Home U.S. Coin Forum
Options

Hansen going CACG?

«1

Comments

  • Options
    coinbufcoinbuf Posts: 10,769 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Some of his collection at least, don't know if he will convert it all.

    My Lincoln Registry
    My Collection of Old Holders

    Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
  • Options
    ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 5,405 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Is it for sale somewhere? I wonder if it's just a dealer who decided to convert his coins before selling them.

  • Options
    BoosibriBoosibri Posts: 11,871 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said:
    Is it for sale somewhere? I wonder if it's just a dealer who decided to convert his coins before selling them.

    The post says that the coins will be on display at FUN which I read as being in the core DLH collection.

  • Options
    coinbufcoinbuf Posts: 10,769 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 30, 2024 9:12PM

    @ProofCollection said:
    Is it for sale somewhere? I wonder if it's just a dealer who decided to convert his coins before selling them.

    CAC had a full set of DH Hansen (owned by Hansen) Barbers on display at FUN, I do not think it was his top set but it was a complete or mostly complete set as I recall the press release. I think someone here posted a pic of the display in a show report.

    My Lincoln Registry
    My Collection of Old Holders

    Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
  • Options

    @PerryHall said:
    What's the advantage of going through the incredible expense of changing slabs? I assume these coins will no longer be eligible to be in any of the PCGS registries which hurts their marketability among those putting together PCGS registry sets.

    Maybe Hansen is more interested in having a high ranking set in the CACG registry than marketing them as a PCGS registry product. In theory couldn't he have the same coin in both PCGS and CACG registries if PCGS is never informed of the crossover?

  • Options

    @Boosibri said:
    If I was leading CACG, I would slab them for free.

    You never really know, maybe they are? It’s certainly not bad marketing.

    @edwardjulio said:
    Mr. Hansen may be a member of the investment group.

    Wouldn’t surprise me.

    Having fun while switching things up and focusing on a next level PCGS slabbed 1950+ type set, while still looking for great examples for the 7070.

  • Options
    messydeskmessydesk Posts: 19,704 ✭✭✭✭✭

    There were several of his coins on display at CACG's booth at FUN, including the 1912 Barber half.

  • Options
    coinbufcoinbuf Posts: 10,769 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @PerryHall said:
    What's the advantage of going through the incredible expense of changing slabs? I assume these coins will no longer be eligible to be in any of the PCGS registries which hurts their marketability among those putting together PCGS registry sets.

    Well in addition to the many points already made, for Mr. Hanson the cost is hardly a consideration. Additionally he has been dominating the PCGS registry for the past 5-10 years or so, maybe changing to another registry is a new challenge for him, and of course it never hurts to promote something your an investor of.

    @TrickleCharge said:
    Maybe Hansen is more interested in having a high ranking set in the CACG registry than marketing them as a PCGS registry product. In theory couldn't he have the same coin in both PCGS and CACG registries if PCGS is never informed of the crossover?

    I think, and hope that Mr. Hansen will have better integrity than that, I know that some (including some on this forum) have no truck with doing this and do just that. But I see it as a signal of poor morals and lacking in honesty.

    My Lincoln Registry
    My Collection of Old Holders

    Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
  • Options
    ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 5,405 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @coinbuf said:

    @PerryHall said:
    What's the advantage of going through the incredible expense of changing slabs? I assume these coins will no longer be eligible to be in any of the PCGS registries which hurts their marketability among those putting together PCGS registry sets.

    Well in addition to the many points already made, for Mr. Hanson the cost is hardly a consideration. Additionally he has been dominating the PCGS registry for the past 5-10 years or so, maybe changing to another registry is a new challenge for him, and of course it never hurts to promote something your an investor of.

    I'm not sure that any registry set is a challenge when you have a bankroll like Hansen's. At that point the only problem is finding the coins and even that's not hard when I'm sure he has several dealers looking for whatever he needs.

  • Options
    WalkerfanWalkerfan Posts: 8,976 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Has CAC even started a Registry, yet??

    I don't see it anywhere on their site.

    “I may not believe in myself but I believe in what I’m doing” ~Jimmy Page~

    My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947)

    https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/

  • Options
    Clackamas1Clackamas1 Posts: 765 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @shish said:

    @TrickleCharge said:

    Maybe Hansen is more interested in having a high ranking set in the CACG registry than marketing them as a PCGS registry product. In theory couldn't he have the same coin in both PCGS and CACG registries if PCGS is never informed of the crossover?

