Options
More Registry Fun
foodude
Posts: 3,553 ✭✭✭
After reading some of the comments on the board related to these new set categories (see, e.g., Link), 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.
I also posed this to HRH in a Q&A a few weeks ago, see: Q&A for his take on it
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? What other ideas do you have?
And keep in mind, the implemetation aspect, BJ already has a lot of registry things to do.
I also posed this to HRH in a Q&A a few weeks ago, see: Q&A for his take on it
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? What other ideas do you have?
And keep in mind, the implemetation aspect, BJ already has a lot of registry things to do.
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
Link to 1950 - 1964 Proof Registry Set
1938 - 1964 Proof Jeffersons w/ Varieties
I have no problem with the idea in general; however, I question if
a complete 65FBL or better Franklin set should be considered as a
"set for people without $$$" to complete. (I'd be interested in your
definition of what constitutes an inexpensive set.)
My biggest concern is that the sets don't get too diluted. I think that
it would take away from the registry a little if there were 10-15 sets
for each coin series. (Proof, Mint, mixed, FBL, non FBL, minimum 63,
minimum 63 FBL, ..., etc)
a complete 65FBL or better Franklin set should be considered as a
"set for people without $$$" to complete. (I'd be interested in your
definition of what constitutes an inexpensive set.)
While complete 65FBL Franklin set is significantly less expensive than some of th top ten or so sets (those 66FBLs and 67FBLs add up), I do not consider a complete 65FBL Franklin set to be inexpensive. I don't even consider a complete 64FBL Franklin set to be inexpensive (the '53-S in 64FBL is the culprit, it is a mid-4 figure coin).
I do consider a complete 65 (i.e., no need for FBLs) Franklin set to be approaching a more reasonable level. And complete 64 Franklin set is, for a slabbed series, inexpensive, and doable for many. Below 64 it may actually be harder to find the coins in slabs.
My biggest concern is that the sets don't get too diluted. I think that it would take away from the registry a little if there were 10-15 sets for each coin series. (Proof, Mint, mixed, FBL, non FBL, minimum 63, minimum 63 FBL, ..., etc)
The current registry pages would be basically the same. The new part would be in addition to the current registry.