Your thoughts on this PCGS Set Registry article?
coinguy1
Posts: 13,484 ✭✭✭
We just posted an article about the PCGS Set Registry program on our website. It is being discussed on the Set Registry forum (I just got back from the post office and haven't even looked over there yet, to see the latest).
I'd be interested in feedback from this forum, as well as the NGC forum, and expect that it might be somewhat different from that of the Set Registry forum. Any comments are welcomed.
Link
I'd be interested in feedback from this forum, as well as the NGC forum, and expect that it might be somewhat different from that of the Set Registry forum. Any comments are welcomed.
Link
0
Comments
It looks like a nice article to me. (I am sure I started to write something similar last year, even had the Good, Bad and Ugly part). Based on the responses I have seen here, I would think it has hit many points right on. When I see people using totally unrelated examples to make a counter-point, it usually means there is much truth to what is being said.
Mark,
I think your articles hit the nail on the head. What's interesting is they came from a coin dealer. The fact that demand, supply, and HYPE is what drives the price of the low pop coins must be acknowledged. The HUGE prices being paid for low pop State quarters and other modern coins, that don't even have a year of availability under their belt, hasn't and won't lure me in. To me it's about "make a buck while you can". If the prices hold I'll be shocked. Rather, I think these coin pops will continue to grow. Whether the prices will remains to be seen.
I agree with what Greg said about having trouble finding certain series in higher grades. I too have been looking for a post 1900 IHC in 66RD. I finally gave up and settled for one in 65RD. I'm not complaining, it saved me a few hundred dollars . I would have rather had the 66RD though.
Finally, registry collecting, for PCGS and NGC, has removed a lot of material from the market. In some cases what's left are coins that would have sold at, or below, normal price levels. Now they're elevated to PQ price levels due to demand.
My Two Cents worth.
I found the article to be very interesting and it reinforced many of the views I hold about registry set programs. I have a couple of questions regarding the article.
Who is the author and did they consult other Pinnacle employees for input?
What were the Pinnacle objectives in writing the article?
I think it's a good article that both applauds the Registry as well as outlining the drawbacks.
When I look at my ranking and then see all the POP Higher numbers, I see that instead of #5 I'm probably really #963 if everybody registered their coins.
My posts viewed
since 8/1/6
I don't know you Steve and in fact this response is not directed at you. But it is directed at the group you are part of.
Either way, not much changes for either camp.
peacockcoins
Many collectors who invest substantial amounts in their collection, enjoy the corollary benefit of leaving their name etched in a legacy alongside the likes of Eliasberg and Trompeter.
You think Mr. #1 State Quarter Set Owner is ever going to get his name alongside these you mentioned? What about Mr. #1 1793-1964, No Gold, No Variety, MS Only - Not Proof, Type Set is going to go down in history with these people?
These people you mentioned put together amazing sets. I cannot say the same for most of the registry set participants. In fact, I can't even see what several of these people put together. All it is is a total number and ranking listed by PCGS. There is no indication of actual quality.
Most people who play the registry game are chasing the number on the slab and not the quality of the coin. I'd bet that 95% of those people that will post here and scream and shout that they are different and they wouldn't upgrade a nice MS66 to an ugly MS67 are not being truthful.
If people are putting together these sets thinking they'll have their names etched alongside the greats, then they are more delusional that I thought. How many coins in the marketplace are pedigreed with meaningless names? I'd discount the price of 99.9% of the pedigreed coins out there since it would cost me money to get their meaningless name off the slab.
Exclusion of NGC certified coins makes the Registry misleading: In a recent statement made by PCGS Chairman, David Hall, he explained why the PCGS Registry Program excludes coins from other certification services – namely NGC. In the interest of space and time we can’t relay his complete answer. However, his primary (and quite valid) point was that he steadfastly maintains that PCGS certified coins are, as a whole, more conservatively graded than those by NGC and that it would be inaccurate to list their coins alongside PCGS.
