Home› PCGS Set Registry Forum

Old Topic- How about some fresh voices?

braddickbraddick Posts: 24,148 ✭✭✭✭✭
in PCGS Set Registry Forum
NGC allows PCGS coins into their Registry.
Would you like to see PCGS allow NGC coins into theirs?

peacockcoins

Comments

  • FC57CoinsFC57Coins Posts: 9,140 ✭
    I'd be in favor of that Pat, if anything because it would enhance to hobby. I for one know that I have a preference for PCGS coins, but now and again I'll run into an NGC coin that I like, but know that it's not worth the money or the bother to get crossed over. I'll keep the coin obviously, but it would be nice if I could include some of those in a registry set on this side of the street.

    Regards,

    Frank
  • fcloudfcloud Posts: 12,133 ✭✭✭✭
    No. that would be lowering the bar. It is fine that NCG has allowed the premire grading company on their site. I just don't think PCGS should. Next they'ed want to let all the services and the quality just doesn't seem to be the same.

    Tonyimage

    President, Racine Numismatic Society 2013-2014; Variety Resource Dimes; See 6/8/12 CDN for my article on Winged Liberty Dimes; Ebay

  • TONEDDOLLARSTONEDDOLLARS Posts: 2,928 ✭✭✭✭
    Is PCGS really the premire grading company that some think it is. I think they both should honor each others holders. they both have their strenths and weaknesses.image
    Magic Mirrors


    Rainbow Stars
  • JJacksJJacks Posts: 759 ✭

    No, No, No! image

    Many Franklins, Ikes, etc. in NGC may very possibly be overgraded from 1-2 points. Now if they allow NGC coins in the Registry, sets that have alot of NGC coins will dominate a few series, even though they cost less to put together in NGC format. PCGS should not put themselves in the position of acting like people should just get their coins NGC graded, because they are as good a company as PCGS is. On the other hand, NGC really had no choice but to allow PCGS coins.

    JJacks

    Always buying music cards of artists I like! PSA or raw! Esp want PSA 10s 1991 Musicards Marx, Elton, Bryan Adams, etc. And 92/93 Country Gold AJ, Clint Black, Tim McGraw PSA 10s
  • FC57CoinsFC57Coins Posts: 9,140 ✭
    OK - so are we forgetting to buy the coin and not the holder? Remember - one of the things we've been arguing back and forth here is that we should be able to appreciate a great coin, regardless of what holder its in. If the registry is to represent the best coins in a given series - and only you yourselves know this by judging your own collections, then who cares whether someone sticks in a few NGC coins in the mix. There are already allowances for non graded coins in some "Stratospheric" collections, why not let us little guys get some enjoyment of the hobby on this side of the street. IMHO.

    Frank
  • BearBear Posts: 18,953 ✭✭✭
    JJACKS - Your reponses always seem to make sense.
    We are indeed fortunate, that you have joined us on this Forum. Bear
    There once was a place called
    Camelotimage
  • PhillyJoePhillyJoe Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭✭
    I think there's room for both services to have their own registry sets. I think NGC should be NGC only and PCGS continue as is. The mix and match thing doesn't appeal to me & your NGC set could be all PCGS coins the way things are now.

    Joe
    The Philadelphia Mint: making coins since 1792. We make money by making money. Now in our 225th year thanks to no competition. image
  • HuliganRSHuliganRS Posts: 345 ✭
    Nah, no thanks.
    ">My PCGS Franklin Registry Set
  • JJacksJJacks Posts: 759 ✭

    Bear, it is sometimes scary when people agree with me you know! On the other hand, I don't know about bears. BTW, which part of the Los Angeles forest do you live in? I am in Orange County.

    I just also wanted to add - I have absolutely nothing against buying the coin and not the holder, but who is to judge that an MS64 from NGC is not just an MS63 from PCGS for example. I know of several people who will tell you it is such on many coins. If you find a nice coin that happens to be in an NGC or ANACS holder, by all means, go for it, but I don't think they should automatically get acceptance into the PCGS Registry.

