<<rollingcoins, meant to ask you, how did this turn out? What steps did the guys across the street do to correct your submission? And did they happen to do the right thing and cover your added expenses, which you wouldn't have incurred had they had their "feces" together?>>
Hi Roger,
Thanks for asking,... I just received my corrected order today. My only ADDITIONAL expense was to ship the coins back to Sarasota. This was a similar 'mechanical error' where business strike coins obtained from bank rolls were mislabelled as SMS. Thankfully, their population report has already been updated with the corrections. See two new WV(d) in MS69!
IMHO the difference between these business strikes and SMS coins is obvious and therefore I am very disappointed in the TPGs inability to differentiate. I also agree with Doug that inaccurate population reports are a huge problem and should be corrected ASAP. TPGs provide only information, their customers provide the coins. What good is inaccurate information?
As far as the Registry...I have not listed my set and I currently do not intend to do so. Mine is a collection of CIRCULATION strikes and does not fit in with the current mixed composition.
Lets hope PCGS has opened their ears to this subjuct and will set a course to resolve it. As I beleive they should, for the benefit of our registry users. Great input, Doug, Don, Micheal, & Mitch, if this doesn't "stir the pot", nothing will. You have my support. I too beleive their should be a variety set added in addition to the current set going. Unfortunitely, I wasn't smart enough to start making high grade Bus. strikes at the onset, so I will probally have to stay where I currently park my quarters. (Unless I find an extra 5K laying around). Good job on outlinning a course that hopefully will resolve this conplex issue for good. WH
Thanks for asking,... I just received my corrected order today. My only ADDITIONAL expense was to ship the coins back to Sarasota. This was a similar 'mechanical error' where business strike coins obtained from bank rolls were mislabelled as SMS. Thankfully, their population report has already been updated with the corrections. See two new WV(d) in MS69!
Don, nice results, congratulations!
Emotions run high when peoples expectations are not managed properly.
Thanks Doug, I will be signing up for those expectation management courses at my local community college. Hope I haven't missed the spring semester sign-up. This was sure a lot easier on my emotional state when I just threw the coins into a jar!!!
The miss-management of expectations occured not because the main registry set adhered to the PCGS either or policy announced at the beginning, It occured in my opinion because no effort was made by PCGS to include a broad enough registry where the MS coins could be accounted for, and further demeaned the MS coins by flagrantly ignoring repeated emails form collectors about the labeling errors showing up each week. It was really flagrant when MS pop's showed up for KS and WV long before the coin was even released into general circulation.
I had a MN sf 69 show up as a circ coin. I contacted pcgs. Had to take pics of the obv and rev of the coin and send them in. The mistake was corrected shortly thereafter. I have to give credit to the young lady who helped me. She was very courteous, right on top of the situation, and was a pleasure to deal with.
It occured in my opinion because no effort was made by PCGS to include a broad enough registry where the MS coins could be accounted for
Mitch, as Doug stated, thanks for starting this thread. I realize you have taken a lot heat with this one (I think "crispy critter" is applicable). I don't think the regestry forum has had this much excitement in a long time. Your comment has brought out a lot of opinions, and also a gathering of the top collectors in the shq series. Maybe this will help bring about the change in the regestry that obviously, is very much needed and or desired. I haven't appealed this situation to anybody at pcgs. Maybe my two cents would help, but, none of my questions to Mr Hall has ever made it past the sorters of his junk mail! If the ms coins get their proper recognition, I will be putting my quarters back in the registry where I thought they belonged. In the meantime, I look forward to getting a ms67 ks-p in the mail from a guy that I consider to be a friend. 18 down, 2 to go. This is truly gonna be a financial challenge in the next 3 years.
Time for work, hope to see more of this tonight. Have a great day everyone. Roger
By the way - throughout this vast, vast Registry - very few coin series can have (2) guys in a dead heat tie for #1 in an incredibly popular series as State Quarters the likes of DONN MURPHY and DOUGLAS RALL. (2) of the finest AMBASSADORS of good will and overall hard working #1 guys anywhere I know in ANY Registry sets. Two thumbs up to these guys!!
