AM

Before I leave for a family day of fun,I will pose this question.

Do you think it is fair..or nice

of someone to have more than one set in the top 5 ?
Example..My friend ***** has 2 morgan sets in the top five..maybe 3 in the top 9..
And 4 of the top 9 Peace dollar sets.
I like ***** ALOT,but I think one set is enough ??

Opinions please.
I even told ***** that I was going to ask this question.

Thanks for reading,
Larry

RGL · July 4, 2002 1:49AM

If you have the coins, you have the coins ... I would be a happy camper to have even a piece of some of the secondary or upgraded registry sets out there....

WWBillman · July 4, 2002 2:21AM

Larry,

This has been discussed here before but is a good subject. There are a few collectors that are doing multiple sets in the same series and registering them all. To me it seems a little selfish and does not make sense, it just clutters the registry and discourages other collectors who just keep getting knocked down the ladder. Personally I can think of a lot of better things to do with my money than work on two identical sets at the same time. But that is not what I suspect they are doing. The coins in the second (or third) sets are left overs from upgrades, coins returned from PCGS with lower than expected grades, or were picked up because an opportunity presented itself and price was right. All of the coins in the second set have but one purpose, to be sold (they kind of fall into the category of dealer stock). What better way to increase the value of those coins than to use the registry to highlight the set and when it is completed sell it off. More money could be realized that way than could be if they were just sold individually as their usefulness to that collector in his true set ended. They only have one true set and that is the one listed highest in the registry.

If they are a hoard type of collector with no intentions of selling any coins and can assemble 20 sets in the same series at different grade levels, great. But again what would be the point of registering all of the sets.

The registry has the word finest in its title for a reason.

As to the question of fairness? Fairness very seldom has anything to do with it.

daveyn · July 4, 2002 2:38AM

I also agree, what's the point. The Idea here is the quality of the set ,not the quantity of sets.
I don't know many people who could afford a top ten Morgan set let alone two or three, I don't know if I would enjoy the hobby as much if I could afford to just go out and buy that top five set.
I think most of the fun is hunting that affordable coin and working trades and deals to aquire it.
As for the multiple sets , leave some of the glory for others.

Have a great fourth everyone,

Daveyn

quattrocoins · July 4, 2002 2:45AM

If the coins are owned by the registor, and they constitute a set, so be it. All this talk of compitition is for for those who need it. I do not!

I collect the best that I can afford for my own satisfaction. I have two sets in three series(so maybe I'm a hoarder). My 2nd proof Washington set is "available" (though I haven't advertised it... maybe I should give it to littlewitcher to do that for me! LOL

), only the white Mercs in my 2nd set are available, and if somebody can't top my 2-coin 2nd SLQ set, they aren't really competitors!

Regards,

Don

DCAM Washingtons,
Winged Liberty, and

keithdagen · July 4, 2002 6:33AM

Larry,

If he doesn't have any upgrades that you want, be completely cool with it.

If he has upgrades that you need for your set then it is completely wrong to be doing what he is doing and he needs to break up a set and sell you those upgrade pieces.

psxchelly · July 4, 2002 6:42AM

I dont understand why you would even want to have more than 2 sets of the same coins... seems expensive and boring?

quattrocoins · July 4, 2002 6:58AM

Why not add the sets together? Who says that a set only consists of one coin per d/mm? I have the same coins in white and toned, full bands and non-FBs, full heads and non-FHs, and they're all in my "set"! Perhaps we can start new catagories..."Registry Hoards"!

Now I got to go figure out how many '44-D 67FBs it would take to "beat" a MS60 '16-D!

