Home› PCGS Set Registry Forum

POLL ON SET REGISTRY REQUIREMENTS-RESULTS & COMMENT

SteveSteve Posts: 3,312 ✭✭✭
in PCGS Set Registry Forum
This is a controversial subject. What do you say? Your responses are appreciated. Steveimage

The results from this poll are "YES" 23 votes or 30% and "NO" 53 votes or 70%. It is clear that most set registry forum respondents believe that the PCGS registry requirements remain the same.

I can understand how important it is to preserve our right to privacy and our choice to show our coins in the registry or not. I personally have always felt that the PCGS Set Registry should be a "fun" thing where everyone would WANT to show off THEIR coins and some of us would enjoy seeing other collectors coins. I recognized from the begining that probably most of the great collections out there would never make it to the PCGS registry. So why make it "seem" like certain people have a #1 set when, in fact, there are probably many other finer sets that never get entered here. Why not just have fun and let people enter what they want without scoring.

I have come to realize that this is NOT the prevailing view out there. There IS competition to be #1 and, in fact, probably some sets go to auction and receive higher bidding just because of their position in the PCGS Set Registry. The "hiding" of some registry sets from view is probably just because of this competition. And, I guess, that is OK too.

Thank you for participating and feel free to add additional comments if you wish.
Steveimage
My True View Album

My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry

Comments

  • dunerlawdunerlaw Posts: 387 ✭✭
    No
    I dont have time to load photos.
    Larry Martin's Mercury Dime Variety Set
  • fcloudfcloud Posts: 12,133 ✭✭✭✭
    Eventhough, I have photos of my dimes, I think it should be optional. It is up to each person to decide if they want photos or if they even want to open their set for others to look at. The more choices the better.

    President, Racine Numismatic Society 2013-2014; Variety Resource Dimes; See 6/8/12 CDN for my article on Winged Liberty Dimes; Ebay

  • dbldie55dbldie55 Posts: 7,735 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Sounds like a lose-lose situation for PCGS.
    Collector and Researcher of Liberty Head Nickels. ANA LM-6053
  • numonebuyernumonebuyer Posts: 2,136 ✭


    << <i>I dont have time to load photos. >>



    What a load of crap.
  • RegistryNutRegistryNut Posts: 606 ✭
    Open sets and images are great and most members, I believe, prefer them. But to take away our options
    and/or preferances is a little harsh. So I voted no.

    RegistryNut image
    RegistryNut's Ebay Auctions
  • XpipedreamRXpipedreamR Posts: 8,059 ✭✭
    I think it's a little disappointing when a set doesn't have pictures, because I like coins, and I like to look at them, especially really nice ones. However, all the registry is is a comparative ranking of sets based on a weighted grade average of the coins in the set, and that's the only way they can do it based on their current grading and registry system. The quality of coin photography is all over the map, so requiring photos would add very little if the owner were not adept at photography or were not very motivated to obtain such pictures, and adds nothing to the ranking process. People may have their own personal reasons for not displaying the set or providing pictures. If you own the coin, you own the coin, and it's no more or less valid of a set with or without pictures or whether the set is open to viewing.




    Now what PCGS could do is require that all registry coins be photographed through their new photography service (only for photographic consistency, of course) image


  • garsmithgarsmith Posts: 5,894 ✭✭
    I think all sets should be open for viewing, but posting images should be your choice not a requirement.







  • WaterSportWaterSport Posts: 6,832 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Open yes, Pictures not required. There are still too many issues for the average person (collector) to pick up a digital camera (the RIGHT digital camera) and take decent pictures.

    WS
    Proud recipient of the coveted PCGS Forum "You Suck" Award Thursday July 19, 2007 11:33 PM and December 30th, 2011 at 8:50 PM.
  • DabigkahunaDabigkahuna Posts: 3,419


    I don't see what difference it makes if somebody is able to view your coins or not but why take away the option? It's a tool that has it place.



    Larry
    Dabiagkahuna
    image
    My Ebay Auctions
    image
  • idocoinsidocoins Posts: 633


    << <i>I don't see what difference it makes if somebody is able to view your coins or not but why take away the option? It's a tool that has it place.



    Larry
    Dabiagkahuna
    image >>



    image
    Building 33-47 Mint Sets always looking for MS67s PM with any coins you might have for sale.