    I've had the pleasure of testing the CAC registry beta software. When the CAC registry goes live I think many people will eventually prefer it for several good reasons.

    Yes, Mr Hanson is one of many CACG investors.

    Will it include stickered coins in PCGS/NGC holders?

  • Options
    edwardjulioedwardjulio Posts: 1,033 ✭✭✭✭✭

    CACG Registry anticipated to be live April 7.

    End Systemic Elitism - It Takes All Of Us

  • Options
    WalkerfanWalkerfan Posts: 8,976 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @edwardjulio said:
    CACG Registry anticipated to be live April 7.

    Thank You. That's good information. :)

    “I may not believe in myself but I believe in what I’m doing” ~Jimmy Page~

    My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947)

    https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/

  • Options
    lermishlermish Posts: 1,954 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Clackamas1 said:

    @shish said:

    @TrickleCharge said:

    Maybe Hansen is more interested in having a high ranking set in the CACG registry than marketing them as a PCGS registry product. In theory couldn't he have the same coin in both PCGS and CACG registries if PCGS is never informed of the crossover?

    I've had the pleasure of testing the CAC registry beta software. When the CAC registry goes live I think many people will eventually prefer it for several good reasons.

    Yes, Mr Hanson is one of many CACG investors.

    Will it include stickered coins in PCGS/NGC holders?

    Yes.

  • Options
    P0CKETCHANGEP0CKETCHANGE Posts: 2,259 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Proofmorgan said:
    I do say, I’ve been very impressed by the CAC photos I’ve seen lately.

    CACG’s photography is pretty solid from what I’ve seen, but it’s worth mentioning that the Hansen coin—as shown in the Instagram post included in the OP—appears to be a digitally edited mockup.

    It looks like the obverse “Image Secure” shot was layered onto a slab image. Here is the Image Secure shot and the actual slab shot from CAC’s database:




    Incredible coin though!

    Nothing is as expensive as free money.

  • Options
    lermishlermish Posts: 1,954 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @P0CKETCHANGE said:

    @Proofmorgan said:
    I do say, I’ve been very impressed by the CAC photos I’ve seen lately.

    CACG’s photography is pretty solid from what I’ve seen, but it’s worth mentioning that the Hansen coin—as shown in the Instagram post included in the OP—appears to be a digitally edited mockup.

    It looks like the obverse “Image Secure” shot was layered onto a slab image. Here is the Image Secure shot and the actual slab shot from CAC’s database:




    Incredible coin though!

    I think the coin looks not quite as good in the slab shot but that embossed Small Eagle on the label looks pretty damn boss.

  • Options
    coinkatcoinkat Posts: 22,795 ✭✭✭✭✭

    So... where can you buy a suit with a coat lapel cut like that?

    I didn't think collar bars were still a thing.

    Sadly these are the pertinent questions if one plans to make the Best Dressed Collectors' list.

    If you are unable to afford six figure coins, one can at least dress and give the impression that you can.

    And I would not have posted this if it were not for an experience I had at a major show in within the last 3 years which will not be shared.

    Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.

  • Options
    WalkerfanWalkerfan Posts: 8,976 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @wondercoin said:
    ‘’I've had the pleasure of testing the CAC registry beta software. When the CAC registry goes live I think many people will eventually prefer it for several good reasons. Yes, Mr Hanson is one of many CACG investors.’’

    I won’t be one of them, unless they also allow PCGS coins in their registry and I happen to decide to list my sets in a second place. I’ve “signed up” with PCGS and I don’t “jump ship” (even if, hypothetically, for a bit more money). Best of luck to Mr. Hansen (and CACG though).

    Wondercoin

    I thought they were gonna have a separate registry for PCGS/NGC coins, regardless of whether or not they were stickered.

    “I may not believe in myself but I believe in what I’m doing” ~Jimmy Page~

    My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947)

    https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/

  • Options
    wondercoinwondercoin Posts: 16,706 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I thought they were gonna have a separate registry for PCGS/NGC coins, regardless of whether or not they were stickered.

    I haven’t been paying any attention. Too busy trying to improve the core PCGS Registry sets I am currently working on.

    Wondercoin

    Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
  • Options
    WalkerfanWalkerfan Posts: 8,976 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @wondercoin said:
    I thought they were gonna have a separate registry for PCGS/NGC coins, regardless of whether or not they were stickered.

    I haven’t been paying any attention. Too busy trying to improve the core PCGS Registry sets I am currently working on.