Regards,

Don

lava · July 4, 2002 12:57PM

The rules are designed to give credit to the best sets. The fact that some of the best sets may be owned my the same owner is coincidence. The best are the best. If you want to get the credit for having one of the best sets, you either need the list expanded to honor the top 10 or top 20 or top 50, or you need to improve your own set into the top 5. I can see it now, everyone wants their name on a slab so everyone campaigns for the credits to go beyond 5. 5 is arbitrary, but I don't think you knock a set out just because it happens to be owned by the same same person as another nice set.

howie08 · July 4, 2002 4:57PM

Bill : I agree with some of your thoughts , that the second and third sets are leftovers form the first set , which is exactly the case in some of my sets. My family and I do this as a hobby , and it's fun for everyone to have their own sets . Granted , these are not top rated sets , but we really don't care ; it's just building the sets that's fun for us. I'm sorry that you feel it clutters up the registry , but it's not cluttering up the first page. The purpose of the second set , is not , as you stated , to be sold. The point of registering all the sets , is so that members can watch their sets progress.
Michelle : It's much cheaper to collect the same series , than everyone branching off into different series. Collecting in the same series , as you upgrade a coin , you can pass the one down to someone else , that you upgraded. If you like a series well enough to do one set , why not multiples ?
Thanks !!
Howie

Keyrock · July 4, 2002 9:36PM

It is a bit of a catch-22. I do agree that the registry is to be the best set(s) so either that individual will have it or another individual will. I would however be reluctant to peruse the Peace dollars based on that information. I guess I could see having upto two sets but more than that ???? It would be easy to have a great set then over time you find another superb piece, but your torn when it comes to selling so you start a second set. Additionally, I could see a blast white set and a lovely toned set. If that is how the Morgans or the Peace dollars are then I am impressed.

Are the set similiar or are they toned sets or white sets?

I could see PCGS starting a rule of no more than two (current) sets just to keep things interesting, otherwise, I would think it would discourage/intimidate people from collecting the series. Maybe even letting you have two toned sets and two white sets. Hmmmm.....

I would also wonder why so many sets in the same series? Do they/he/she want to insure their position in the registry? IMO, move onto something else.....

Rich

WWBillman · July 5, 2002 2:18AM

howie08,

I think it is great you collect as a family and you are right it is cheaper and more convenient for family members to collect the same series if that is what everyone enjoys. My statements were not meant to be absolutes, there are always instances that fall outside the norm. I would have nothing negative to say about family members posting their individual sets even if they are in the same series. They would each be a true set with one collector and have every right to be included in the registry.
My statements were more geared toward an individual collector. I also said that there are exceptions to the set only having one purpose (to sell it). I just don't understand why one individual person would want to register more than one. But again there are circumstances I could understand like having a blast white and a toned set. That would indicate a collector really loves and enjoys that series. But two sets where one is the collectors TRUE set and another with all the left overs from upgrades, coins returned from PCGS with lower than expected grades whereas the only thing that seperates the two is grade? I just do not understand the logic. Unless like I said it is only being done to advertise & promote your coins for sale which to me is an abuse of the registry.

DAM · July 5, 2002 2:25AM

Bill,

Good point with regards to the upgrade issue. I've probably got about half of what I need to complete another Two Cent Set in Red with coins I've upgraded over the years. And the other half I've sold or traded.

As a "collector", I saw no need to get rid of my dupesif I didn't have to, and have held on to them as a result. Of couse it's a little easier to do with the Two Cent series considering you only need 9 coins.

DAM

tompkins · July 5, 2002 2:54AM

If one collector has multiple sets in the same series, what is the problem with them being registered. As bill says, in his argument : against having multiple sets:

<< The registry has the word finest in its title for a reason. >>

If one person happens to own two of the "finest" sets why shouldn't he register them? Selfish? Is it selfish for High Desert to have a corner on the type set #1 positions, probably using the same coins in multiple sets? I don't think so. He happens to have the "finest" type sets. Similarly, if someone has two of the finest sets in some other series, is it selfish to not allow others into the top five? I think that it is not only NOT selfish, but detracts from the significance of the registry if certain sets (ie second sets) are prohibited from participating.

To the argument that it prices people out of the game: yes it might. But "finest" is "finest". And that costs money. It's not like the NBA with a salary cap. Do you propose a new series: "Morgan circulation strikes with a total investment of less than $500,000"? Might be an interesting series, but it's not the game by the current rules.