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
<< <i>Sounds like a move in A direction may be in the works. Will it be right? Lots of great points made though out this post on which way it should go. >>
Dear Mas 3387,
Will it be right? This is an outstanding question you ask. If PCGS would just look at it's own home page, they have a link to a page called Lingo. PCGS further defines Circulation Strike as: An alternate term for Business Strike or Regular Strike. A coin meant for commerce.
None of the 2005 Satin Finish coins were meant for commerce, they were produced by a special process (special dies), and do not belong in a set that has CIRCULATED in the title. Put the Satin Finish coins were they belong, in a COMPLETE SET or/and a VARIETIES SET.
To allow the either / or solution, implies that both SF and non-SF coins are equal when in fact they are not.
I hope PCGS looks and read this thread before they make thier decission. I believe more points have been made to keep the SF coins out of the CIRCULATED sets, especially if PCGS wants to use it's own definition: An alternate term for Business Strike or Regular Strike. A coin meant for commerce.
Another suggustion for PCGS to consider, if they are to allow the SF coins into CIRCULATED sets then maybe a -2.5 weight given to the SF.
DH emailed me back this morning approving the new State Quarter Registry set, which will include the (12) varieities mentioned here to start the set!
Mitch,
So does this mean that PCGS will allow only business strikes (non SF coins) in the regular SQ set and the only place you can enter SF quarters will be in the variety set?
IF THAT IS THE CASE...then where does this leave lincoln, jefferson, roosie, kennedy & SAC sets???? Shouldn't those sets have the SF coins pulled out of their regular sets as well? I would think PCGS would want to stay consistent and not just do this to the SQ registry. All of the above ARE NO DIFFERENT than the SQ registry, IMHO.
Just take a look at the pop report for 2005 P & D business strike lincolns. If I'm not mistaken, 2005-P shows only 1 MS67 and 3 MS68's....while 2005-D shows 2 67's WITH NON GRADED HIGHER!
Ellewood: PCGS will be adding a state quarter variety set which will essentially have (12) more coins in it (to start) than the regular set. Nothing changes in the regular set - anyone can place either a SF or a no-SF coin in the regular set.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
<< <i>anyone can place either a SF or a no-SF coin in the regular set. >>
Would this be fair to the set collector who has put a set together by picking up Rolls from a local bank to search and submit his/her own coins to PCGS?
With "Either OR" this will put this type of set builder at a great disadvantage?
Mitch: Thanks for the kind words. For several years Doug Rall and I have corresponded off and on and I have always respected his knowledge and insight. I look forward to meeting him one day as I do meeting you. Doug and I have bought coins from each other and traded a few. It is obvious to me he loves the "hunt" and he must spend tremendous amounts of time finding the great coins he does. His comments on this thread are right on and I hope PCGS takes note and fixes what is now an obvious problem. Mitch, I want to commend you for starting this topic and for your efforts on behalf of us collectors. I have come to very much appreciate your tremendous knowledge about coins in general and your insights concerning the business components of collecting coins. I am just a collector who has loves finding and collecting coins for about the last 35 years. I am glad we have an Ambassador like you working in our corner to champion issues like this for us. Your time and efforts on behalf of our collecting community I am sure is much appreciated. Donn Murphy
<< <i>anyone can place either a SF or a no-SF coin in the regular set. >>
Would this be fair to the set collector who has put a set together by picking up Rolls from a local bank to search and submit his/her own coins to PCGS? With "Either OR" this will put this type of set builder at a great disadvantage? 7 years into such a set Funny how all valid points are brushed over >>
It is tragic in it's implications for the Business Strike collector. If someone wants their Satin Finish set to shine, they can use the Variety Set, but if the business strike collector adds coins to the Business Strike set, they don't have the value they should.
In most instances it appears that a 2 point separation exists in rarity between SF & BS.
