Eliasberg Ike Dollar Set Registered!
itsnotjustme
Posts: 8,779 ✭✭✭
It was based on what coins Eliasberg would have held, had he collected Ikes.
OK-Just Kidding, but those who are getting beat by newly registered sets with coins that were never in PCGS holders must be wondering, "What's next?"
OK-Just Kidding, but those who are getting beat by newly registered sets with coins that were never in PCGS holders must be wondering, "What's next?"
Give Blood (Red Bags) & Platelets (Yellow Bags)!
0
Comments
Well, at least I beat him to it so he won't feel so bad.
I think a POLL is in order.
09/07/2006
<< <i>How about the "If Wondo had $2,000,000" registry set of Peace dollars?
...or "if cladking ruled the world roosies".
<< <i>Eliasberg never seemed to interested in moderns. I doubt he would have cared much for Ike's either. >>
Brian,
Don't forget there would still be phantom coins in each set becasue his sets most likely would have been comprised of both mint state and proof coins.
<< <i>I think a POLL is in order. >>
I'm going to sit down this week and put my opinion in writing, and send it to CWs Letters to the Editor. I wonder if the collecting public knows what a scam PCGS is pulling here. If I were Eliasberg, I'd be turning over in my grave. I think it's making a mockery out of what a great collection he had. It's obvious PCGS is on a mission to further their interests at the expense of collectors. I would be interested to know too if these sets are counted on the totals. Not that it make a big difference, but it gets back to principal.
I've got a copy of the original PCGS Set Registry from 1997. For 2 Cent Sets they have a collector by the name of John Priest at the top of the All-Time Finest and me as second. John has absolutely no information in "any column". Under the Current Finest I am the only one listed. Since then, John's name has been deleted. Also listed in this Registry are many Eliasberg sets, most, if not all, are listed today.
No, no, no! Slow down. Do you really think that PCGS is adding the Eliasberg sets out of their own interest? Absolutely not. I've corresponded with HRH about the sets many times - remember, I used to have a conniption fit over the estimated grades. I believe that HRH respects the heck out of Eliasberg and is spending time, effort and even money to ensure that the Eliasberg collection is put forth in all its glory for subsequent generations to see. There is no self interest conflict here - only tweaking that needs to be done to make the Registry the best it can be.
The only reason I put forth my opinions on the matter are so that PCGS can see what this one collector believes. Sometimes, working so close on an item, the forest is lost in the trees. But you're wrong if you think there is any intent here whatsoever other than long term good for the history of numismatics.
<< <i>Eliasberg never seemed to interested in moderns. I doubt he would have cared much for Ike's either. >>
I believe he did have the first few years of Roosies though, before they got tough in high grade.
<< <i>I believe he did have the first few years of Roosies though, before they got tough in high grade. >>
Yep, the roosies are what put an end to the collection. In 1950 he "completed" his set. I am sure clads never entered his mind. He could get them from change as well as the rest from 1950 - date.
<< <i>I've corresponded with HRH about the sets many times - remember, I used to have a conniption fit over the estimated grades. >>
Hmmmmmmmmmm.........that's interesting.
Michael
<< <i>
<< <i>I believe he did have the first few years of Roosies though, before they got tough in high grade. >>
Yep, the roosies are what put an end to the collection. In 1950 he "completed" his set. I am sure clads never entered his mind. He could get them from change as well as the rest from 1950 - date. >>
There was never a chance to assemble a complete Roosy set from pocket change. The silver
issues were gone before the clads were well in circulation. Had he assembled them from poc-
ket change his set might be considered somewhat below registry quality. His death in 1976
would have complicated his acquisition of the later more difficult dates.
Many of the pieces he collected were in circulation when the set was started. Some of his coins
were only a few years old when he got them.
<< <i>...remember, I used to have a conniption fit over the estimated grades. >>
Perhaps that's what I'm doing. I have a hard time "giving" a person a coin to assist in completing a set. If this keeps up, the number of coins in his set will increase 15% - 20%.
It's not affecting me personally with the sets I've got listed, at least not yet, but others have to compete against "phantom coins" which likely would not have been a part of his set.
Rules are rules. PCGS established rules for the Registry to make this a showcase for collectors to share/show off their collections. I believe it's time they start following them too. I guess right or wrong, I look at what's being done as a black eye for the Registry.
Which means exactly what, Frattlaw? If you wish to communicate to PCGS about the Registry, all you have to do is email BJ and it'll get forwarded to HRH - just like I and many others do. Got a problem with that or do you just enjoy being critical and have nothing positive to add to the mix?
Will we all be able to add our raw coins?
President, Racine Numismatic Society 2013-2014; Variety Resource Dimes; See 6/8/12 CDN for my article on Winged Liberty Dimes; Ebay
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I believe he did have the first few years of Roosies though, before they got tough in high grade. >>
Yep, the roosies are what put an end to the collection. In 1950 he "completed" his set. I am sure clads never entered his mind. He could get them from change as well as the rest from 1950 - date. >>
There was never a chance to assemble a complete Roosy set from pocket change. The silver
issues were gone before the clads were well in circulation. Had he assembled them from poc-
ket change his set might be considered somewhat below registry quality. His death in 1976
would have complicated his acquisition of the later more difficult dates.
Many of the pieces he collected were in circulation when the set was started. Some of his coins
were only a few years old when he got them. >>
So if there were no original mint state coins of these years when he collected, why are there so many now? Get a life and quit trying to make coins you collect what they are not.
Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
<< <i>It's obvious PCGS is on a mission to further their interests at the expense of collectors.
No, no, no! Slow down. Do you really think that PCGS is adding the Eliasberg sets out of their own interest? Absolutely not. I've corresponded with HRH about the sets many times - remember, I used to have a conniption fit over the estimated grades. I believe that HRH respects the heck out of Eliasberg and is spending time, effort and even money to ensure that the Eliasberg collection is put forth in all its glory for subsequent generations to see. There is no self interest conflict here - only tweaking that needs to be done to make the Registry the best it can be.
The only reason I put forth my opinions on the matter are so that PCGS can see what this one collector believes. Sometimes, working so close on an item, the forest is lost in the trees. But you're wrong if you think there is any intent here whatsoever other than long term good for the history of numismatics. >>
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>Did Eliasberg have a proof Kennedy Short Set? >>
No silly!
But you should see his complete set of State quarters... all 50 of them.
A separate idea then popped up: I have also suggested to David Hall by pm the concept of PCGS setting up a separate cateory of Pedigreed Collections currently in PCGS holders with an added column for OPTIONAL listing of the current owners at the owners discretion. This way this would encourage all current owners of PCGS (and even possibly NGC) holdered coins to add their coins, hopefully with pictures to the PCGS registry system. This would also help create a database of the current owners so that the indiviual pieces are not lost down the road when the owners ever sell. It also helps the current owners marketabilty of their PCGS slabbed pedigreed coins which would be a win-win situation.
The best part of the idea I have explained in the second paragraph is it finally shifts the registry set concept to its pure intent. Recognition of great coins held by great collectors without a rating system at all! It allows collectors to band together and re-create the pedigreed collection of famous collections without competition!