Pete

BRdude · July 5, 2002 10:14AM

Hi Larry,
I would answer just as you answered a question from me one time about the registries. A person should do what is right for THEM, regardless of who, what, where, when why, and how

khayse · July 5, 2002 11:23AM

Man, how come I couldn't get this sort of response to my very similar question
I posed a couple days ago?

My question was about collectors who register multiple sets but they don't own them
all at once (collect a set, sell it, collect same series with different coins, sell it, etc).
To me it's like comparing Carl Lewis (or whoever) with the second best sprinter and
focusing on the fact that the second best sprinter has the 20th best time. What
interests me is who is the second best sprinter, not how many times did Carl Lewis
run faster than the second best person ever did.

To answer your question, I think it's fair but I don't think it's very nice.
To me the registry is about showcasing your best. Putting up a 4th set
that is better than other people's first has got to be disheartening.

-KHayse
p.s. I don't think people are wrong for disagreeing with me (this seems to be
very much a personal preference issue).

WWBillman · July 5, 2002 11:31AM

tompkins,

We are not talking about having more than one set registered, we are talking about having multiple sets registered in the same series.

That High Desert comparison is completely off topic. HD only has 1 set in each category. Using the same coin in different sets is a different topic and has been discussed in other threads.

Hey, whatever makes you happy. You are correct, it is not against the rules. The rules also have nothing to do with this thread. The question posed was "Do you think its fair or nice". All I was doing is expressing my opinion. Obviously we have very different character.

Regardless of the rules I think about the other collectors participating it this "contest". I believe in giving my "best" (singular) effort and allowing them to give their "best" (singular) effort in each series I choose to participate in and would not rub my financial status in their face or use the registry for financial gain.

Regardless of the rules I personally do not think it is fair or nice. I think it is selfish, inconsiderate, self-serving, and unproductive.

tompkins · July 5, 2002 12:38PM

<< Regardless of the rules I personally do not think it is fair or nice. I think it is selfish, inconsiderate, self-serving, and unproductive. >>

I agree, Bill, my high Desert comparison is a little off topic. But is it selfish, inconsiderate, self-serving, and unproductive for some one with far more financial means than I to "buy" his way to number 1? To me, finest means finest; if someone can buy his way there or if one person has two sets better than mine, it amounts to the same thing: my set is "less fine" than his (at least by the rules of the PCGS registry). I don't find it at all selfish, inconsiderate, self-serving, or unproductive for a second set to be listed: no more than an expensive purchased set --- in fact, I would find it self-serving to preclude him from listing that second set, if that's what he wants to do! But just glancing through the registry, it doesn't seem to be much of an issue, as I'm not aware of any series where multiple highly rated sets are owned by the same person.

I keep thinking, "yes, it would be nice to let more players in", but then I keep coming back to the word "finest".

And, contrary to what you might surmise, I really don't feel very strongly: since I'm never going to be the one with two top rated sets in any given series, if PCGS wants to prohibit multiple sets from the same collector, I wouldn't object.

Pete

keets · July 5, 2002 12:57PM

But that is not what I suspect they are doing. The coins in the second (or third) sets are left overs from upgrades, coins returned from PCGS with lower than expected grades, or were picked up because an opportunity presented itself and price was right. All of the coins in the second set have but one purpose, to be sold (they kind of fall into the category of dealer stock). What better way to increase the value of those coins than to use the registry to highlight the set and when it is completed sell it off. More money could be realized that way than could be if they were just sold individually as their usefulness to that collector in his true set ended. They only have one true set and that is the one listed highest in the registry.

Hey Bill---didn't you learn about what idle speculation in the forum can do from the "teetelli bruhaha?" the key word in your above statement is suspect. it would seem that by going straight to the horses mouth instead of speculating would be a better way to find answers for the things that puzzle you. as i've said repeatedly in thread after thread, i'm puzzled by individuals who are puzzled by the manner in which some of us collect. i'll ask a direct question to get a direct answer----why do you worry so much about what everyone else is collecting and the ways that they assemble and register there sets?

give us insight into the hobby itself and not criticism of others. please.

al h.

