BJ: Can You Answer These Questions Please
wondercoin
Posts: 16,973 ✭✭✭✭✭
BJ: I have a couple questions concerning future exhibits (i.e. "showdowns") of popular and exceptional quality PCGS collections:
1. Must a set be registered to participate? In other words, if an unregistered PCGS set collector agrees to have his/her set displayed at an exhibt (showdown) without actually being registered in the Registry, is there any problem with that? For example, would there have been any problem if Stewart competed in the last showdown, but did not actually register his set in the set Registry? There are some collectors who simply have no interest in registering their PCGS collection in the Registry, but might consider allowing PCGS to display their incredible collection at one of the events involving their collecting area.
2. Assuming a collector has a "world class" PCGS collection in the collecting area for which an exhibit is to take place, will PCGS make the arrangements for both the pick up and return of the collection at PCGS' expense. In other words, say a collector has a $1,500,000 collection. He certainly would not be interested in preparing (60) separate Registered Mail packages (max. insurance $25k per shipment) to mail the coins to PCGS that way. I would assume PCGS would arrange a Brinks pick up (or something along those lines) and return of the collection to the collector at PCGS' expense? Further, I assume from the time the collection left the collector's hands to the time it was safely delivered back to his/her bank, the collection would be fully insured against all risks of loss by PCGS? Is this the case?
I believe PCGS will attract many more world class collections depending upon the answers to these questions.
Thanks in advance for taking the time to address this thread. Wondercoin.
1. Must a set be registered to participate? In other words, if an unregistered PCGS set collector agrees to have his/her set displayed at an exhibt (showdown) without actually being registered in the Registry, is there any problem with that? For example, would there have been any problem if Stewart competed in the last showdown, but did not actually register his set in the set Registry? There are some collectors who simply have no interest in registering their PCGS collection in the Registry, but might consider allowing PCGS to display their incredible collection at one of the events involving their collecting area.
2. Assuming a collector has a "world class" PCGS collection in the collecting area for which an exhibit is to take place, will PCGS make the arrangements for both the pick up and return of the collection at PCGS' expense. In other words, say a collector has a $1,500,000 collection. He certainly would not be interested in preparing (60) separate Registered Mail packages (max. insurance $25k per shipment) to mail the coins to PCGS that way. I would assume PCGS would arrange a Brinks pick up (or something along those lines) and return of the collection to the collector at PCGS' expense? Further, I assume from the time the collection left the collector's hands to the time it was safely delivered back to his/her bank, the collection would be fully insured against all risks of loss by PCGS? Is this the case?
I believe PCGS will attract many more world class collections depending upon the answers to these questions.
Thanks in advance for taking the time to address this thread. Wondercoin.
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
0
Comments
Since you made this a public thread, I feel that comments should be okay.
I feel the answer to 1 partially depends on 2.
I can see reasons why PCGS would want sets registered as that is how they can futher promote the registry. I would think if someone wants PCGS to "foot" the bill to get the coins to a "showdown" then the owner should register the set in return.
At the same time, I can see why some would not want to register their set (I can see reasons why you do not register your Washington Quarter set, but have no idea what the actual reason is). While I respect the decision of anyone to do this, I cannot see what the difference is between anonymously registering the set vs. showing it at a public display (sort of like the sets called David Hall Customer).
Just wish I could attend some of these shows. Hope my comments do not seem out of line.
As you know, there are great sets out there that are not registered and likely will not be anytime soon. Still, these sets would be a thrill for all to see at one of the exhibits involving that particular collecting area. For example, just think if Stewart (for whatever reason) decided to not register his Indian Cent collection and, on that basis, PCGS did not welcome his set to the showdown. What a loss that would have been -right?
Regarding the issue of pick up and delivery of the coins -well, to me, it's kind of like dating a wonderful woman on the first big date. You go and pick her up and take her home. Sure, she could drive to you and find her own way home. But, when the date is over, you want her to know you put your best foot forward and treated her like a lady all the way - right? No different with these special coin collections? Comparing wonderful women to coins - OK, I've been at it too long ever since Long Beach
Wondercoin.