    Wondercoin

    Ok, thanks. I guess we’ll find out in April.

    “I may not believe in myself but I believe in what I’m doing” ~Jimmy Page~

    My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947)

    https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/

  • Options

    @winesteven said:

    @TrickleCharge said:

    @PerryHall said:
    What's the advantage of going through the incredible expense of changing slabs? I assume these coins will no longer be eligible to be in any of the PCGS registries which hurts their marketability among those putting together PCGS registry sets.

    Maybe Hansen is more interested in having a high ranking set in the CACG registry than marketing them as a PCGS registry product. In theory couldn't he have the same coin in both PCGS and CACG registries if PCGS is never informed of the crossover?

    From my understanding, CACG will have TWO separate Registries - one for ALL coins in PCGS, NGC, and CACG holders, with or without stickers, and a separate set for coins in holders of those same TPG’s, but PCGS and NGC holders MUST have CAC stickers for this second (tougher) Registry! As such, one can fully partake in BOTH Registries without ANY need to cross coins to CACG!

    Steve

    @wondercoin said:
    ‘’I've had the pleasure of testing the CAC registry beta software. When the CAC registry goes live I think many people will eventually prefer it for several good reasons. Yes, Mr Hanson is one of many CACG investors.’’

    I won’t be one of them, unless they also allow PCGS coins in their registry and I happen to decide to list my sets in a second place. I’ve “signed up” with PCGS and I don’t “jump ship” (even if, hypothetically, for a bit more money). Best of luck to Mr. Hansen (and CACG though).

    Wondercoin

    Good news! See my comment above!

    Steve

    @Walkerfan said:

    @wondercoin said:
    ‘’I've had the pleasure of testing the CAC registry beta software. When the CAC registry goes live I think many people will eventually prefer it for several good reasons. Yes, Mr Hanson is one of many CACG investors.’’

    I won’t be one of them, unless they also allow PCGS coins in their registry and I happen to decide to list my sets in a second place. I’ve “signed up” with PCGS and I don’t “jump ship” (even if, hypothetically, for a bit more money). Best of luck to Mr. Hansen (and CACG though).

    Wondercoin

    I thought they were gonna have a separate registry for PCGS/NGC coins, regardless of whether or not they were stickered.

    Yes, see my comments above.

    Everything I’ve said is what JA described MANY months ago. While I have not heard anything is different from what I said, who knows? It’s always possible changes may have been made in their plans. Presumably we’ll all find out next week.

    Steve

    Thank you for the info Steve. It would seem that Hansen crossing to CACG may be more to help sell his brand than to participate in the registry. Regardless, it will be interesting to see how CACG does compared to the more established PCGS registries and the more recent MyCollect ones.

  • Options
    Cougar1978Cougar1978 Posts: 7,640 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 1, 2024 5:24AM

    If Hansen has the pocket why not? Envision a display case at a show that’s nothing but CACG. Stacks of them.

    Do you have the money buy some?
    Are you going to step up and pay the money?

    So Cali Area - Coins & Currency
  • Options
    BStrauss3BStrauss3 Posts: 3,166 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I could offer BBQGC stickers - "Burton's Blind Squirrel Grading Conglomerate" with the motto "Occasionally Our Stickers Make Sense".> @PerryHall said:

    If Hanson is one of the owners of CACG and they are slabbing his coins, isn't that a conflict of interest or at least gives the appearance of a conflict of interest? The graders must certainly recognize his coins since they give them a fancy label with his name on it. If a coin is on the border between a B coin or a C coin, could the graders be consciously or subconsciously influenced to give the coin the benefit of the doubt?

    Coins are graded in flips. The labelling happens AFTER.

    -----Burton
    ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
  • Options
    winestevenwinesteven Posts: 4,076 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 1, 2024 6:26AM

    @BStrauss3 said:
    I could offer BBQGC stickers - "Burton's Blind Squirrel Grading Conglomerate" with the motto "Occasionally Our Stickers Make Sense".> @PerryHall said:

    If Hanson is one of the owners of CACG and they are slabbing his coins, isn't that a conflict of interest or at least gives the appearance of a conflict of interest? The graders must certainly recognize his coins since they give them a fancy label with his name on it. If a coin is on the border between a B coin or a C coin, could the graders be consciously or subconsciously influenced to give the coin the benefit of the doubt?

    Coins are graded in flips. The labelling happens AFTER.