WWBillman · July 5, 2002 2:29PM

<< Hey Bill---didn't you learn about what idle speculation in the forum can do from the "teetelli bruhaha?" the key word in your above statement is suspect. it would seem that by going straight to the horses mouth instead of speculating would be a better way to find answers for the things that puzzle you. as i've said repeatedly in thread after thread, i'm puzzled by individuals who are puzzled by the manner in which some of us collect. i'll ask a direct question to get a direct answer----why do you worry so much about what everyone else is collecting and the ways that they assemble and register there sets? >>

First of all you are right, the key word was "suspect". Suspect is just that, suspect not an accusation.

I also never applied my "SUSPECT" theory to anyone that registers more than one set in the same series. I did give alternate reasons why someone might do it and in some instances "I" could understand it but in others "I" just don't see the logic (personal opinion).

I do know for a FACT that there are individuals that fit my SUSPECT theory to a tee in this registry.

As far as that whole "teetelli bruhaha?" Obviously you are as uninformed about that coin he was selling as a lot of other members here that jumped on his self boasting, shady excuse, BS band wagon and are making a lot of idle speculations yourself. If you take the time to read that whole thread and the one it was based on you will also see he was the one personally attacking me.

I am not puzzled at all about how other people collect. Everyone can collect as they see fit, to each their own. If someone wants to own 100 1913 buffalo nickels I could personally care less. The only thing that puzzles me is why someone would want to register multiple sets in the same series in this registry? Maybe this registry should be called "The catalog and keep track of your collection registry" or "advertise your coins here registry" or "Fulfill your ego here registry" or "who has enough money to buy ten of everything registry".

There are rules governing how this registry is to be used. Like everyone always says to many rules can be a bad thing. So, there are a lot of moral and ethical issues that are not covered by the rules but instead we as members are left to use our best judgement concerning what is or is not fair when we play the game. Naturally when a lot of different people come together and try to agree on what is fair there will be different opinions. One of the reasons this board is here is so we may all openly express our opinions and try to come to some sort of majority agreement WITHOUT being personally attacked by someone who does not agree with you. It has also been proven in the past that the majority rule is not always morally right and at times PCGS has stepped up made a new rule to put a stop to the abuse of the registry.

To answer your final question, I don't worry or care. This thread was started asking for "OPINIONS" and for the reasons above I stated my opinions as is my right.

If you do not like my opinions so be it. You are free to express yours. But I do not expect to be personally attacked for expressing mine.

A lot of members that posted in this thread do not agree with me and, as is there right stated their opinions and some even asked me to clarify mine which I did.

I never accused anyone of anything. I never personally attacked anyone over their opinion. All I did was make some observations and state some opinions.

PQpeace · July 5, 2002 2:32PM

Just for the record..the person I am talking about likes having 4 or 5 sets..none are extras...just having fun putting them together..
I have 2 sets,but one is # 6 and the other is way down the list..
I will be removing that set soon as I put them into the pl and variety set.
Larry

dbldie55 · July 5, 2002 2:48PM

One person has three Proof Liberty Nickels sets listed in the top 5. He had the same three sets listed in 1999. If you own them, you can register them. (if they made it so you couldn't, the person can just have it registered for them. You know the kids set or something) Not allowing it would be like saying those coins in your other sets are not allowed, which isn't right either.

The one place that only one set should be listed is retired sets, especially if many of the same coins were in both sets. Not sure of the point of having multiple sets listed that are no longer owned. Naturally if you sell one set, you should have the financial means to assemble another set.

I am just trying to finish one set. Not a top set, just a complete set. Only 13 Mint State, 27 Proof, about 100 varieties, a few more error classifications and about 13 different patterns to go.

