Are large holders becoming popular? Do you have or want any?

Zoins

When PCGS announced the Rarities Holder, I was curious to see if it would gain traction. These remind me of the Capital Plastics presentation holders and perhaps the TPGs are trying to recapture some of this presentation.

https://www.pcgs.com/news/pcgs-launches-rarities-holder

Recently I seen more coins in large size holders.

Here's the original in the announcement showing a nickel.

Here's a dime-sized PCGS coin from @FredWeinberg:

Here are two more from NGC:

bidask

Only for the large coins I want slabbed

TomB

I mean, I guess if you have a lot of empty wall space in your office...

Walkerfan

They are 'OK' but I have no real interest in them.

BillJones

I don't care for big holders at all. Safe deposit box space is expensive, and if you own a few certified medals, you can fill up a box pretty fast.

Here is an example of "certification gone crazy." This Winston Churchill medal is about 68 mm in diameter. It's in slab that is 12 cm wide and 18 cm long and 20 cm thick. The medal is worth about $15. I paid too much for it because I admire Churchill. Still there is no way that one would pay the safe deposit box fee for this unless they have room to spare.

291fifth

Too much bulk.

Smudge

A holder should be no larger than necessary.

jt88

PCGS can't even holder my 5 OZ coin. I have two 5 OZ coin return as no holder last week. I can't believe it. PCGS pretty much raise the white flag to NGC by giving up on holder big size coin. I really hope they can re-consider it.

golden

I do not have any and do not want any.

Mr_Spud

I have a couple of the first 5oz quarters in large slabs

U1chicago

I’m not the biggest fan as they are often too bulky. I understand the need for large coins/medals but a small coin looks out of place in an oversized holder.

jesbroken

My favorite holder was the small white ANACS holder. It did the job just fine.
Jim

edwardjulio

.

Zoins

@jesbroken said:
My favorite holder was the small white ANACS holder. It did the job just fine.
Jim

The standard current holders would be a lot smaller if they weren't designed to hold $50 gold slugs.

Having a holder for Half Dollar and smaller would further dramatically reduce size.

anablep

I have none and I want none. I agree with @jesbroken regarding the small, white ANACS holders.

BryceM

I might like a regency holder someday for the novelty of it, but as a general rule, the frame shouldn’t overwhelm the painting. Nobody cares about the Mona Lisa’s frame - which means they framed it correctly.

Honestly, coins can endure for centuries. Coins now are lucky to stay in the same holder for more than a few years, and should be treated as such.

Zoins

@BryceM said:
I might like a regency holder someday for the novelty of it, but as a general rule, the frame shouldn’t overwhelm the painting. Nobody cares about the Mona Lisa’s frame - which means they framed it correctly.

Famous coins tend to come in larger holders, like the 1913 Walton Nickel and 1933 Weitzman Double Eagle.

Perhaps the "bigger" the coin, the more holder won't be noticed?

Here's the holder for the Walton Liberty Nickel:

Honestly, coins can endure for centuries. Coins now are lucky to stay in the same holder for more than a few years, and should be treated as such.

There are holders that have been around for decades now. I just picked up gold PCI holder. The holders can endure, but perhaps not the provenance or other items on the holder's insert.

If holders aren't meant to survive, we can make them more environmentally friendly by making them of biodegradable plastic now.

MedalCollector

The large size holders work well because they can hold many of the pieces that the standard slab cannot. They also help protect the larger pieces for which there aren’t a lot of good storage options.

The downside is that the holders are rarely optimized for viewing the actual item. The gasket is often too thick and hides the rims of medals (even though it accommodates the high relief devices). Many times the medal is pushed to the back of the slab, so the viewer can see the reverse, but has difficulty seeing the obverse.

Also, because of the reflection of the plastic, more so than with the standard slab, it is actually difficult to view the piece except at the perfect angle.

The larger holders also get scuffed more easily. I’ve received large size slabs directly back from PCGS with large scratches and scuffs. I’ve also noticed more dust and debris in large size slabs than standard slabs.

Zoins

@GoldenEgg said:
The large size holders work well because they can hold many of the pieces that the standard slab cannot. They also help protect the larger pieces for which there aren’t a lot of good storage options.

The downside is that the holders are rarely optimized for viewing the actual item. The gasket is often too thick and hides the rims of medals (even though it accommodates the high relief devices). Many times the medal is pushed to the back of the slab, so the viewer can see the reverse, but has difficulty seeing the obverse.

Also, because of the reflection of the plastic, more so than with the standard slab, it is actually difficult to view the piece except at the perfect angle.

The larger holders also get scuffed more easily. I’ve received large size slabs directly back from PCGS with large scratches and scuffs. I’ve also noticed more dust and debris in large size slabs than standard slabs.

It seems like the Rarities Holders account for this by using the same capsule size as the standard holder. They don't seem to be designed to holder larger coins or medals, but to provide a larger slab for the same size gasket.