    Not for Crossovers with a minimum grade requirement!

    Steve

    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
  • Options
    PerryHallPerryHall Posts: 45,441 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @BStrauss3 said:
    I could offer BBQGC stickers - "Burton's Blind Squirrel Grading Conglomerate" with the motto "Occasionally Our Stickers Make Sense".> @PerryHall said:

    If Hanson is one of the owners of CACG and they are slabbing his coins, isn't that a conflict of interest or at least gives the appearance of a conflict of interest? The graders must certainly recognize his coins since they give them a fancy label with his name on it. If a coin is on the border between a B coin or a C coin, could the graders be consciously or subconsciously influenced to give the coin the benefit of the doubt?

    Coins are graded in flips. The labelling happens AFTER.

    Can you guarantee that when a group of ultra rare coins come into the grading room, they never have any idea who owns them? :D

    Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.

  • Options
    MFeldMFeld Posts: 12,056 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @PerryHall said:

    @BStrauss3 said:
    I could offer BBQGC stickers - "Burton's Blind Squirrel Grading Conglomerate" with the motto "Occasionally Our Stickers Make Sense".> @PerryHall said:

    If Hanson is one of the owners of CACG and they are slabbing his coins, isn't that a conflict of interest or at least gives the appearance of a conflict of interest? The graders must certainly recognize his coins since they give them a fancy label with his name on it. If a coin is on the border between a B coin or a C coin, could the graders be consciously or subconsciously influenced to give the coin the benefit of the doubt?

    Coins are graded in flips. The labelling happens AFTER.

    Can you guarantee that when a group of ultra rare coins come into the grading room, they never have any idea who owns them? :D

    In all seriousness, you know that a guarantee of that type can't be made, as some coins are easily recognizable as being in very well-known collections.
    If you owned a grading company and were calling the shots, what would you have the graders do when presented with such coins for grading?

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • Options
    ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 5,405 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @winesteven said:
    My understanding is that with the new upcoming CACG Registries, the “formula” for weighting coins that fill each slot in Type Sets will be weighted to give a fairer point score to a rarer date in a lower grade compared to a much more common date in a higher grade.

    Will that “hurt me” in the CACG Registry Type Sets with me using common dates in high grades? Absolutely! But I recognize that’s a much fairer system, leveling the playing field, for Type collectors who choose to get tougher (rarer) dates for slots in their Type Set!

    Isn't that how the PCGS set registries work with their weighting system? I'm not sure I see how this is different.

  • Options
    PerryHallPerryHall Posts: 45,441 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MFeld said:

    @PerryHall said:

    @BStrauss3 said:
    I could offer BBQGC stickers - "Burton's Blind Squirrel Grading Conglomerate" with the motto "Occasionally Our Stickers Make Sense".> @PerryHall said:

    If Hanson is one of the owners of CACG and they are slabbing his coins, isn't that a conflict of interest or at least gives the appearance of a conflict of interest? The graders must certainly recognize his coins since they give them a fancy label with his name on it. If a coin is on the border between a B coin or a C coin, could the graders be consciously or subconsciously influenced to give the coin the benefit of the doubt?

    Coins are graded in flips. The labelling happens AFTER.

    Can you guarantee that when a group of ultra rare coins come into the grading room, they never have any idea who owns them? :D

    In all seriousness, you know that a guarantee of that type can't be made, as some coins are easily recognizable as being in very well-known collections.
    If you owned a grading company and were calling the shots, what would you have the graders do when presented with such coins for grading?

    I thought it was obvious that it was a rhetorical question. I don't own a grading company so your question is irrelevant and I assume it's also rhetorical. Do you agree that there's at least the appearance of a conflict of interest when one of the owners of a grading company has his personally owned coins graded by his company??

    Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.

  • Options
    BoosibriBoosibri Posts: 11,871 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 1, 2024 12:17PM

    @MFeld said:

    @PerryHall said:

    @BStrauss3 said:
    I could offer BBQGC stickers - "Burton's Blind Squirrel Grading Conglomerate" with the motto "Occasionally Our Stickers Make Sense".> @PerryHall said:

    If Hanson is one of the owners of CACG and they are slabbing his coins, isn't that a conflict of interest or at least gives the appearance of a conflict of interest? The graders must certainly recognize his coins since they give them a fancy label with his name on it. If a coin is on the border between a B coin or a C coin, could the graders be consciously or subconsciously influenced to give the coin the benefit of the doubt?