As for the transport issue, it makes sense for the sponsor to arrange for transport and insurance of pieces.
bsearls@collectors.com
Set Registry & Special Projects Director
PCGS (coins) www.pcgs.com
PSA (cards & tickets) www.psacard.com
Wondercoin
Assuming "most" of the world's finest coins are in PCGS holders, what harm would it do to have a few NGC or other holders represented? PCGS could even offer free crossover reviews for coins in attendance not in their holder. And who knows, perhaps some of them would cross, giving PCGS even more of the "finest market".
And then, what about raw coins?
Isn't the underlying issue... to find the finest?
...they are entitled to promote their product.
I agree with you. No argument there. But, their product is the grade, correct or not, not the coin. I maintain not allowing a "coin" to be included, that rivals a PCGS graded coin or not, is a disservice to the hobby. IMHO
As for your car dealer analogy, what about a cruise in. All makes are usually welcome. Granted, they're not new models, but still from different manufactures. They may not have them everywhere, but they do have them here in Ohio.
Edited because my fingers didn't get the correct commands from my brain.
Maybe this will open up another avenue for the ambitious to start a "Showdown" off ALL/ANY coins at major shows, possibly in conjunction with the displays?
But, until someone comes along to do so, if it's PCGS sponsored then why should they open it up for SEGS/NGC/PCI/RAW coins?
peacockcoins
USPS insurance can be purchased for up to 15mil (13K charge for that amount) so only one package needed! Special handling does need to be arranged.
Registry 1909-1958 Proof Lincolns
wONDERCOIN - I have my own insurance when my coins are with me.When PCGS had pocession of my coins,they provided insurance.You have to realize this is a two way street.The same is true if everyone else in a showdown has to register their sets,then why not your client ? PCGS spent their own money and time putting together the showdown.It is also a pleasure working with B.J.
I honestly believe my Indian Cents are worth more today than they were before the showdown.I believe the same is true for the Richard collection and the Ally collection.
Stewart
<< <i>Re: Shipping comment
USPS insurance can be purchased for up to 15mil (13K charge for that amount) so only one package needed! Special handling does need to be arranged.
Of course, if it gets lost they will only pay a max of $25,000. Are you sure you want to do that?
Stewart: Understand that I can not force a customer to register a set. That is why I asked the question. Let's say you had no interest in registering your Indian set (indeed, you had no interest for the past many years) and on that technicality your set was not allowed in the Showdown. What a loss all the way around that would have been for everyone.
Frankly, if you are asking me, I think the act of registering a set is a "red herring", if you know what I mean. Do you think a single person walking by the PCGS booth at Long Beach muttered "I sure hope that Blay collection is actually registered on line with PCGS". Or "I will only love this Blay collection if it is registered".
PCGS demanding that private people who chose not to register their set but agree to display their work for all the world to enjoy, must register their collection or not be involved in an exhibit is essentially "biting the hand that feeds them". It is the collectors that make PCGS what they are, not the other way around. To force a collector with a spectacular PCGS set to register it when he choses not to or not be allowed to exhibit it is being very penny wise and pound foolish. It is also failing to respect the wishes of a collector IMHO. It is "lose-lose", a bad way to do business I'm afraid. Just my 2 cents - no disrespect intended.
Wondercoin
Mitch,
What are you afraid of happening ? Your collector can remain anonymous by registering his/her collector under Mickey Mouse's spectacular Liberty Head nickels or Popeye's Washington quarters and noone's privacy will ever be invaded.You should persuade your client as I can tell you it is a Real High !!!!!
Stewart
Pete
Maybe someone wouldn't even want PCGS and all of its sister companies to have the personal information on them. Frankly it is not my business to tell collectors what they have to do and not do. Now, if a dealer representative could register the set under some fictitious name he could create (such as "Popeye's Wash Quarters" as you suggest) then it seems fine to me (and also rediculous that PCGS would require such foolishness
Stewart: P.S. Enough of this - on to more lucrative things. I'm glad you are up at this late hour - I will call you.
I have to jump in here! PCGS is not FORCING anyone to register his or her set. PCGS is not forcing anyone to participate in a showdown. The Showdown was meant to be FUN. Yes, it's marketing for the Set Registry and yes, it does a lot to promote a certain series and the collections that are involved, but the bottom line is that we are having fun doing it. I want to keep it that way.