It was valid? It was bull sh*t. He used a few population statistics to draw a conclusion that he wanted to draw. Look at prices in the Greysheet. They are the same. The biggest problem is that with PCGS you never know what grade your coin is going to get regardless of its actual condition.
If you want statistics to show that PCGS overgrades coins I'm sure it wouldn't take me too long to show them to you. Of course, they'd be just as meaningless as the ones that David Hall posted.
The PCGS Registry Program at its best has encouraged collectors to become more focused and goal oriented in their pursuits and has created a forum whereby collectors can stay in closer touch with the numismatic community. At its worst, it has further subdivided the marketplace for PCGS and NGC material.
At the very best the registry has pushed up the prices of top grade coins. At the worst it has created a bunch of number chasers that know nothing about quality and they'll get screwed in the end.
<< <i>Overall I thought it was an excellent article, but I think one key point was missing. The registry causes people to collect numbers on slabs and not coins. >>
Steve27,
Perhaps you missed this?
<< <i>We are concerned that too many collectors are simply “buying the holder” – not the coin. >>
--------------------------------------------------
<< <i>At the worst it has created a bunch of number chasers that know nothing about quality and they'll get screwed in the end. >>
Greg,
That point was clearly made in the article:
<< <i>Without going into detail, it suffices to say that paying tens of thousands of dollars for common-date, late-20th century issues is begging for disappointment. >>
Mark,
On balance, it's an excellent article. I fully understand why, with an article of this nature and considering the business Pinnacle is in, that it has to be somewhat neutral.
Russ, NCNE
I don't know you Steve and in fact this response is not directed at you. But it is directed at the group you are part of.
This diatribe coming from the guy who wanted kindler gentler posts from me. Hypocrite!
You speak just like a number collector.
Let's go thru your post:
Do you really think that a coin, lets say between 09 and 1920 in a 66 holder is not a superior coin to say a 65 of the same year?
Do you really think that a grading service, say PCGS, has graded so accurately over the years that all MS66s are superior to all MS65s? Their grading standards are all over the place and have been for years. What is in an MS66 slab might not make MS64 today. What is in another MS65 slab might make MS66 today. Those people who make stupid statements like "Do you really think that a coin, lets say between 09 and 1920 in a 66 holder is not a superior coin to say a 65 of the same year?" are number buyers. They assume that the MS66 is better than the MS65. Probably because they don't have the grading abilities to tell the difference.
Don't you think that collectors who collect this higher graded stuff are collecting finer material, and not just a number?
Sure they are. The fact that they can't tell the difference between a PR70 and a PR69 or an MS68 and MS67 has nothing to do with it. They collect the finer coin. They know it is the finer coin because they can read it on the slab. One has a higher number than the other which must equal the coin being finer. After all, don't you really think that a coin, lets say between 09 and 1920 in a 66 holder is not a superior coin to say a 65 of the same year?
What is your actual point when you and others make this silly statement?
The fact that people like you, number collectors that refuse to admit it, can't see the actual point that the grade on the slab is a starting point and not an end point.
My conclusion is that anyone who makes the statement just simply can't afford the finer material and chooses this as a way of putting them down.
My conclusion is that you are a complete moron. Only a moron would draw the line from warning people to buy the coin and not the holder and that of being jealous. Do you even know who some of the people making these statements are? They could buy and sell you a thousand times over. Money isn't a big problem to them. Yet, you believe it is jealousy that makes them make these statements.
You don't see me spewing the nonsence you and others regularly regurgitate do you? Back up your statement I say or don't say it at all.
You're right. You spew other nonsense like "My conclusion is that anyone who makes the statement just simply can't afford the finer material and chooses this as a way of putting them down."
I'm tired of being thrown into a category of collectors you have obviously not spent enough time to (and perhaps don't have the capability of understanding).
But you are a picture candidate of that group. Got it? YOU are Mr. Number Collector. Your words show this. Perhaps you don't have the capability of understanding this!
I don't know you Steve and in fact this response is not directed at you. But it is directed at the group you are part of.
And this article was directed at the group you are part of.