    Coins are graded in flips. The labelling happens AFTER.

    Can you guarantee that when a group of ultra rare coins come into the grading room, they never have any idea who owns them? :D

    In all seriousness, you know that a guarantee of that type can't be made, as some coins are easily recognizable as being in very well-known collections.
    If you owned a grading company and were calling the shots, what would you have the graders do when presented with such coins for grading?

    I think to start, it is the responsibility of companies to remove the most egregious and clear conflicts of interest, which CACG and the other services have done a fairly good job of doing.

    From there, you have to assume positive intent. It is completely impractical to eliminate all conflicts, real or perceived. The more we as individuals focus on the unavoidable exceptions, the more we drain ourselves of the energy to enjoy the hobby.

  • Options
    BoosibriBoosibri Posts: 11,871 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @PerryHall said:

    @MFeld said:

    @PerryHall said:

    @BStrauss3 said:
    I could offer BBQGC stickers - "Burton's Blind Squirrel Grading Conglomerate" with the motto "Occasionally Our Stickers Make Sense".> @PerryHall said:

    If Hanson is one of the owners of CACG and they are slabbing his coins, isn't that a conflict of interest or at least gives the appearance of a conflict of interest? The graders must certainly recognize his coins since they give them a fancy label with his name on it. If a coin is on the border between a B coin or a C coin, could the graders be consciously or subconsciously influenced to give the coin the benefit of the doubt?

    Coins are graded in flips. The labelling happens AFTER.

    Can you guarantee that when a group of ultra rare coins come into the grading room, they never have any idea who owns them? :D

    In all seriousness, you know that a guarantee of that type can't be made, as some coins are easily recognizable as being in very well-known collections.
    If you owned a grading company and were calling the shots, what would you have the graders do when presented with such coins for grading?

    I thought it was obvious that it was a rhetorical question. I don't own a grading company so your question is irrelevant and I assume it's also rhetorical. Do you agree that there's at least the appearance of a conflict of interest when one of the owners of a grading company has his personally owned coins graded by his company??

    Many of the well known dealers are also part owners/investors in CACG.

  • Options
    MFeldMFeld Posts: 12,056 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @PerryHall said:

    @MFeld said:

    @PerryHall said:

    @BStrauss3 said:
    I could offer BBQGC stickers - "Burton's Blind Squirrel Grading Conglomerate" with the motto "Occasionally Our Stickers Make Sense".> @PerryHall said:

    If Hanson is one of the owners of CACG and they are slabbing his coins, isn't that a conflict of interest or at least gives the appearance of a conflict of interest? The graders must certainly recognize his coins since they give them a fancy label with his name on it. If a coin is on the border between a B coin or a C coin, could the graders be consciously or subconsciously influenced to give the coin the benefit of the doubt?

    Coins are graded in flips. The labelling happens AFTER.

    Can you guarantee that when a group of ultra rare coins come into the grading room, they never have any idea who owns them? :D

    In all seriousness, you know that a guarantee of that type can't be made, as some coins are easily recognizable as being in very well-known collections.
    If you owned a grading company and were calling the shots, what would you have the graders do when presented with such coins for grading?

    I thought it was obvious that it was a rhetorical question. I don't own a grading company so your question is irrelevant and I assume it's also rhetorical. Do you agree that there's at least the appearance of a conflict of interest when one of the owners of a grading company has his personally owned coins graded by his company??

    It was obvious that your question was rhetorical and mine was largely so, as well. But I was trying to highlight how in some cases, potential conflicts of interest are unavoidable.

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • Options
    winestevenwinesteven Posts: 4,076 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 1, 2024 8:38AM

    @ProofCollection said:

    @winesteven said:
    My understanding is that with the new upcoming CACG Registries, the “formula” for weighting coins that fill each slot in Type Sets will be weighted to give a fairer point score to a rarer date in a lower grade compared to a much more common date in a higher grade.

    Will that “hurt me” in the CACG Registry Type Sets with me using common dates in high grades? Absolutely! But I recognize that’s a much fairer system, leveling the playing field, for Type collectors who choose to get tougher (rarer) dates for slots in their Type Set!

    Isn't that how the PCGS set registries work with their weighting system? I'm not sure I see how this is different.