WWBillman · July 5, 2002 3:04PM

I just wanted to bring this thread back to the original question. Everyone knows it is not against the rules. The question is;

Do you think it is fair..or nice of someone to have more than one set in the top 5 ? (in the exact same series, for example; MS Merc dimes, one person registering set number 1, 3, & 5)

WWBillman · July 5, 2002 3:15PM

dbldie55,

<< If you own them, you can register them. (if they made it so you couldn't, the person can just have it registered for them. >>

<< The one place that only one set should be listed is retired sets, especially if many of the same coins were in both sets. >>

But if you own them and you can register them (Multiple sets in the same series) then you can also retire them. And if they are all in the top 5 and complete they would all go straight to the retired sets list.

You cannot have one without the other.

<< Not sure of the point of having multiple sets listed that are no longer owned. >>

The same purpose as having multiple sets listed that are owned. Whatever that purpose may be.

dbldie55 · July 5, 2002 3:35PM

I don't consider multple sets listed that you no longer own as being the same as multiple sets that you do own. You could buy-Sell-Buy-... until you had 20 sets, which shows nothing. But owning them at once is different.

I still see nothing wrong with registering multiple sets if you own them. The registry is just a way to catalog coins anyways. Otherwise, if you cannot be #1, why bother.

WWBillman · July 5, 2002 4:03PM

tompkins,

Sorry I meant to get back to you but got sidetracked.

<< But is it selfish, inconsiderate, self-serving, and unproductive for some one with far more financial means than I to "buy" his way to number 1? >>

No I do not think that way. That is the nature of the beast. The one with the most money wins. And that is ok with me to.

I just feel it is selfish, inconsiderate, self-serving, and unproductive for the winners to go to the extreme and rub it in by listing multiple top sets. To me it is like them saying;
"hey not only can I afford to do it once but look at me I can do it all day. You might as well give up because as soon as you take a step up I am going to knock ya back down. If my first set is the best it can be and I can't keep beating you back upgrading that one I will just register another and do it that way." (ok maybe that is a little extreme)

Believe it or not there are a lot of people who admit it or not are really trying hard and making a lot of sacrifices in an attempt to someday be in the top 5 in this game. Why would anyone with the financial means to buy his way there want to monopolize the top 5 spots and crush the less fortunate collectors dreams? They are and will always be in the top 5 and it only takes one set to prove it.

You are right it is not happening on a wide scale, there are no rules against it and if someone chooses to do it so be it. I just don't agree with it and am just responding to the question posed in this thread with my personal thoughts.

This registry is a competion regardless of what anyone says, if it was not everyone would not be rushing to update and add sets just to get a plaque. With that said I just feel everyone should and would in the true spirit of competion respect other set builders and fellow collectors by registering their one best set in this forum. If you want to build duplicate sets as a collector great but I do not see the advantage of registering them all.
If you want to retire a set and start a new one in the same series all over again in the registry, hey, thats great and I see nothing wrong with it.

I don't know maybe I am just a little to sensitive. But I have always tried to stand up for the underdogs.

keets · July 5, 2002 10:36PM

hey bill---you seem to me to be defensive and a little thin skinned!! i wasn't attacking you with my reply---maybe i should have used a few smiley faces to let you know that.

i'll probably incite you a bit more by asking if you think it should be called "the do it my way registry?"

i guess others, and maybe you fit into this category, get upset when someone else grabs too much of the limelight. there's plenty of room on the registry for everybody's sets, and plenty of room down on the lower veranda where i seem to be stuck!!

getting back to teetelli, i did read all the threads---i just don't share your OPINION about the whole thing. my whole point on that thread and on this one is the same simple fact. that would be---contempt prior to investigation. others who contacted him had a different spin on the whole thing and there responses seemed to be tempered a bit more than yours. perhaps it's just a matter of differing styles of expression. i do know without a doubt that despite the circumstances involved, character assassination accomplishes nothing positive. and that includes your attacks on him and his on you---the blade cuts both ways. the old saying that you can catch more flies with honey than you can with vinegar most surely applies here. i always use the PM function before a full frontal attack!!

al h.