One example is my purchase of a gorgeously toned MS 66 Seated Dime at a 50% markup from MS 65 prices. Why? The Registry Set people were going after 7s If you want to pay $3,000 plus for a 7 versus $1,500 for a nice 6, be my guest. If they weren't going after the 7s, I would have been forced to pay more for my nice 6.
This also is a great opportunity to buy properly graded high end NGC coins, as the Registry Set people are going after PCGS material. If you look hard enough, it is available; all of these coins have not been crossed to PCGS slabs. If you know the right dealer, you'll get some of these savings passed along to you.
I bought a MS 64 Reeded Edge Half this way. FYI, the nicest Capped Bust Half in MS 65 I've ever seen is in an NGC slab.
Greg's comment re "slab chasers" is on the mark. A number of respected people in the business have commented to me over the last several years that it was a pleasure to deal with someone who was actually interested in the coins and not only the number on the slab.
It is no accident that in the last several years, I've noticed a number of 19th Century Type coins in 7 and a few in 8 holders. Before that, I'd see only a few 6s at Long Beach, and maybe one 7. Not any more. So, keep trying to get the pop one coins. It just creates more opportunites for me. I like the Registry Set phenomenon!
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
Russ, point taken, but maybe it should have been given more emphasis?
dbldie55 - interesting point you raised in saying "When I see people using totally unrelated examples to make a counter-point, it usually means there is much truth to what is being said." !
DAM - thank you for your comments. I replied briefly to your post on one of the other boards, as well.
RLinn, in answer to your questions "Who is the author and did they consult other Pinnacle employees for input?
What were the Pinnacle objectives in writing the article?'
Some time ago, I had sent a proposed outline for a possible article to Kathleen Duncan and Todd Imhof, Pinnacle's two owners. The topic is one that comes up frequently among us. Todd ended up writing the article, with feedback from Kathleen and me.
The main objective was to present the positives and negatives of the Registry program, hopefully in a balanced way. We realized that some might be upset by it and that others would appreciate it. We feel it is important that collectors/clients think about what they are buying, the prices they are paying, their reasons for doing so and the current and possible future state of the rare coin market .
lincolnSence - hopefully I have answered your questions in my posts. If not, I have a feeling you don't really want to know.
Steve 27 - you said "Overall I thought it was an excellent article, but I think one key point was missing. The registry causes people to collect numbers on slabs and not coins"
I agree with you, completely about some people collecting the "numbers" and not the coins. That was one of the points off our article and I am sorry if we were not clear on that.
gmarguli - I agree with you that pedigrees don't mean what they used to. I will leave it at that.
Russ, thanks for your post, even if it is, by addressing some of the questions posed by others, making some of what I am typing here, obsolete.
I specialize in Wisconsin currency! Looking for information on WI national banknotes. Census stands at 12,318 notes.
**"Wisconsin National Bank Notes - 2nd Edition" is out!!!" Only $20PPd!!!
the bias, NGC's exclusion. As for grading accuracy, I have seen coins in all kinds of slabs and the grading
in everywhere but consistant. I have MS64 and 65 slabbed coins that look better than coins in MS66 and 67 slabs. It's ludicrous for anyone to think that someone can categorically place or divide millions of mint state coins into 11 groups, MS60 to MS70.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Overall, a well-reasoned point of view expressed in the Article. But, IMHO, I wonder if Mark and the gang over there realize the slight bias displayed in the article against PCGS? For example, here is a quote from the Article:
"However (and in all candidness) we believe that SOME of the prices being paid for “PCGS Registry coins” are simply outrageous. Without going into detail, it suffices to say that paying tens of thousands of dollars for common-date, late-20th century issues is begging for disappointment"
My question - why limit the fair comment to "PCGS" coins? Mark-did you see the post I made here last week concerning the $19,250 auction price tag for a 1948(s) quarter in an NGC-MS68* holder? Other than a 1932(d,s) quarter in MS66 (and perhaps one or two 1932(d) in MS65 sales throughout the history of the world), I can not recall a price that high for any MS Wash quarter, PCGS or NGC, for any date, any grade. What was more remarkable was the fact this $19,250 sale was for a "common date" Wash quarter, where the same coin in the "one grade under" NGC slab tends to sell for a couple hundred dollars!!