    Absolutely NOT! While each slot has its own weight, coins of ANY date that qualify for that slot are all treated the same with PCGS, but presumably will not with CACG. So in the example i gave of a Type Set that requires one Morgan Dollar, a common 1880-S graded MS65 will have the same number of Registry points as a much rarer (and MUCH more expensive) 1895 Morgan Dollar graded MS65 filling that one slot with the PCGS Registry, but with the CACG Registry, that slot filled by a rarer coin will have more Registry points than a more common date filling that same slot!

    Steve

    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
  • Options
    ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 5,405 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @winesteven said:

    @ProofCollection said:

    @winesteven said:
    My understanding is that with the new upcoming CACG Registries, the “formula” for weighting coins that fill each slot in Type Sets will be weighted to give a fairer point score to a rarer date in a lower grade compared to a much more common date in a higher grade.

    Will that “hurt me” in the CACG Registry Type Sets with me using common dates in high grades? Absolutely! But I recognize that’s a much fairer system, leveling the playing field, for Type collectors who choose to get tougher (rarer) dates for slots in their Type Set!

    Isn't that how the PCGS set registries work with their weighting system? I'm not sure I see how this is different.

    Absolutely NOT! While each slot has its own weight, coins of ANY date that qualify for that slot are all treated the same with PCGS, but presumably will not with CACG. So in the example i gave of a Type Set that requires one Morgan Dollar, a common 1880-S graded MS65 will have the same number of Registry points as a much rarer (and MUCH more expensive) 1895 Morgan Dollar graded MS65 filling that one slot with the PCGS Registry, but with the CACG Registry, that slot filled by a rarer coin will have more Registry points than a more common date filling that same slot!

    Steve

    If I understand you correctly, you're saying that if I choose to complete a date set with an MS63 1893-S Morgan (very expensive) instead of an MS63 1893-P Morgan (much cheaper), I'll get more points for using the S?

    That doesn't sound like a very good way to do things. If a collector chooses to fill a slot with a difficult (expensive) coin instead of a cheap one, that their decision, but the "competition" shouldn't be about finding the most expensive coin for the slot, but rather which one is graded highest. I had always thought that the idea of a registry set was to reward the highest graded sets, not the most expensive/rarest/etc.

    This also seems like it is only an issue for sets like date and type sets.

  • Options
    winestevenwinesteven Posts: 4,076 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 1, 2024 9:12AM

    @ProofCollection said:

    @winesteven said:

    @ProofCollection said:

    @winesteven said:
    My understanding is that with the new upcoming CACG Registries, the “formula” for weighting coins that fill each slot in Type Sets will be weighted to give a fairer point score to a rarer date in a lower grade compared to a much more common date in a higher grade.

    Will that “hurt me” in the CACG Registry Type Sets with me using common dates in high grades? Absolutely! But I recognize that’s a much fairer system, leveling the playing field, for Type collectors who choose to get tougher (rarer) dates for slots in their Type Set!

    Isn't that how the PCGS set registries work with their weighting system? I'm not sure I see how this is different.

    Absolutely NOT! While each slot has its own weight, coins of ANY date that qualify for that slot are all treated the same with PCGS, but presumably will not with CACG. So in the example i gave of a Type Set that requires one Morgan Dollar, a common 1880-S graded MS65 will have the same number of Registry points as a much rarer (and MUCH more expensive) 1895 Morgan Dollar graded MS65 filling that one slot with the PCGS Registry, but with the CACG Registry, that slot filled by a rarer coin will have more Registry points than a more common date filling that same slot!

    Steve

    If I understand you correctly, you're saying that if I choose to complete a date set with an MS63 1893-S Morgan (very expensive) instead of an MS63 1893-P Morgan (much cheaper), I'll get more points for using the S?

    That doesn't sound like a very good way to do things. If a collector chooses to fill a slot with a difficult (expensive) coin instead of a cheap one, that their decision, but the "competition" shouldn't be about finding the most expensive coin for the slot, but rather which one is graded highest. I had always thought that the idea of a registry set was to reward the highest graded sets, not the most expensive/rarest/etc.

    This also seems like it is only an issue for sets like date and type sets.

    While i used Type Sets in my example, the same would indeed hold true for DATE sets.

    I understand your point and logic, and that is indeed how PCGS handles their Registry DATE and Type sets. But CACG is looking to balance things a bit by giving more weight to coins that are rarer filling a slot, compared to a more common dated coin filling that same slot.

    As noted, the CACG weighting system will hurt my Type sets (and my several DATE sets as well), as I've always strived for the highest grade affordable, so that means common dates), but I understand their logic too.

    Steve

    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

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file