How can Eliasberg have #1 Registry Sets.......

Sandhawk

How come famous sets like Eliasberg are in the Registry (and #1 of all time) when they were never graded by PCGS (all of the grades are listed as estimated). And PCGS won't even let NGC coins be included in the registry, but allow sets that were never even graded be #1 in the registry. Just because the sets came and went long before TPG were around, doesn't mean they should be included.

If there is a good explanation for it, please let me know.

rainbowroosie

Hey, I have the 1804 restrike cent from that sale and it is slabbed by NGC!!! That said, it is a GREAT coin!!!!!!!

DAM

Sandhawk,

If you run a thread search using the words "phantom"and "Eliasberg", you should find some threads discussing this issue. IMO, the way it's being done isn't fair, because of the PCGS certified coins only rule.



<< <i>If there is a good explanation for it, please let me know. >>


The one that stands out it because PCGS says so.

foodude

Based on some commets HRH made at last years Registry lunch on Baltimore, it my understanding that these grade estimates are based on detailed noted that HRH and others he respects for their grading expertise.

dbldie55

After a few attempts, the one I own (of the two) is still in the same grade PCGS holder as is listed in the "phantom set". They have a sound reason for what they have done. Many have suggestions of how to better handle it. For me it is a non-issue.