Why doesn't the pedigree service apply to all registry sets?

FrattLaw

So I was reading an earlier post about someone wanting their name on their coins and I came across the following from PCGS;

"If you participate in the PCGS Online Set Registry program and your set ranks in the top five, your set may qualify for free pedigree service. (Note: the free pedigree service does not apply to modern sets, proof sets, mint sets, and a few other issues.)"

I can't understand why the pedigree service doesn't apply to all registry sets or collections. What classifies as a "modern set?" If I had a top 5 Jefferson Nickel set could I get a pedigree, what about lincoln sets, ect. Why no proof or mint sets? Some of these "modern" marvels command more of a premium then some of the more classic designs. Why the preference or discrimination?

This isn't meant to be a modern vs. classic thread though.

Do you think there should be parameters to the pedigree designation? If so, what should they be?

Thanks
Michael

JR

I believe if PCGS allows a set to be entered into their Registry in the first place, that all the top five sets in every category should be eligible for pedigree.

nwcs

Why limit it to the top 5 in any case?

itsnotjustme

I think those who pay the bills get to make the rules. I think PCGS is limiting their liability to re-holder for free thousands of coins.

As I once heard a senior IBM exec say in a meeting "We're not a non-profit organization you know!"

airplanenut

<< <i>I think those who pay the bills get to make the rules. I think PCGS is limiting their liability to re-holder for free thousands of coins.!" >>


They charge $5 per to reholder...

wil31

It might be because so many sets would qualify. For example, under the SAE business strike set, there are over 70 sets tied in second.

mrcommem

If PCGS decides that your set is worthy to be pedigreed, the pedigree and reholdering is free. You can update the pedigreed set with new coins and PCGS will place the pedigree on the coins and reholder them but it will cost you $5 a coin.

KlectorKid

I have to agree with wil because the coins are new and almost all the same grades then they have massive ties and lose money on having to slab all 1000 slabs from a proofset tied between 180 people.

FrattLaw

I understand everyone's point, but there are Mint State and Proof Sets were there aren't a gazillion sets tied for number two. What about those collections?

I would think to be fair PCGS should decide on a case by case (set by set) basis which should be eligible.

Michael

Russ

<< <i>I would think to be fair PCGS should decide on a case by case (set by set) basis which should be eligible. >>



I agree. And, I think they should decide that the proof Kennedy short set is eligible - and they should do it quickly! I just got bumped down to 4th already.

Russ, NCNE

MrEureka

Why the preference or discrimination?

Stating a provenance is typically meant to convey that the coin was recognized as something special by a knowledgable collector. Therefore, I think that labeling PR 70 DCAM ASE's with provenances would be laughable and would to some extent cheapen the value of all provenances. For that reason, I agree with the PCGS policy.

That said, if it was up to me, I WOULD not hesitate to label with a provenance an astoundingly toned set of ASE's. There are exceptions to every rule.

FrattLaw

Andy -- would you say the same for a set of toned Peace $, that aren't in the top 5?

Michael

MrEureka

Andy -- would you say the same for a set of toned Peace $, that aren't in the top 5?

Maybe, but probably not. If it was up to me, I'd look at the coins and make a subjective decision as to whether or not the collection was special enough.

cherrypickincoin

Since I started the other thread, I should note that I do not wish to have this service for my own coins and was only interested in how the pedigree was obtained.

I, for one, would not pay more for a coin simply because it belonged to a gentleman that was number one in the registry. I would only pay a premium for a coin owned by another person if you could prove it was held by Abraham Lincoln himself.

Robgetty

While I wouldn't mind to have a big name pedigree coin in my set, I could care
less if I got a coin with a pedigree of someone I'd never heard of. Having said
that, I still think it would be neat to have my set with a pedigree. Once they
push the mint and proof sets back to 1872, then I'll have complaints. Right now,
the policy is fine.