If you have a customer who owns the finest set in the country and does not want to register his or her set for whatever reason, that's fine. The Showdown is meant to showcase registered sets. We have never claimed that the sets we are showcasing are the finest in existence (although after seeing Stewart's set we might legitimately make that claim), we are merely saying that they are the finest in the Set Registry and some of the finest overall. Obviously, we would love to have all the finest sets in the world registered in the PCGS Set Registry. But the reality is that some sets are mixed and some collectors wish to remain entirely anonymous, which we certainly respect. If a collector sees an advantage to registering his set, he will do so, or if you see an advantage, I'm sure you will recommend that he register.
I do understand your position and it seems that if open showdowns were to occur, it might be someone like the ANA who sponsors such an event. But the PCGS Showdowns, funded by PCGS, will continue to directly benefit PCGS Set Registry collections. A non-registered set owner can enjoy the peripheral benefits from the showdown when his/her series is showcased.
bsearls@collectors.com
Set Registry & Special Projects Director
PCGS (coins) www.pcgs.com
PSA (cards & tickets) www.psacard.com
I believe that use of the name "Popeye's Washington Quarters" might cause Popeye's Fried Chicken to sue for copyright infringement, especially if any "legs" or "wings" are displayed on the coins in question. And, such would certainly be the case with a Washington Quarter set. Be very careful in choosing an anonymous name for a set!
My understanding was that the "Showdowns" were to showcase PCGS great collections. After all, what is there to "showdown" when all you have is the #1 vs #2 vs #3 sets? Basically, #1 wins or collectors just use the showdown as evidence that the rankings are meaningless anyway and the weights could be all messed up as well - right? Think about it. The excitement of a Showdown is having the "gunslinger" come to town - the unknown, the "mystery" set. The drama that builds in whether this unregistered PCGS collection can stack up against the #1 and #2 registered sets. Who knows, maybe even the owners of these "mystery" sets will chose to register ON THEIR OWN, like Stewart decided to register after years of not being on the Registry. But, regardless, without the ability for your #1 and #2 registered sets to accept a challenge from the "mystery" PCGS set, or the "mysery" PCGS set to accept a challenge from your #1 Registered set, you will lose a tremendous amount of excitement and collectors, in many cases, will lose the opportnity to view some of the most spectacular PCGS collections out there ever assembled. "Lose-lose".
BJ: By way of a quick example (and let's even say a hypothetical), it was recently suggested on another current thread that at one point silver MS Roosie dimes be exhibited. The collector with the #2 set agreed to showcase his collection and he has a fine collection. But, what many people want to see are those couple dozen PCGS-MS68 silver dimes, which PCGS has graded in 15 years (i.e. PCGS graded less than 2 every year on average). Last I looked, I believe that #2 set has either 0 or 1 example. The #1 set has 2 examples last time I looked. Now, let's say there was an unregistered collection out there with nearly every other PCGS-MS68 dime ever graded. Are you telling me PCGS would not want to invite that ENTIRELY PCGS GRADED collection to the showdown simply because it wasn't registered? Remember, I have never advocated inviting an NGC set to your PCGS sponsored event (I understand your corporate position) - I am talking about 100% PCGS collections. I just think PCGS should be a little more flexible to ensure the very best PCGS assembled sets can attend these showdowns.
Wondercoin
Greg
The real show down should be sponsored by the ANA.
I agree. Will the ANA make it happen? Would they want to?
If collectors with finest known coins/sets are showing off their collections, my interest isn't seeing the best coins graded by ABC grading service, I want to see the best coins.
Having said that, I believe PCGS has a better batting average than the others. But, that doesn't mean they've cornered the market on all the best coins.
Yes, I know you were referring to non-registered PCGS coins. Others in this thread weren't. I just wanted to make it clear that the Showdowns are for registered sets.
That being said, I must be missing something as I simply do not understand why someone would want to show a set in a Showdown at a major coin show, participating in all the publicity that goes with it, yet not want to register his set when he can do so totally anonymously. I'll be out of pocket the rest of the day, but why don't you call me tomorrow and explain to me your reasoning. I will certainly reconsider allowing non-registered sets if what you tell me makes sense.
Thanks.
bsearls@collectors.com
Set Registry & Special Projects Director
PCGS (coins) www.pcgs.com
PSA (cards & tickets) www.psacard.com
Anyway, someone who choses not to register a set may be persuaded to allow his/her set to be displayed where the collecting public ASKS for it and it is handled through the collector's dealer of choice. Like in the case of Typetone asking on the other thread the other day with respect to MS Liberty nickels. If the collecting public wants to see all the great PCGS sets, then in many cases PCGS may have to relax its rule on a set being registered. It's as simple as that. Not much to argue about here, as without a relaxed rule, PCGS and the collecting public simply will not get to see many incredible sets in myriad collecting areas.
