Home› PCGS Set Registry Forum

PCGS database is acting weird

WhitewashqtrWhitewashqtr Posts: 736 ✭✭✭
in PCGS Set Registry Forum
Anyone notice that the pop reports in the Registry are way off? I assume PCGS is solving the problem, but for now, the system is stating incorrect population reports in the Registry.

PCGS's online pop report remains OK.
HAVE A GREAT DAY! THE CHOICE IS YOURS!!!!

Comments

  • RGLRGL Posts: 3,784 ✭
    Hmmmm. Maybe I can get those 67s bumped into 68 DCams by some computer error, zoom into the top five and get my set pedigreed ... Would be the cheap way to go! image
    The Ludlow Collection (DCAM/CAM)
    The Ludlow Brilliant Collection (1938-64)

    image
  • RGLRGL Posts: 3,784 ✭
    BJ are you listening (or reading at least)? Ok, I see what is at work here apparently attributable to some server or programming glitch. The registry pop listings have been advanced one notch; that is, the number of coins in a listed coin's grade is listed as the pop higher and the the listed coin's pop has been replaced with the number of coins in the grade below. To clarify by example: The 1942 Type I Jefferson proof has a population of 206 in PR-67 with none higher. It now reads 834 in PR-67 (which is the PR-66 pop) and 204 higher (which is the true PR-67 number). Sounds easy enough to fix with a line of code...
    The Ludlow Collection (DCAM/CAM)
    The Ludlow Brilliant Collection (1938-64)

    image
  • sonofagunksonofagunk Posts: 1,349 ✭✭
    I saw a lot of pop 0/0 coins in Wayne's Lincoln Set. Wonder what they are worth
    eBay Error Sales
  • BNEBNE Posts: 772 ✭
    Probably nothing, as they evidently don't exist.image
    "The essence of sleight of hand is distraction and misdirection. If smoeone can be convinced that he has, through his own perspicacity, divined your hidden purposes, he will not look further."

    William S. Burroughs, Cities of the Red Night
  • BearBear Posts: 18,953 ✭✭✭
    You dont seem to understand, coins that dont exist are actually flawless. As such, they are very rare and should be very valuable . Actually, I have thousands of coins that dont exist and when I sell them I will be very ,very rich, at least for a bear.image
    There once was a place called
    Camelotimage
  • cladkingcladking Posts: 28,689 ✭✭✭✭✭
    That is a flawless coin Bear. Even if you hit it with a hammer it'll still
    be flawless- - that should bump it up a little from a mere MS-70!
    Tempus fugit.
  • tompkinstompkins Posts: 413
    For what it's worth, in at least one series I looked at, the registry pop was getting the wrong number by two grades for DCAMs and one grade for Cameos---that is, a 69DCAM reported the actual pop of 67DCAM, and in the "pop higher than" column reported the pops for 68DC, 69DC and 70DC---everything is off by two grades. Similarly, a 69CAM reported the actual pop for a 68CAM---everything is off by one grade. And the non-cameo's are reported correctly.

    Something must be screwed up in their lookup as they migrate from penalties for noon-DCAM to the newer approach of adding bonuses for CAM and DCAM.

    Pete
    My coins
  • FlashFlash Posts: 1,090 ✭✭✭
    Maybe that explains why the pop for 1981-S SBA's in MS66 zoomed to 175 with 66 higher in a matter of a week! It was something like 67 with 0 higher the last time I checked. But hey.. I really like the pop for my MS63 1900 Barber half. It is now a pop 5 with only 2 graded higher. Wooohooooo!! image I hope that whatever the problem is, it gets fixed really soon!
    Matt
Sign In or Register to comment.