    JJacks


    Always buying music cards of artists I like! PSA or raw! Esp want PSA 10s 1991 Musicards Marx, Elton, Bryan Adams, etc. And 92/93 Country Gold AJ, Clint Black, Tim McGraw PSA 10s
  • BearBear Posts: 18,953 ✭✭✭
    JJACKS - All of it. We bears have a rather large range. Bear
    Anyhow I am on this thread because an old topic deserves an old voice( and old body too).
    There once was a place called
    Camelotimage
  • IrishMikeIrishMike Posts: 7,737 ✭✭✭
    No No No, they can't do that, it would force collectors to buy the coin and not the holder. Besides some the finest world class sets of all time are in those ghastly NGC overgraded by 1-3 point slabs that all these coin experts keep telling us about, without any empirical proof. Heavens no don't let them in, all these self-appointed coin experts would have to prove what they say. Oh where oh where is Foxy Loxy when we need him?image
  • WWBillmanWWBillman Posts: 900
    IMHO, if you want to combine both grading service slabs in your registry collection NGC is a good place to do it. Go have fun.
    Bill

    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
  • DIMEMANDIMEMAN Posts: 22,403 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I don't know how I would vote on this issue. JJACKS has a good point about buying the coin not the holder, but if you find a nice coin and it is in an NGC holder, what have you gained if you can't put it in your registry set. I have had several very nice coins in NGC holders, but they are hard to sell unless you can find a dealer who buys the coin not the holder.

    I had a 1945-S NGC66FB that I needed to sell because I bought the same coin in PCGS so I could put it in my Merc set. Well this coin listed $50 in NGC and $200 in PCGS. It was truly a 66 and toned beautifully. Probably an end roll coin. I finally found a dealer who liked the coin for what it was and he gave me the PCGS money for an NGC coin. This is hard to do as most of you are probably aware of. I have seen good coins in all holders and bad coins in all holders. I haven't kept score, but PCGS probably wins. If we allowed a mix and everyone bought true to grade coins it would work out fine, but some would resort to buying overgraded coins at less money to gain an advantage. But you can probably do that now if that is the way you wanted to play and you didn'y mind owning overgraded coins.

    JMHO, Jon
  • JoshuaJoshua Posts: 56 ✭
    Why not allow a small percentage of NGC coins to be a part of a set? Say 5 or 10% as a maximum. Contrary to some beliefs here there are a few NGC coins that are as good or better than the same grade PCGS coins. This way it would allow you to buy the coin and not the holder in selected circumstances.

    Joshua
  • GerryGerry Posts: 456 ✭
    No thank you! Market prices in virtually every issue tell us the two grading scales are not comparable. Anyway, this is really an academic discussion because there is no way PCGS would ever allow it (I hope).
  • WWBillmanWWBillman Posts: 900
    Another thing, all this "Buy the coin not the holder" BS. Give me a break, anyone that buys a slabbed coin buys the holder to some extent. Its impossible not to. Seeing the holder, what company certified it, and what grade it was assigned will to some extent influence your opinion on the coin. Who here buys ACG slabs? Why? Because of the slab.

    Yes it’s a good philosophy to preach and strive to practice but I don't really think it will ever be something achievable.

    If everyone wants to buy the coin and not the slab then why does a lot of these same people want a STAR (NGC) on the holder and think PCGS should follow suit? (Here I go again Mikeimage)
    Bill

    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
  • mdwoodsmdwoods Posts: 5,547 ✭✭✭
    No, I don't think NGC is quite up to the standards that PCGS maintains. Not true on every coin in every grade, but more the rule than the exception. Mark
    National Register Of Big Trees

    We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,162 ✭✭✭✭✭
    IMO NGC's current standards are about the same as PCGS's standards of a few years back. They are not the same as PCGS's current standards. Of course, NGC standards pre 1995 were on par with PCGS. Of course, PCGS was pretty loose from 1998 to 2000. And pretty tight from 88 - 92. I'm certain you could point out a few more loose or tight eras from either company. They seem to change often enough!