If PCGS insists on keeping the Business Strike set as "Either / Or", then wouldn't it be Best For The Hobby to weight the "Either / Or" coins???
You, as much as anyone, should know Registry "progress" is made ONE STEP AT A TIME. We have come together on a very important issue concerning a State Quarter variety set this week (now approved by all of the top 4 sets and PCGS for that matter). Now, it needs to be implemented - (i.e. the set needs to get out there not just talked about). This is no time to throw into the discussion the entirely separately discussion of weighting for the various registry sets. That will require another "100+ post thread" - believe me!
Tim suggested -2.5 weight for SF coins if I read that correctly. In that case, an MS68 non-SF would be worth 1/2 point more than a SF MS70 coin!! I can almost bet the ranch that will never happen and I can almost guarantee that even Douglas who loves his non-SF coins will never agree to weigh them as 70.5. Would it be approrpriate to give the non-SF coins at least an additional 1 point weight? I personally think so. BUT, again, this is not the time for that entirely separate topic - here on this thread. Once the State Quarter variety set is up and running, let's visit the issue of an adjusted weight for non-SF coins - I think it is a good idea.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
I do not know 'wondercoin', but the impression that I get from this thread is that he is a dealer who buys many, many, many mint sets and then cherrypicks them for coins to be grade and then sold. If this is the case, then he is trying to protect his interest and I'm not surprised that he believes and has politiced for PCGS to have the either / or policy as it relates to SF or non'SF coins being in the circulated sets.
PCGS should be looking out for the 'Best Interest' of the hobby and of the Registry, not what is best for dealers. I wonder how wondercoin got DH's ear.
My first reply to this thread, I made it clear that I felt the SF coins didn't belong in the circulated sets and the reply I got from wondercoin was to "flame on". I took it that wondercoin doesn't like anyone to dissagree with him or have thier own opinion. So I felt it necessary to reply back and refer to him as the five year old he was acting like.
Tim: I have the #1 ranked 1932-date set of MS Washington Quarters (for which state quarters play an important role). It is true that I have no interest in a #1 set of MS state quarters, which is why I sold many pop 1 and pop 2 coins to Doug and Donn (and will continue to do so). Likewise, your DEALER friend MAS (who you seem very interested in hearing from on these subjects) has no interest in #1 (or any place set for that matter at this time?) - he too sold his best coins to Doug and others. In any event, if you believe I have no right to post this thread, or work towards the creation of a state quarter variety set or enjoy owing a top 5 set of MS state quarters or a #1 ranked 1932-date set of Washinigton Quarters for that matter, because I am also a dealer - you are entitled to your opinion. This is now your 58th post on these Message boards. It is almost embarrassing to see this is my 8,104th. Wondercoin.
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
I don't know who TAClough is or have I ever had any conversation with TAClough other than this post. And NO PM's as well. But don't mind having him as a new friend,
<< <i>This is now your 58th post on these Message boards >>
And this means?
Got to give the guy credit, He's a Reads well into things?
What will be will be, the Right thing to do many of us know. What will be done we all need to live with?
I've made many good points here and now will be done.
Michael: I agree - I am finished discussing all of this as well. What will be, will be at this point. You have made some very good points here. Hopefully, the Variety set can be launched sooner, rather than later. Hopefully, we can have a discussion inthe future concerning a possible re-weight for non-SF coins (I agree with Seth and others that it should be done).
Donn - Thank you for the kind words.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
Donn, I have met Mitch and believe me it is nothing special! Just kidding Mitch. We have made some headway here and it seems to be popular over all but we gots ta fix up the pop report first! This to me is side by side as important as the new registry. By the way, anyone can have DH's ear when he is around. Mitch can we do the pop report fix first or at the same time?
Despite differences of opinions here, it certainly should bring to the attention of PCGS something has to be done. For that I thank wondercoin for starting this. I rarely post but often read these threads. This is one of the best in a long long time. Thanks for the many responses by the SHQ family.