Baley

Big slabs obviously make sense for big coins and medals.
For regular-sized, small coins, it seems like a lame attempt to make the coin more substantial, imo. Especially when the picture on the insert is only slightly larger, and of a different, prettier coin

Why not go further, and better, with an 8x10 or 11x14 framable slab with a nice trueview of the actual coin holdered within? and the coin itself, the grade, serial number, stickers, etc, displayed in the spaces at the top and bottom of the side by side circles of the photos? Plenty of room for more stickers! 😏

That would be cool for both very rare expensive coins, as well as more common but super high grades and/or spectacularly toned ones.

coinsarefun

I honestly do not like the large holders and have not bought many medals that I truly liked
but didn’t. Two reasons.....take up too much space and doesn’t fit in the standard box of 20.

Floridafacelifter

If I bought one of those Forsythe Indian proof $10s in the Legend auction the first thing I would do is send it back to PCGS to be removed from that ridiculously large holder.

koynekwest

I have one for my Pan-American medal-

FredF

The medal is worth about $15. I paid too much for it because I admire Churchill.

if it's a $15 medal, then why not display it in your house? Why use up SDB space? I totally get putting expensive items in the SDB, but if you really like the medal and it's not crazy expensive, then show it off. If someone steals it, oh well, but I figure you can get more enjoyment out of it if you see it every day then if it's locked away for safe keeping.

That said, to the original discussion I am in agreement with those who would prefer not to have these large holders. I can fit my entire collection in a partially-full shoebox if I want to, and I like that attribute.

Kliao

Too large for my liking. The coin and slab are just to disproportionally off for me to enjoy.

ShaunBC5

I don’t have any and don’t particularly want any, but would consider a nice multi-coin holder like the ones that have the Wisconsin Quarter variants.
Large holder for a single coin, though, probably not.

Zoins

From the announcement:

@BrettPCGS said:
It is always exciting to work directly with a collector to bring a new product to the market. These holders are meant to make a statement and allow collectors to share their prized coins in a distinctive way. The decision to share this creation with the collecting community as a free option for the highest tier coins was an easy one to make.

It's nice that it's free for the highest tier coins.

It sounds like it was developed with Gerald Forsythe.

3keepSECRETif2rDEAD

...I’m for small slabs, small phones and small taxes

Bruce7789

@3keepSECRETif2rDEAD said:
...I’m for small slabs, small phones and small taxes

Well the phones keep getting bigger, the slabs apparently are getting bigger and I guess I'm not allowed to comment on where the taxes are getting ready to go!

trueblood

I have cracked my medals out of the large holders due to one aspect, its size and nothing else

Zoins

For those that like their things smaller, it's possible to shrink coins too

http://www.capturedlightning.com/frames/shrinkergallery.html

scooter25

I don’t like them. That’s a lot of plastic for no reason lol . Kind of like wearing one of those giant sized belt buckles. And besides those won’t fit in my intercept boxes 😅

Zoins

@koynekwest said:
I have one for my Pan-American medal-

Nice. I still kind of regret not going higher on the one I missed a while back.

yspsales

They can be nice for presentation, but just don't care for them.

Like I learned with Box Toppers in baseball, alot of plastic means fewer customers and alot less $$$

There is a triple struck Quarter I need for my state collection.

It is packaged with four or five coins in a complete slab that includes errors I already own or do not care about.

amwldcoin

I hope you mean 20mm not 20cm thick as that would be something! 🙀

@BillJones said:
I don't care for big holders at all. Safe deposit box space is expensive, and if you own a few certified medals, you can fill up a box pretty fast.

Here is an example of "certification gone crazy." This Winston Churchill medal is about 68 mm in diameter. It's in slab that is 12 cm wide and 18 cm long and 20 cm thick. The medal is worth about $15. I paid too much for it because I admire Churchill. Still there is no way that one would pay the safe deposit box fee for this unless they have room to spare.

markelman1125

I think it’s too add a extra protection for coins that are less replaceable

AuldFartte

I have one, but it was necessary for two reasons (IMHO). One, the medal size is 64mm, and, two, being a "top pop" over at the other place, it really should have the added protection.

But for regular coins? No way.

MarkKelley

For the 5 oz. ATB's, the ones from PCGS make sense, I guess. The ones from NGC are entirely too large.

keets

with the larger holders for medals, PCGS has more options and more flexibility for size. NGC tends to have a one-size-fits-all approach for medals from 50mm-100mm which makes the smaller medals like the two in this thread look out of place. the PCGS holder is smaller, though it still takes up space. for lots of medals there really aren't many options, a bulky holder is better for long term protection and storage than a flip or the original packaging.

that brings up another point, that many medal come to us with no packaging and no protection. I recently won the medal pictured below and it has no box, came in a flip. it shows some evidence of what we like to call "cabinet friction" as well as discoloration at the high points where it has clearly rested for many years. aside from some type of custom holder, encapsulation is the best option. my collection is not so large that the capsule will require another SDB or rob space from something else. I'm a pragmatist, protection is more important than any space consideration.