    Who the hell knows? How can you tell the quality of a coin from a number on a slab? Standards change with every grader and every insert color. Now we're having showdowns cuz people can't even accept a number on just one company's slab, for heaven's sake!
    Early Dollar Set
  • BearBear Posts: 18,953 ✭✭✭
    Bill - Take a Zantac, it will knock that stomach acid down right away. Bearimage
    There once was a place called
    Camelotimage
  • IrishMikeIrishMike Posts: 7,737 ✭✭✭
    Bill, I am collecting MS64 reds IHC's in PCGS holders, hoping to complete a full set some day. It's the not the money or the slabs holding me back, it's the time to go see them at the various shows. Whenever I do to a show I ignore the slab, with the exeception of ACG, and the new PCI and a couple of wannabes. It's never been part of my nature to even look at the grade or slab, with the exception of the aforementioned IHC's and my quarters, which the vast majority are in NGC slabs. I get the feeling that PCGS hasn't gotten in right on the cameos. NGC is much tougher on the cameos. BTW Bill, I finally got that 1966 SMS 68 w* beauty in from R&I. It's almost a cameo, obverse is and it has luster to die for. When I get the Nikon back I will send you a picture, I know you can't wait to see it, so you can pick it apart.image
  • oldcameoproofsguyoldcameoproofsguy Posts: 3,174 ✭
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Eliasberg's collection graded by the NGC? If so, why are his collections still listed in the Registry? There seems to be a double standard set here? Eliasberg's NGC coins are OK but mine are not. When I'm done with my set it will probably be really close to Eliasberg's numerically because I have decided to collect the balance of my Barbers in PR67. How will it be possible to rank the sets fairly, especially if the series is ever weighted for cameos. I probably will have more cameos and DCAMS than Eliasberg because I am making a conscious effort to collect only these coins. Yet, how will we know how many he had?

    It is a mystery, and I am a serious whiner!


    My Barbers
  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,162 ✭✭✭✭✭
    image
    Early Dollar Set
  • IrishMikeIrishMike Posts: 7,737 ✭✭✭
    oldcameoproofsguy, no you aren't a wine drinker or a PCGS koolaid drinker. image
  • AndroidAndroid Posts: 726 ✭
    Why is PCGS so afraid of NGC? Perhaps for good reason!




    image Andy
    We are finite beings, limited in all our powers, and, hence, our conclusions are not only relative, but they should ever be held subject to correction. Positive assurance is unattainable. The dogmatist is the only one who claims to possess absolute certainty.

    First POTD 9/19/05!!

  • goyankeezgoyankeez Posts: 357
    Absolutely not. Many NGC coins will not get the same grades and designations if they were submitted to PCGS. A set of all NGC coins and all PCGS coins will not look the same and will not cost the same, but they may have the same rating in the Registry. That's not fair for the person who bought the more expensive and better PCGS coins. I've seen the coins in my current set go for much cheaper in NGC slabs. There were coins designated by NGC as CAM or Ultra CAM that will never cross to PCGS's standards.

    The bottom line is that the Registry is just numbers on a slab, and by looking at the ratings and rankings you can't judge the actual coin. The best the Registry can do is keep the slabs consistent in terms of quality, and I believe PCGS is superior.
    "Buy the coin, not the holder"

    Proof Dime Registry Set
  • DAMDAM Posts: 2,410 ✭✭
    wwbillman,

    Another thing, all this "Buy the coin not the holder" BS. Give me a break, anyone that buys a slabbed coin buys the holder to some extent. Its impossible not to.