    Mike
    idocoins
  • LindeDadLindeDad Posts: 18,766 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I feel that the hidden set has it's place, especially when I and several other collectors may be interested in the same coins at the same time. Also remember that some registry sets are no more than inventory or investments not really collections.
    That said I really like to see the open collections with good images. Just to be able to admire top grade coins, that I may never be able to collect is an enjoyable way to speed time.
    And I and a lot of others are waiting for PCGS to make the imaging upload easier, and still trying to learn the art of good true images of our coins.
    So all that said leave it as it is. It serves the needs of the members as is.
    My Current project....https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/mysetregistry/album/160794
  • RADRAD Posts: 287
    Voted no.....Requiring images may be a waste of "space", as not all images are worth looking at (my own photgraphy needs some work!!). As for sets being open for viewing, I agree with LindeDad in that competition for some series can be heated, and I don't really want to have to compete at auction with any dealers who might try to 'corner' an issue that can be challenging, just because they know it is not part of someones' or several someone's set.

    Perhaps requiring a completed set be open for viewing makes some sense, though a carrot may be more effective than a stick (maybe offer a free grading for those sets that are completed , with more than 20% photos....)
    RAD
  • KeyrockKeyrock Posts: 961 ✭
    The only way I could see it working is if PCGS imaged every coin and you instantly has the image uploaded from their image database to your set when the coin was listed.

    If it was required I would just take a blurried image and link it to every coin. I would like to image my coins and it's on the list of things to do, its just labor intensive. Some day I will do it for my own satisfaction but to require it would drive people away who have no desire (or equipment) to do so.

    my 2 cents
  • BNEBNE Posts: 772 ✭
    I'd have voted "yes" if smoeone would be willing to photograph and post photos of all of my coins for free.
    "The essence of sleight of hand is distraction and misdirection. If smoeone can be convinced that he has, through his own perspicacity, divined your hidden purposes, he will not look further."

    William S. Burroughs, Cities of the Red Night
  • JulienJulien Posts: 533
    I voted yes but would like PCGS to link pictures or drastically up the size allowed.
  • StoogeStooge Posts: 4,668 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I believe that all of the H.O.F. sets should be open for viewing, and I also believe that they should be required to be pedigreed.

    As far as the question, It should be up to the current owners of their sets to decide whether or not to keep them open or closed. Pictures should always be optional.

    Later, Paul.

    Later, Paul.
  • docday2003docday2003 Posts: 1,100


    << <i>Open yes, Pictures not required. There are still too many issues for the average person (collector) to pick up a digital camera (the RIGHT digital camera) and take decent pictures.

    WS >>



    I agree that they should be open, but I disagree with requiring photos
  • BNEBNE Posts: 772 ✭
    Stooge: Why do think all HOF sets ought to be pedigreed?
    "The essence of sleight of hand is distraction and misdirection. If smoeone can be convinced that he has, through his own perspicacity, divined your hidden purposes, he will not look further."

    William S. Burroughs, Cities of the Red Night
  • MistercoinmanMistercoinman Posts: 1,820 ✭✭✭
    I voted no becuase the registry is about having options not requirements. The only rule now is that you can only put PCGS coins in them. The other reason is that not all collectors want to have there coins revealed to everyone! FRed
    JR Newsletter
  • Dan50Dan50 Posts: 1,816 ✭✭✭
    I agree, let owners decide whats best for their situation. I have never closed my set, but to be truthful it has crossed my mind lately. Seems the closer you get to 100%, the more expensive the coins offered from board members get. Like 3-4 times what they should be selling for. I wont even mention the offer sent to me for two coins that are only a year out of the mint, at 5 x+. image
    Dan
  • RegistryCoinRegistryCoin Posts: 5,117 ✭✭✭✭
    Digital pictures? Digital cameras? Uploading? I am too fearful to learn, or spend the time and money, so I'll say that "It's all just modern crap"! image
  • StoogeStooge Posts: 4,668 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Stooge: Why do think all HOF sets ought to be pedigreed? >>



    The H.O.F. sets are rare to come by in the registry, they should be required to be open so collectors such as myself can see what a H.O.F. set looks like. As far as the pedigee is concerned, this should be required with special H.O.F. labels, so if the set ever gets auctioned, the new owners will know exactly who owned the coin, and that it is a H.O.F. coin.

    Later, Paul.

    Later, Paul.
Sign In or Register to comment.