Wondercoin.
I completely do not understand your position in this. To me, it makes zero sense.
Say you know a collector who has, bar none, the finest collection of X Coins, and this collector is willing to allow you as his trusted agent, represent him at a national show and showcase those coins. PCGS's Registry rules allow you to list those coins as the agent, without requiring any data from the collector. You show up with the coins in tow, but you are the only one who knows who owns them, yet the set is registered and displayed permanently in the rankings, boosting PCGS's Registry credibility as well.
You say that the public is being robbed of fine coins, but they forget that not all nice coins reside in PCGS holders.
Anyway, this also addresses BJ's confusion I believe on why someone would not register a set, but would stand behind the table at a show on behalf of the set in the Showdown. The answer, of course, is that it would be a dealer standing behind the showdown table on behalf of the ananomous collector, not the private collector.
Wondercoin
In order to list your set as current, you must own the coins you are listing or be an agent with permission to represent a collection.
So, a temporary dealer listing of a set for purposes of a showdown might just solve the problem in many cases. Seems workable. Wondercoin.
Greg
Mitch, I think your point is somewhat narrow and limited. I find it hard to imagine a person so private that they wouldn't want to list their set even under a fictious name, yet gregarious enough to want to display their actual coins in public. It seems like it would be the other way around.
If they don't want to display them, fine. There are plenty of nice sets out there to look at right now. Let's see those that will show them.
Who needs insurance??? My fists are known in some circles as "weapons of mass destruction." (LOL)
OPEN LETTER FROM AN UNREGISTERED COLLECTOR WITH A MARVELOUS COIN COLLECTION:
Dear Frank, Stewart, and Others:
I’m the collector Mitch has been referring to. My apologies to Mitch for letting him carry the ball without me and to all of you for not answering sooner. But I’m a dad and a businessman first and second and while a fanatical collector, that’s only my third priority.
Look, I’m happy as a clam with my coin collection salted away in a slew of safety deposit boxes. I get to see the coins, enjoy them, fondle them (or at least the slabs), gloat over them, study them, and learn from them. I can’t tell you how many new and sometimes interesting varieties I’ve discovered ... I’ve lost count.
I’m something of a loner and have little or no contact with other collectors. Mitch and one other dealer/friend are the only people who have ever seen a substantial portion of my collection and I’m perfectly content with that.
I have many NGC coins, some ANACS coins, and one ICG coin that I consider to be great and glorious. I think any loving, knowledgeable numismatist would be proud to own those as a part of their collection.
But even setting those coins aside and counting only my PCGS slabs, I believe my collection contains the best in at least 16 different categories, including for instance, Jefferson Nickels business strikes 1938 through ‘64, and the lovely Standing Liberty Quarters.
But I have NEVER collected competitively. I accumulated those sets because I loved the various series and wanted the best for my own satisfaction.
It was Mitch who recently introduced me to the concept of the Registry Sets. After studying the concept and how it was executed, I decided I didn’t want to be part of it.
First and foremost, Set Registry focuses attention on the plastic not the coin. If there are two coins, one in MS66 and the other in MS67, and as sometimes happens, the 66 is better, still the pressure to buy the 67 would be excruciating.
Why should I go down that road? Why should I start looking at the plastic instead of the coin?
Second, I don’t like the way the Registry Sets are formulated. I think, for instance, that it’s a disservice to collectors to exclude the 1918-S overdate from the Standing Liberty Quarter set. Heck, that’s the most interesting and valuable coin in the set. How can you talk about the best set of Standing Lib’s, if the best set doesn’t have the overdate?
Ditto for the Jefferson nickels Registry set which doesn’t differentiate between the reverse of 1938 and the reverse of 40, and which ignores all the beautiful and interesting varieties like the doubled eye, the 43/2 overdate, and the incredible doubled Monticello.
I can go down Registry set by set ... the Lincoln pennies excluding the ‘55 double die and the 22-no D. The Buffalo nickels excluding ... oh you get the idea.