    I think you're dead on here. Makes me wonder what the heck we did prior to slabbed coins. What was the issue then? Grading of course! Nothing much has changed.


    oldcameoproofsguy,

    ...but wasn't Eliasberg's collection graded by the NGC? If so, why are his collections still listed in the Registry? There seems to be a double standard set here? Eliasberg's NGC coins are OK but mine are not.

    BIG TIME DOUBLE STANDARD!!!!

    Recognize the accomplishments of collectors with GREAT sets from the past (pre-third party grading) and get them the heck off the precious PCGS only listings! If it's fair for one, it's fair for all.

    I wonder what PCGS's position is on allowing women to play at Augusta? image

    Dan
  • KeyrockKeyrock Posts: 961 ✭
    As long as they are consistent and can provide the same grade, designation etc...

    Now I have tried to cross a MS62 NGC and had PCGS tell me it was a AU58, however, I haven't tried to take a PCGS and go to NGC. I have a few that were rejected by PCGS, I'll submitt to NGC and those that make it into a NGC holder I'll see if PCGS accepts them. When It's all done I'll have a better opinion of the PCGS vs NGC issue....

    Rich
  • AndroidAndroid Posts: 726 ✭


    << <i>I haven't tried to take a PCGS and go to NGC. >>



    I have. Here are the results.

    PCGS 1937S FB MS65 Merc = NGC wouldn't cross noting the coin in their opinion is not FB
    PCGS 1934D MS65 FB Merc = NGC wouldn't cross noting the coin in their opinion is not FB
    1934 PCGS MS65 Washington = NGC refused to encapsulate due to cleaning (upon closer inspection, they were right)
    1935 PCGS MS66 Washington = NGC Wouldn't cross noting they would grade it MS65.
    1936 PCGS MS66 Washington = NGC Wouldn't cross noting they would grade it MS65.
    1945D PCGS MS65 Washington = NGC crossed to MS66.
    1942S PCGS MS65 = NGC crossed to MS65.

    Andy

    We are finite beings, limited in all our powers, and, hence, our conclusions are not only relative, but they should ever be held subject to correction. Positive assurance is unattainable. The dogmatist is the only one who claims to possess absolute certainty.

    First POTD 9/19/05!!

  • mdwoodsmdwoods Posts: 5,547 ✭✭✭

    I have. Here are the results.

    PCGS 1937S FB MS65 Merc = NGC wouldn't cross noting the coin in their opinion is not FB
    PCGS 1934D MS65 FB Merc = NGC wouldn't cross noting the coin in their opinion is not FB
    1934 PCGS MS65 Washington = NGC refused to encapsulate due to cleaning (upon closer inspection, they were right)
    1935 PCGS MS66 Washington = NGC Wouldn't cross noting they would grade it MS65.
    1936 PCGS MS66 Washington = NGC Wouldn't cross noting they would grade it MS65.
    1945D PCGS MS65 Washington = NGC crossed to MS66.
    1942S PCGS MS65 = NGC crossed to MS65

    Andy, what was your opinion of the coins, were you hoping for upgrades, straight crosses? Mark
    National Register Of Big Trees

    We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
  • AndroidAndroid Posts: 726 ✭


    << <i>Absolutely not. Many NGC coins will not get the same grades and designations if they were submitted to PCGS. >>



    And vice-versa. See my previous post.



    << <i> A set of all NGC coins and all PCGS coins will not look the same and will not cost the same, but they may have the same rating in the Registry. >>



    Yep! My over graded PCGS coins will have the same rating in NGC's registry.



    << <i> That's not fair for the person who bought the more expensive and better PCGS coins. I've seen the coins in my current set go for much cheaper in NGC slabs. >>



    If I can buy a correctly graded NGC coin, why the heck would I buy the more expensive correctly graded PCGS coin? Sounds like a great bargain for me! Since when does more expensive automatically mean better in the world of numismatics? "Expensive" quality is a perception and not necessarily a reality.



    << <i> There were coins designated by NGC as CAM or Ultra CAM that will never cross to PCGS's standards. >>



    Never say never!



