A rule I didn't know about

tradedollarnut

I'd never read the rules too closely until the recent question on the interpretation of what a PCGS coin meant. When I did I noticed another rule. Here is the email I just sent to BJ:

I see in the rules that a set who's owner has no intention of upgrading the
set should be moved off the current finest.

I recently reunited the Eliasberg 1884 and 1885 trade dollars and now have a
matched PF66 set. I have no intention of further upgrading the proof set
beyond where it is now. Accordingly, please delete the set from the current
finest and leave it on the all time finest.

Since my set is no longer active, I wonder if David would extend me the
courtesy of giving me the same estimated grades on the 1884 and 1885 as
Eliasberg in the all time finest category. Thanks.

PS - I will always be looking to upgrade the MS set, so it should remain
active.

EVillageProwler

TDN,

I think it was Stewart Blay who said that you're really just competing with yourself.

You're a special case, and it wouldn't surprise me if the rules of the registry don't fit you very well. If you were typical, then I would expect the rules to fit someone like you better.

What I think you should do is to share the wealth, become more typical, and adopt me. Go M's.



EVP

gmarguli

Hey, those 1884 & 1885 are listed as cameo under the Eliasberg set. I thought this got fixed?

Yank the whole set and cross them into NGC slab. They don't have a political agenda.

tradedollarnut

Actually, the 84 and 85 probably are cameo. You can view them at the NGC site.

At this point of time, I am so sick of worrying about "which" holder "what" is in, I will never change holders on a coin again!

STEWARTBLAYNUMIS

Trade Dollar Nut - Do you think there are any Trade Dollars left anywhere that could upgrade ANY coin you own ? what about in the Smithsonian ?

Stewart

tradedollarnut

Yes. There are lots of proofs nicer than mine - my goal there was a set matched to the quality of the two rarities - PF66. That is why I don't intend to upgrade any more.

On the MS coins, I know of a few:

Knoxville 1878-S NGC MS67 will MS68 at PCGS
1877 NGC MS66
1877-S in a private collection reportedly will MS69

I have a condition census on my website - I am absolutely certain there are others out there unknown to me. After all, the Vermuele 1873CC (NGC MS65) didn't appear until last year.

lordmarcovan

Wow. I'd love to see your "babies" one day.

oldcameoproofsguy

Is there a determined time frame that a set must receive an upgrade to be considered active thus remaining on the current finest list? This rule does not make any sense. If someone owns a set and it is together wouldn't that make it a current set regardless of whether or not someone intends to upgrade? What about a collection that has all coins being finest known? How does one upgrade that set?

TDN,
I also agree with EVillageProwler that your case is an exception, there will never be other sets that will even come close to competing, therefore estimated grades should be allowed in this case.

tradedollarnut

Good news: PCGS has changed the rule. The new rule states that when a set is sold or broken up that it should be removed. Otherwise, it should stay up.