More Registry Fun
foodude
Posts: 3,572 ✭✭✭
in Q & A Forum
David,
(Please bear with me on this one, there is a question at the end)
First, thanks for giving the additional CS Roosevelt and CS Franklin Registry sets a try (i.e., the ones where there is no bonus for FB and FBL, respectively).
Second, after reading some of the comments on the board related to these new set categories, and my take away from some comments that it would be nice if collectors without big $$$$ could further participate and have fun with the Registry. So after thinking about it for a while, I came up with the following two ideas.
Idea #1
In addition to the Registry sets that are ranked based on grade, rarity, designation, etc., have another section for each set that simply recognizes that someone has completed a set at a certain minimum grade or grade+designation. For example, let’s take mint set Franklins. There could be a listing of sets that are at least MS64FBL, another listing for sets that are at least 65 (non FBL bonus), another listing for sets that are at least 65FBL. For Franklins that should be enough; for other series appropriate set listing could be developed. For CS Franklins, these sets would be in addition to the current two CS Franklin Registry Sets.
Once a set qualifies for the next level of grade, or grade+designation, it would move up to the new level, and drop from the previous level. For example, if a set was at least 64FBL, and an upgrade made the set at least 65FBL, it would be listed in the at least 65FBL list, and dropped from the at least 64FBL list. Dropping the set when it moves up would allow the other sets in each level to stand out, and not be cluttered with sets that have been upgraded to the next level.
And for those that wish too continue to try for the top sets, or see how their sets rank against the top sets, the current Registry system would still be in place.
As a collector, I find completing a set is a big deal, and worthy of acknowledgement. In addition, having a goal such as at least 64FBL, 65, or 65FBL, may help people select collecting goals. In the end, I hope it encourages more collectors to participate, have fun, have a sense of accomplishment, have their set highlighted for others to see, and for those that care, more of an opportunity to see their name in “lights”.
Idea #2
Randomly pick complete Registry sets and feature a link to them on the PCGS website (just a little area on the website)- like a set of day or something like that. Click on the icon for the set of day, and there it is.
If nothing else, I hope these ideas stimulate a discussion that leads to a better Registry in which more people can actively participate, and have fun doing so.
So what do you think about these ideas?
Greg
BTW, is this the longest post yet in the Q&A
(Please bear with me on this one, there is a question at the end)
First, thanks for giving the additional CS Roosevelt and CS Franklin Registry sets a try (i.e., the ones where there is no bonus for FB and FBL, respectively).
Second, after reading some of the comments on the board related to these new set categories, and my take away from some comments that it would be nice if collectors without big $$$$ could further participate and have fun with the Registry. So after thinking about it for a while, I came up with the following two ideas.
Idea #1
In addition to the Registry sets that are ranked based on grade, rarity, designation, etc., have another section for each set that simply recognizes that someone has completed a set at a certain minimum grade or grade+designation. For example, let’s take mint set Franklins. There could be a listing of sets that are at least MS64FBL, another listing for sets that are at least 65 (non FBL bonus), another listing for sets that are at least 65FBL. For Franklins that should be enough; for other series appropriate set listing could be developed. For CS Franklins, these sets would be in addition to the current two CS Franklin Registry Sets.
Once a set qualifies for the next level of grade, or grade+designation, it would move up to the new level, and drop from the previous level. For example, if a set was at least 64FBL, and an upgrade made the set at least 65FBL, it would be listed in the at least 65FBL list, and dropped from the at least 64FBL list. Dropping the set when it moves up would allow the other sets in each level to stand out, and not be cluttered with sets that have been upgraded to the next level.
And for those that wish too continue to try for the top sets, or see how their sets rank against the top sets, the current Registry system would still be in place.
As a collector, I find completing a set is a big deal, and worthy of acknowledgement. In addition, having a goal such as at least 64FBL, 65, or 65FBL, may help people select collecting goals. In the end, I hope it encourages more collectors to participate, have fun, have a sense of accomplishment, have their set highlighted for others to see, and for those that care, more of an opportunity to see their name in “lights”.
Idea #2
Randomly pick complete Registry sets and feature a link to them on the PCGS website (just a little area on the website)- like a set of day or something like that. Click on the icon for the set of day, and there it is.
If nothing else, I hope these ideas stimulate a discussion that leads to a better Registry in which more people can actively participate, and have fun doing so.
So what do you think about these ideas?
Greg
BTW, is this the longest post yet in the Q&A
Greg Allen Coins, LLC Show Schedule: https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/573044/our-show-schedule-updated-10-2-16 Authorized dealer for NGC, PCGS, CAC, and QA. Member of PNG, RTT (Founding Platinum Member), FUN, MSNS, and NCBA (formerly ICTA); Life Member of ANA and CSNS. NCBA Board member. "GA3" on CCE.
0
Comments
I believe that most Registry participants like to know where they stand and enjoy the ranking, whether they are #1 or #31. I do agree with you that the Registry is a good way to keep track of a collection and formalize a numismatic accomplishment, but I don't think an "unranked" Registry would be that popular. It would also be a ton of work and BJ would kill us both.
I like the idea of the link to sets and we are actually working on several variations of this.
David