    << <i>The bottom line is that the Registry is just numbers on a slab, and by looking at the ratings and rankings you can't judge the actual coin. >>



    Agreed! So what is the point of the registry if it is just a collection of a bunch of numbers on the slab? My numbers are better than your numbers? Isn't it kind of silly, based on what most have us have experienced with third party grading, that the "numbers" accurately reflect the coin? Hey! Whatever happened to the coin anyway?



    << <i> The best the Registry can do is keep the slabs consistent in terms of quality, and I believe PCGS is superior. >>



    One thing that's so nice about this country, is that everyone can have their own opinion. I would have to disagree with this one though, as I think that's the Kool-aid talking!

    Andyimageimageimage
    We are finite beings, limited in all our powers, and, hence, our conclusions are not only relative, but they should ever be held subject to correction. Positive assurance is unattainable. The dogmatist is the only one who claims to possess absolute certainty.

    First POTD 9/19/05!!

  • AndroidAndroid Posts: 726 ✭
    Mark,

    I was trying for a straight cross. I certainly wouldn't have minded getting upgrades, but that was not my intent. For better or for worse, I like all of my coins in the same kind of holder, and I like NGC's better. My opinion of the coins was that they were correctly graded by PCGS, and I expected them to cross. The FB thing really threw me though. I would've said that they were FB on initial inspection, but after looking at them, the 34D, under 16x magnification had one small area where they were not split. The 37S's bands are not real "round" and the split is shallow, but nonetheless I would have said they were FB. In any case, NGC certainly looked at the coins VERY closely. I'm thinking that NGC's FB standards are different than PCGS's, kind of like with "full steps" on Jeffersons.

    Andy image

    We are finite beings, limited in all our powers, and, hence, our conclusions are not only relative, but they should ever be held subject to correction. Positive assurance is unattainable. The dogmatist is the only one who claims to possess absolute certainty.

    First POTD 9/19/05!!

  • cointimecointime Posts: 2,013 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Braddick,
    I don't really like the idea, but they could give extra points as NGC does with the STAR* in their holders. Like there would be a 1 point addition for PCGS graded slabs. From the coins I have looked at and cracked out to cross, I would say their grades would compair 70/30.

    Ken

    My Washington Type B/C Set

  • Steve27Steve27 Posts: 13,274 ✭✭✭
    Yes, but I agree that some series would end up being dominated by PCGS coins and others with NGC, with the lower standard dominating. However, this might result in more uniform grading standards for both companies.
    "It's far easier to fight for principles, than to live up to them." Adlai Stevenson
  • cosmicdebriscosmicdebris Posts: 12,332 ✭✭✭
    Yes plain and simple
    Bill

    image

    09/07/2006
  • beornbeorn Posts: 211 ✭
    imagehi folks,i,m new to the forum so i may well get my feet wet.i have to agree with keeping ngc and pcgs seperate.its like comparing apples and oranges,there may even be some ngc set owners that would be offended.i happen to prefer the ngc slab over the pcgs slab.a mix would dilute the validity of the system.
  • perfectstrikeperfectstrike Posts: 677 ✭✭
    I'm torn. I'd like to see NGC coins in the PCGS registry because it might bring both services to start using the same standards. The down side, to me, is that I've spent a lots of $$$ submitting to PCGS when I could have gone somewhere else. Most of my certified coins would grade the same at both services, I know which ones would not. This is why I now submit to both companies.

    The competition isn't that big a deal. I'm acquiring more NGC coins, so that's not an issue either. The prettier coin is going to stay in my collection in the end.

    How about a compromise. Have PCGS add the NGC varieties that they don't recognize?

    perfectstrike
  • pontiacinfpontiacinf Posts: 8,915 ✭✭
    i agree with JJacks
    image

    Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
  • TWQGTWQG Posts: 3,145 ✭✭
    Leave it as it is.
    My eBay store
Sign In or Register to comment.