Now I need to find a Wisconsin Variety for my set.
Mark: It is true - you've got the great looking hair and appear to be a "chick magnet".
Hey, on that pop report issue - I am waiting to hear back from Dennis H. on the email I sent him the other day. I agree with you guys that just his serial number alone might clear up (19) or so big mistakes in mislabeled SF coins. Let's see if PCGS can fix these (19) mistakes this week - that would be a great start - no?
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
We had a few hundred Minnesota Quarters graded very early on when I believe the mistake was made. It is possible that these coins were ours. I will go back and find those submissions. Hopefully this will help.
After reveiwing the NEW 2005 Mint set series, I beleive if the choice is to make the SHQ series 2 sets, SF and the Variety Series, I beleive PCGS should as well make 2 separate mint sets for 2005. Variety Only (Buss strike ONLY) and a SF ONLY set, as there are sets that will be extremely comprimised by having a mixed set: (2005 Variety Set / TTT - To the top / Isn't this a fun set - John).
It would be neat to have a business strike "Circulation Set". In this case, I believe the Satin Finish coins are correctly placed in the "2005 Mint Set" for registry purposes. Wouldn't we need to call the other set a "2005 Circulation Strike Set"? Likely, the best way to do it would be to simply put a business strike set together and enter it separately from your Satin Finish set and then ask PCGS for the different category.
The question is, how many people would (or could) actually put one together at this point?
<< <i>It would be neat to have a business strike "Circulation Set". In this case, I believe the Satin Finish coins are correctly placed in the "2005 Mint Set" for registry purposes. Wouldn't we need to call the other set a "2005 Circulation Strike Set"? Likely, the best way to do it would be to simply put a business strike set together and enter it separately from your Satin Finish set and then ask PCGS for the different category.
The question is, how many people would (or could) actually put one together at this point? >>
I think John could, he seems to be running things over in the mint sets and shq's these days. Maybe we should ask him what PCGS should do, God knows he polluted the NGC registry this year with his mixed sets and PCGS/ NGC slabs.????
<< <i>God knows he polluted the NGC registry this year with his mixed sets and PCGS/ NGC slabs.???? >>
Isn't this the way NGC does it, accept PCGS or NCG Coins? And the problem is? Can't speak for others but is your set / sets 100% PCGS on the other side,
Sounds like the heat is too much for you with the new kid in town
Michael, I have not worked on the humpback Bison but i would like to see it become a variety. It is not as slick as the low and high leaf WI-D but I do like it as well as the "speared Bison" variety PCGS does recognize. It seems to me you have approaced PCGS and they did not do anything, right/wrong? Maybe with a new variety set they will now.
Michael, try calling him the phone. His secretary will relay messages and if you stay on it you will get a response from him or her. "The sqweeky wheel gets the grease"!
Mark: I thought it was agreed that the most important thing to do at this point was to clean up the pop report? It appears a good first step might be for Brian to provide those MN(P) serial numbers so we can try to remove (19) or more "bad" coins at once - right? Anyone here work with Brian - Doug it appears you have bought a number of coins from Brian - why don't you (2) guys get together and provide me with solid (problem) serial numbers so I can try to get them removed.
The time to politic for new varieties, adjusted weights, etc. etc. in a Registry variety set that doesn't even exist right now is AFTER the set is established IMHO.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
<< <i>God knows he polluted the NGC registry this year with his mixed sets and PCGS/ NGC slabs.???? >>
Isn't this the way NGC does it, accept PCGS or NCG Coins? And the problem is? Can't speak for others but is your set / sets 100% PCGS on the other side,
Sounds like the heat is too much for you with the new kid in town >>
<< <i>The time to politic for new varieties, adjusted weights, etc. etc. in a Registry variety set that doesn't even exist right now is AFTER the set is established IMHO.