As seen from my 1948(s) quarter example (and there are many other recent examples as well), I believe the point Pinnacle was trying to make was not limited to "PCGS Registry Coins", but potentially wild prices being paid for many 20th Century coins regardless of the holder.
Also, there is no question that an additional bias is shown in the article against "modern" Registry coins. Yet, as you know Mark, it would be very easy to fill the pages here with stories of rediculously overpriced (and overgraded) classic coins, which collectors are buying from various sources. I think you would probably admit yourself that for every coin Pinnacle offers for sale there may be a coin or two Pinnacle wouldn't touch with a "ten foot pole" - right? Interestingly, there are rarely warnings issued against all the "classic junk", which comprised a decent % of coins out there - right? Fair point?
Overall, I enjoyed reading the Article.
Wondercoin
Coinguy1 - you didn't really address why the article was written IMO. Just because I called it an ass covering article, in no way reflects the fact that my statement should be viewed negatively. I suggested that you could have written a number of better articles in its place. But I just reread the article and now I have a different opinion in light of your reply. I now believe that Pinnacle should not have published it. First you do bash PCGS and maybe you don't even see it. The title is.........the PCGS registry program. You didn't title the article "registry programs " as you probably should have. You never introduce the reason for the article, but you draw some interesting conclusions. Like the one about not having any "direct evidence, but you have your suspicions" and the now memorable "areas of artificial value and increased risk". Mark can you expand on what the intent of these statements are? But in the end, you ask readers to contact Pinnacle not NGC or PCGS with further questions about the registry. Why would you not refer them to the respective organizations with questions? I guess this means you want customers to call Pinnacle with questions on .......... what? Please, I don't want to speculate. I offered my opinion and you might have taken it the wrong way, but if you please some answers to my questions.
Greg - what can I say, we don't like each other. But I thought we could at least agree on no name calling. Let your points speak for them selves. I recognize that you work with both companies quite a bit so you have good experience. I do not submit like you do. But clear up some items for me:
You say grading standards are all over the boards, but most threads suggest that the old PCGS holders would all go up at least one grade if currently submitted. What is it? Just a crap shoot no matter what in your opinion?
Yes the famous 70's vs 69's. I will grant you this one. Now to help me could you please point to another example we can all get behind? Or will we continue to hear about this one screw up as the basis for the misgrading argument forever?
Your opinion seems to be warn the people about how bad it is with the registry. You suggest this is the theme of the article. Maybe that was PART of its message. So why do you think this is so good - to warn the masses and all? Your just one voice (and a big one at that) but thats it - one opinion.
And please don't threaten anybody with the wealth associated with forum members. You don't know anything about me for instance. Besides, when I call you on the carpet on this one, who will you send to defend your statements. I suggest you stick to the issues.
For the record, I do collect nice NGC pieces. However in my series their registry is not the place to compete for the finest set. I wish it were. But its not. And I do collect by the numbers. To obtain the finest set. Many of my coins I feel are undergraded. But I don't send them in for cross or upgrades. I buy coins that anyone anywhere anytime would say wow, what a set. All original properly graded specimens. They are hand picked, and reviewed by some of the most demanding collectors.
In summary I would suggest not generalizing so much that everyone who collects for the registry is a number chaser. There are many, I'm sure. But if and when you ever get a set of lincolns assembled, call me for the date of the showdown.
And, no doubt some 19th century issues are "complicated", just as some 20th century issues are "complicated". But, what is most interesting is the fact that for every decent 19th century coin buy out there, there are an equal amount (if not multiples) of "classic junk" in holders just waiting for some collector to take a beating on. I do not think Mark would argue with this observation.