DAM · July 5, 2002 10:50PM

Bill,

<<I just feel it is selfish, inconsiderate, self-serving, and unproductive for the winners to go to the extreme and rub it in by listing multiple top sets. To me it is like them saying;
"hey not only can I afford to do it once but look at me I can do it all day. You might as well give up because as soon as you take a step up I am going to knock ya back down. If my first set is the best it can be and I can't keep beating you back upgrading that one I will just register another and do it that way." (ok maybe that is a little extreme>>

In a way I agree wilth you, but only if it's done to intentionally keep someone down. And I don't think that's happening. The ultimate issue is one of money. If you have it, you can buy the coin. For some money isn't a problem, regardless of the amount. For others a $200 coin may take six months to save for. During that time a coin like they want may have come one the market a couple of times. Even if they had the money, unless they know the collector or dealer who owns the coin, or are on a dealers want list, they still may not know of it's existance.

Then there's the collector who's interested strickly in a series or two, who spends their money on those coins only.

And, even those with mutliple sets listed have room to improve, if they desire to. So now you're limiting their ability to assemble a set.

I don't think a person should be limited to how many sets they can list. This is utlimately a hobby. And it shouldn't be censored. With the Registry, PCGS has added another twist, visual competition. Prior to the Registry you could read about, talk about, or view sets at coin shows or in periodicals. Now you can see them in living color with the click of a mouse.

DAM

Edited for smiley

WWBillman · July 6, 2002 4:08AM

keets,

My apologies if I misunderstood your comments as an attack. Maybe I am a little defensive now a days.

I don't feel it should be the "do it my way registry" and I also do not think it should be the "do it your way registry" that is one of my points. Just because something is not against the rules does not necessary mean it is fair in the true spirit of competition. I just feel more consideration should be extended to fellow collectors before someone decides to do something. We all know this registry has a built if fallacy by calling them the finest sets. We all know better sets are out there. This is just a game among collectors who wish to participate. My opinion, in the spirit of the game collectors should limit themselves to registering their one best set per series in this forum.

As far as the limelight, I have not even made the decision to register my sets yet. I personally have no great need to stand in the limelight, that is not why I collect. One day I may decide to register one or two, when that day comes multiple set registers won't concern me personally because my one set will be my best effort and will more than likely rise above their second and third efforts.

teetelli, well he is behind me and you are right the knife cuts both ways. If that whole ordeal has damaged my character in the eyes of some other members here so be it, I can easily live with that. I know the truth as do a few other members here who very wisely choose to remain in the shadows. The vast majority here have been deceived and will never know the real truth but that’s ok to and they are more than free to form their own opinions about me and him based on what they know.

dragon · July 6, 2002 10:04AM

WWBillman,

"It clutters the registry"

Are you kidding me?? How about all of the absolutely inane proof state quarter sets, I believe there are like 40 sets all tied for the #4 spot that are all EXACTLY the same, all PR69DCAMs, now THATS clutter!!, along with many other of the near worthless sets that "clutter" up the registry. BTW, would any of these people know if someone switched their set with somebody elses unless they memorized their cert numbers?

If a serious collector has enough oustanding duplicates of coins in a certain series to make multiple sets in the top 5 spots, more power to them. It's not selfish and makes perfect sense, the registry is about COINS, not who owns them.

Dragon

DeepCoin · July 7, 2002 10:39AM

I have mixed feelings about this as I collect in an offbeat fashion. If I were to hit the lottery I would probably want to start a Merc set in FB. My current set is 100% No Bands. Thus I would have two going.

I agree with Dragon pretty much. It should be about the COINS. The average collector will never be able to complete with the really deep pockets collectors.

I am more concerned with the completion of my set, so I dont really care about multiple sets ahead of me. In fact when a new top 5 set appeared overnight in the Merc registry, we were all talking about how nice a set it was and how putting it together must have been such fun.

In some of the other registrys it may be more of an issue I guess. Anyway, if you have them you would be able to show them.

DAM · July 7, 2002 1:09PM

dbldie55,

The collector of Proof Liberty Nickels you mentioned has had those sets for a while. In the 1997 Set Registry, there were also 3 sets. The grade averages were 65.42, 65.00, and 65.00. Curently the top set's grade is 65.97. So there has been some upgrading going on. At least in one set.

Quick registry question :)

Comments