Wondercoin >>
Mitch, I think I understand what you're trying to say about getting it started first as that's the hardest part. As long as true varieties are given their notice regardless of who's in control of which variety. It can obviously make a few people a lot of money like the speared bison crack. I personally don't own a humpback, but I think it should be authenticated in a PCGS slab (like the speared bison) and put in the variety set. I too have an Error coin that's currently in the same boat as mas3387's Humpback. Mine is a 2005 P Bison SF DDO Type 1 that would be nice to see as a nickel variety and given the same notice as the speared bison, but so far I too have sent them to ANACS for authentication (and they authenticated them) because I understand that PCGS is reluctant to give error designations to even the humpback. Honestly I have not contacted PCGS about it and maybe I should, but it seems that you need to know who to talk to about it to get through to the right people.
Any suggestions anyone? Straight to David Hall? or is there someone else @ PCGS that's capable of making a decision on this?
Anyone interested in the only 2005 P Kansas MS68 in town?
Speaking of mislabled, I have one that has the right coin # (914040) and when you do cert verification it says Satin Finish, but they didn't put Satin Finish on the holder. SO, it appears to be a 1 of 1 $,$$$ coin, but it's obviously just a very nice Satin Finish Coin. It's going back to PCGS, so the coin won't be in the wrong hands with any funny business, but it's another word to the wise about checking the coin # on a coin that appears to be a Business Strike...
Edit: I have a 2005-P Oregon MS69 that's the same way too. 914038, but no mention of SF on it. It too is going back to PCGS.
Just an FYI for you buyers out there to watch for.
Seth: I agree - varieties need to be carefully analyzed before a decision is made whether to include them in the set (which is why I say again - let's establish the variety set and debate additional coins thereafter). I have a number of really neat Doubled Die Washington quarters which I personally feel would fit in nicely to the variety set - like the 1936 Doubled Die Obverse and 1942(d) Doubled Die Reverse quarters to name just two (the pop report at least recognizes the latter). I do not recall ever asking PCGS to include a silver quarter variety in their registry set. Perhaps one or two days per year, someone at PCGS can agree to assess proposed varieties from Registry set collectors? Proposed coins that PCGS really likes can then be considered and perhaps even Registry set owners polled?
Obviously, everyone can agree that the (12) varieties PCGS is starting with are the "no brainers" for state quarters. But, perhaps there are a few other potential state quarter (and silver Wash quarter) varieties for the sets to consider. I think it would be a good idea to have PCGS select a "point man" to preliminarily assess proposed additions to the variety sets. The gentleman at PCGS that currently handles their Price Guide actually loves variety coins - I'll ask him next week if he would agree to be such a "point man" if we all think that would make sense?
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
<< <i>Anyone interested in the only 2005 P Kansas MS68 in town? Speaking of mislabled, I have one that has the right coin # (914040) and when you do cert verification it says Satin Finish, but they didn't put Satin Finish on the holder. SO, it appears to be a 1 of 1 $,$$$ coin, but it's obviously just a very nice Satin Finish Coin. It's going back to PCGS, so the coin won't be in the wrong hands with any funny business, but it's another word to the wise about checking the coin # on a coin that appears to be a Business Strike... Edit: I have a 2005-P Oregon MS69 that's the same way too. 914038, but no mention of SF on it. It too is going back to PCGS. Just an FYI for you buyers out there to watch for. >>
You know, if someone was evil enough they would send that coin to NGC for crossover. Get it crossed and then cross it over at PCGS. Then it would be in a non Satin holder with the correct non Satin coin number on the insert. . .
Time consuming but, again if someone is evil enough, worth it.
You know, if someone was evil enough they would send that coin to NGC for crossover. Get it crossed and then cross it over at PCGS. Then it would be in a non Satin holder with the correct non Satin coin number on the insert. . .
It seems Seth's motivations are not driven by money, at least not at the expense of his integrity. Way to go. I have seen many of your auctions at ebay, bid a few, but I don't think I have ever had the pleasure of winning any of your coins. Your to be commended, truly an asset to coin collecting.