Back up to my point: I recently acquired, in pertinent part, what is perhaps the greatest collection of MS, Proof and Pattern Shield nickels ever assembled. But, an interesting development came from this major purchase:
The seller, who spent years assembling the collection, pointed out for nearly every coin in the collection, the junk upon junk out there on the marketplace which he rejected on nearly every coin date in the set (showing why his classic coin selection was special for that slot). He was filled with information of this auction lot and that auction lot that was no good, or this dealer's coin or that dealer's coin that was absurdely overgraded or overpriced. While every seller may believe, to some extent, his collection is better than another, this collection was truly wonderful (by many top dealers account) and the knoweldgeable seller had detailed information concerning the slabbed junk out there in the way of Shield Nickels and Lib nickels (which I also acquired fabulous selections of along with the Shield Nickels). Also, there were selected coins that I had no interest in even with an understanding of the complicated landscape and (as has been mentioned here many times) it also became clear that grading services were known to slab MS coins as PR and PR coins as MS, creating additional risks in "playing" in this coin area (anyone know the difference in price between a PR64 or PR65 1880 Shield nickel and an MS64 or MS65 coin!!)
Bottom line: 19th century Registry is no better than 20th century registry for the collector who is not willing to do the work and learn about the series he is interested in. Pinnacle might be a wonderful 19th century dealer and then there are other dealers who are wonderful in the 20th century. But, the secret is learning about what the series is all about - not simply concluding that 19th century coins are better than 20th century coins Wondercoin
And, as I just mentioned on the Registry board "Fair and excellent point. With that, I can agree. Whew!"
lincoln - I have already answered a number of the questions you have posed and don't care to do so again. Sorry. I think you want to argue and or fight and I'm not interested.
I liked the article. I read a Q.David Bowers piece the other day that reiterated the slab is just a starting place in the decision making process that goes into buying a coin. I believe your article serves as fair warning to those who step in front of a super-competitive group of collectors trying to buy a pop-top coin. It is a responsible warning. As for the impact of the registry, LOL, you're two years two late with your article. Most of us "discussed" and came to the same conclusions you did in the piece long ago here on the boards. The registry is fun if you keep it such. It is flawed if you take it seriously. The effect of the registry is clear if you look at the price and desireability of any coin one grade off pop-top.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
I have a number of lower graded coins (same service) that are nicer than the higher numbered ones. And this is directly correlated to the inconsistency of the grading services. Just recently I owned a seated half dollar in MS65 for about a year. It was nicer than any of the 66's I owned. I resubmitted it recently and it regraded 67.
At major auctions I often see lower slabbed pieces exceed the price of higher slabbed coins or come darn close.
I'm sure many forum members own coins in lower holders that are nicer than similar coins with higher numbers.
roadrunner
I ask that we cut LS some slack. Not matter how hard we try, we won't be able to get everyone to come to our way of thinking. That's the plain hard truth. LS obviously was terribly wrong in the harshness of his response, but let that be his problem.
We no longer need to shout constantly to the deaf ones. Let them function merrily in their own world.
It'll also keep this forum more civil -- something I admittedly have not tried hard to do lately.
EVP
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com
I haven't read the article but I will.
I have read the thread and some of the responses gave me the headache that you had last week. Thanks a lot.
My headache is better (see I want to scream by Mark Feld)
I read the article. (Don't know why I didn't notice the link).
The comments seemed to be sensible and pretty middle of the road. Nothing to save as one of those memorable contributions but I agreed with the tone and insights.
That said, it is hard to understand why it evoked such an emotional debate which deteriorated into some unneccesary descriptors of and by forum members.
I hope the forum is therapeutic and keeps violence off the streets.
Periphrastic verbiage, frequently a key element of tact.
EVP
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com
I stand before you bloodied arms
Limbs strewn about the field
The fate was met by every man
Who stood- but would not yield
To the victor goes the spoils
That carved in stone, 'tis true
Whatever you may think of me
Far less I think of you
I know, I know, I'm a poetry writing pain in the pa-toot. But, someone has to immortalize and bring glory to the combatants. It's a dirty job, but I will do it, nonetheless.
Clank
Seems kinda appropriate too, no?
EVP
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com