Home PCGS Set Registry Forum
Options

Help - I'm in a Typeset Conundrum

I'm starting to build quite a nice group of 19th Century type pieces. I had thought I would like one example of each major type and not every variety. For example, one seated quarter instead of all six subtypes. The reason is that I prefer to buy pieces graded at least MS63. For many of the early subtypes, these can be prohibitively expensive. The problem is that the complete C/N/S type set requires all the varieties as well as the major types. We also know that you are severely penalized for partial sets. So, here are my choices:

1. Register my major types version of the set, so that I can share images of my coins with the public. But realize my set will never make the top ten, and thereby be psychologically damaged!

2. Keep the collection private and only post images on occassion on the Boards.

3. Start to expand the collection to the varieties, but be satisfied with AU and EF pieces for some of the expensive types.

4. List the set in the NGC registry where the incompleteness penalty is much less.

Comments and suggestions are welcome.

Here is an example of one of my coins. This one is graded MS64 and was acquired courtesy of Mike at Larry Whitlow.

Greg

Comments

  • Options
    DIMEMANDIMEMAN Posts: 22,403 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Greg,

    I vote for #3. And to me it looks like NGC has bigger gaps in they way they award points in the thousands.

    And BTW, very very nice Bust Dime!!!!

    Jon
  • Options
    DAMDAM Posts: 2,410 ✭✭
    Greg,

    I hadn't really given any thought to how hard the C/N/S/ Set would be to complete until I registered mine, about a year ago. Most of what is listed I already had in my collection. That's because I've focused my collecting habits on type collecting almost exclusively. I've added a few coins since I first listed the set, partly as a result of completing other Registry Type Sets. Like you, I'm concerned about the cost of completing the set in mint state. Also, like you, I would like to have a nice set of major type coins, without the subtypes/varieties. Perhaps that's a set PCGS will consider in the future.

    I guess the question you have to ask yourself is, do you want to collect coins to participate in the Registry, or collect coins because you enjoy the hobby.

    Let me say nice Bust Dime too! I've been eyeing that for a week. Nice coin! I especially notice when an 1829 is for sale, in any grade. You never know when you might cherrypick a curl base 2. image

    Congrats on the 20th Century Type Set too!
    Dan
  • Options
    Did you consider what the set composition was before you started buying up all these type coins for the set? I wouldn't worry about it and put together whatever a type set in my mind consisted of. I understand the natural inclination that some people have to make the registry a competition, how about just enjoy listing your coins for everyone to appreciate and not worry about having a top 10 set.
  • Options
    NGC Registry would love to have your set. Since the HRH thing the # of NGC Sets have really grown.
    PCGS sets under The Thomas Collections. Modern Commemoratives @ NGC under "One Coin at a Time". USMC Active 1966 thru 1970" The real War.
  • Options
    You have quite a set with many awesome coins.

    You could also consider buying the major types, then moving into other types. These can be gold, Alaska gold pieces or other things.

    I don't know exactly how psychologically damaged you would be with an incomplete set!!! Once you finish the major types you will want to buy something. Varieties? Gold? Work on a series?

    Personally I am not adding coins frequently. But I want the major types before the varieties. That include gold and California fractional gold too. It also includes one Hard Times Token and one Hobo Nickel. I keep expanding my definition of what a type set is image
  • Options
    LincolnCentManLincolnCentMan Posts: 5,347 ✭✭✭✭
    Greg,

    Either registry is just "frosting" on the numismatic "cake." The registry sets are mearly templets representing what most collectors view as commonly put together sets. It has the side benifit of providing a little fun competition. Since the set you're working on doesnt fall into any of those templets... well... just dont worry about it. (Heck, I've been waiting for a year and a half for the lincoln cent shortset 1934-1958.) I would certainly place you're set in the major type set registry if you want the pictures displayed for the rest of us to see. Just dont go there and look at your rankings every day, and it'll supress the desire to go out and buy something just to improve your rank. I talked my wife into doing this with her toned coins. You can take a look at it if you like. You can tell from what's being put in it, that there's no way the set will ever be 100% complete. I dont expect we'll buy any of the earlier stuff for it. Try finding a rainbow Chain Cent... Ha! ...for that matter, even if one existed, try paying for it! Also, that "Complete Type Set" does not include any coins after 1964. What's the deal with that? How can you have a "complete" type set and totally ignore the clad coins? She's got a killer Kennedy and Roos. Dime I'd like to put in that registry, but they dont have a slot for it. Bottom line, collect what you want and if it happens to fit in a registry, great.

    Best wishes,
    David
  • Options
    PBRatPBRat Posts: 1,324 ✭✭✭
    I vote for #1. You shouldn't feel damaged just because your set doesn't conform with the PCGS definition. Even a set in last place can bring pride to its' owner.

    (or you could sell your type set and buy Canadian - there are many sets where you would be first!)
  • Options
    tjkilliantjkillian Posts: 5,578 ✭✭✭
    I would vote for #1. The collector, not PCGS, should be the one who dictates what one should collect. I am working on a complete type set 1792-1964 with gold, but will never collect the covered ear eagle, high relief double eagle, or a half disme. I also collect the coins past 1964. I collect what I want and really don't care if PCGS has a registery set just for me.

    Tom
    Tom

  • Options
    Why not suggest PCGS put up a Major Type Set?
    Bill

    image

    09/07/2006
  • Options
    tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,147 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Psychological damage is an inherent risk [or was that prerequisite?] in numismatics! Definitely number one.
  • Options
    DAMDAM Posts: 2,410 ✭✭
    1. Register my major types version of the set, so that I can share images of my coins with the public. But realize my set will never make the top ten, and thereby be psychologically damaged!

    Greg, I just had a thought. Perhaps this is something you could sue PCGS for, psychological damage. image

    I'm sure there's a lawyer of two on one of these forums that could advise you. With the settlement proceeds you could possibly afford to complete your CNS set.

    Just a thought! imageimage


    (Just kidding, don't ban me) image
    Dan
  • Options
    mdwoodsmdwoods Posts: 5,526 ✭✭✭
    Very nice dime. You managed to capture the luster pretty well it looks like. Either option 1 or 3 would work. However, if you choose option 1, we will all point at you and laugh.image
    National Register Of Big Trees

    We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
  • Options
    Or choice #5: wait for a basic type set.

    I see you asked if PCGS could create a basic type set on the Q&A and HRH replied:

    "Greg...This is something we need to do pronto. BJ and I are working on gold coins right now. Next up is revamping the type sets and first on the list will be the basic sets. Should get to them in the next 30 to 60 days."
Sign In or Register to comment.