Anyway, Mitch asked me to exhibit my coins, in part as a give back to the numismatic hobby which has given me so much pleasure ... and in part as a service to the Set Registry concept which he zonks on even if I don’t.
He thought if I exhibited you’d see some interesting coins you might never see otherwise. Like in the 1938 through 64 Jefferson nickel series, you would be able to see the 1954-S in MS67 full steps ... all the major varieties (and many of the not-so-major varieties) in top-notch condition ... and all 5 MS68s (4 in full steps and 1 in not full steps).
Go ahead and compare my MS68's with one another -- and with your own 67 pq full steppers. Some of your 67 pq full steppers may beat one of my 68s. Mitch thought that would probably be fun for you. Well, wouldn’t it? The whole business is fun.
I told Mitch I was willing to put my coins on exhibit but didn’t have the time to prepare exhibits ... that I was not willing to register ... and he had to reassure me that my coins get back to me safely.
Mitch volunteered to fly to my home town at his own expense and take his own time to root through my safety deposit boxes (with my Secretary) to prepare the exhibit(s). That handled that problem.
I’ve explained my objections to registering. And my desire for assurance of safe return of my coins is why Mitch raised the issue of Brinks.
Now I’ve gone as far as I’m willing to go. Mitch has done all he can do. Now if you want to see the coins, the ball’s in your park and PCGS’s.
One last note to Frank Corso. Frank: Your collection of Jefferson full steppers is a standout. It shows the thought and intelligence you bring to the table and which shines through in your letters to the message board. Regardless of how this turns out, perhaps we can meet sometime in the future.
Best wishes to you, to Mitch, and the rest of the good people in the Registry Set program.
First I would like to say thank you for the comments on my Jefferson nickel set. I have spent a great deal of time searching through Jeffersons to put this set together. Even thought this set contains 5 pop 1 coins, and about 50 of the 73 coins are tied for top pop, I consider it a work in progress. There are many coins I would like to upgrade. Ultimately, I may move on to another series, but have not reached that point yet.
The high end Jefferson market is a fairly small community and while you are an unregistered collector, I have a good guess to your identity.
While I have no great desire to exhibit my set, I might consider it if it was displayed next to yours for no other reason but to look over and admire your Jeffersons. I would especially like to see that 1954S MS67FS – wow!!!
I would also have some of the same security concerns. Since I live in Jacksonville, the trip to Orlando is not a great concern. But security and insurance for the coins while in Orlando would have to be addressed in order for me even to consider showing the coins.
I’ll give this more thought, but I need to hear from PCGS before I make a final decision.
Whether this comes off or not, I would like to meet at some point to compare nickel stories.
Frank
My Jefferson Full Step Variety Set (1938 - Current)
My Jefferson Proof Variety Set (1938 - Current)
But isn't this supposed to be a showdown between top "registry sets?" If your client doesn't agree with the Registry system, he doesn't have to play. No big deal.
Should I call up some friends of mine and ask them if I can "represent" their sets at a showdown?
If he wanted to show up and compare his set with the one's on display, that would be just fine also. There was a collector who brought a stunning set to the Indian Cent Showdown and nobody threw rocks at him. Those at the show got to see them also.
Who said varieties could not be on display also? Stewart had a couple in his case at the show that were un-be-lievable. It certainly didn't detract from the show, nor were they unwelcome.
If a collector is so narrow as to want to have their set shown in public, but not be put in the registry, the should be excluded. What an self centered moron.
If someone can give me one reason why someone should be allowed to show their set at the expense of PCGS but not register it, I want to hear it. (everything is anonymous, so that is no excuse)
Dbldie 55 - It is not polite to call ANY collector a SELF CENTERED
MORON
I feel you should apologise immediatele or be disciplined
by Carol
Stewart
Dbldie55: If Carol does not boot you azz for that comment, consider yourself one lucky poster. Maybe you should speak with that dealer you visit everyday in his shop and take a lesson on picking up some class.
Wondercoin
How about taking the time that's being spent bickering over my coin is better than yours because it's registered or because it's in a certain holder, and spend it putting together a true "show/showdown" (what ever you want to call it) of the today's greatest coin set(s). Certified or not, registered or not.
Isn't that what our hobby is about? Collecting and educating?
And if someone doesn't want to participate, leave 'em alone. The coins are theirs to do with what they want.