Kicked to the curb again, might as well stay here. With one vote aginst looks like I'd be wasting my time I feel enough points & facts have been presented as to which coin is the Variety IMHO. As I said before what will be - will be.
You want some company Michael. I feel like a little kid screaming for attention here. All I seem to have gotten for the trouble is "Here kid, have a sucker. Now go outside and play."
Pat: Obviously a possibility. But, a number of things would have to occur which as a combination appear unlikely. They are:
1. NGC crosses the PCGS coin (we can discuss the PCGS cross rate as they publish it every month in the dealer newsletter, but, NGC, best I know, is fairly tough on its crossovers as well).
2. NGC misses the fact that the coin is truly SF. Unlikely and the probable reason the coin would not cross from the PCGS holder.
3. PCGS crosses the NGC coin
4. PCGS misses the fact that the coin is truly SF.
Chance of all 4 events happening - HIGHLY UNLIKELY I BELIEVE.
Seth: Good job catching the mechanical errors.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
Are we going to accept that all of the graders can't tell if the coin is SF or regular dies?
Sorry we pay a lot of money for the difference in a 67 and a 68 coin they grade. The difference in SF and regular is greater to my old eyes and I don't even call myself a grader.
Thats why I buy graded coins, or maybe why I used to buy graded coin if this keeps up.
And I was asking on these boards what PCGS was going to do with the mint set special finish coins before they were released.
Comments
<<rollingcoins, meant to ask you, how did this turn out? What steps did the guys across the street do to correct your submission?
And did they happen to do the right thing and cover your added expenses, which you wouldn't have incurred had they had their
"feces" together?>>
Hi Roger,
Thanks for asking,... I just received my corrected order today. My only ADDITIONAL expense was to ship the coins back to
Sarasota. This was a similar 'mechanical error' where business strike coins obtained from bank rolls were mislabelled as
SMS. Thankfully, their population report has already been updated with the corrections. See two new WV(d) in MS69!
IMHO the difference between these business strikes and SMS coins is obvious and therefore I am very disappointed in the
TPGs inability to differentiate. I also agree with Doug that inaccurate population reports are a huge problem and should
be corrected ASAP. TPGs provide only information, their customers provide the coins. What good is inaccurate information?
As far as the Registry...I have not listed my set and I currently do not intend to do so. Mine is a collection of CIRCULATION
strikes and does not fit in with the current mixed composition.
~Don
Sarasota. This was a similar 'mechanical error' where business strike coins obtained from bank rolls were mislabelled as
SMS. Thankfully, their population report has already been updated with the corrections. See two new WV(d) in MS69!
Don, nice results, congratulations!
Emotions run high when peoples expectations are not managed properly.
The miss-management of expectations occured not because the main registry set adhered to the PCGS either or policy announced at the beginning, It occured in my opinion because no effort was made by PCGS to include a broad enough registry where the MS coins could be accounted for, and further demeaned the MS coins by flagrantly ignoring repeated emails form collectors about the labeling errors showing up each week. It was really flagrant when MS pop's showed up for KS and WV long before the coin was even released into general circulation.
I had a MN sf 69 show up as a circ coin. I contacted pcgs. Had to take pics of the obv and rev of the coin and send them in. The mistake was corrected shortly thereafter. I have to give credit to the young lady who helped me. She was very courteous, right on top of the situation, and was a pleasure to deal with.
It occured in my opinion because no effort was made by PCGS to include a broad enough registry where the MS coins could be accounted for
Mitch, as Doug stated, thanks for starting this thread. I realize you have taken a lot heat with this one (I think "crispy critter" is applicable). I don't think the regestry forum has had this much excitement in a long time. Your comment has brought out a lot of opinions, and also a gathering of the top collectors in the shq series. Maybe this will help bring about the change in the regestry that obviously, is very much needed and or desired. I haven't appealed this situation to anybody at pcgs. Maybe my two cents would help, but, none of my questions to Mr Hall has ever made it past the sorters of his junk mail! If the ms coins get their proper recognition, I will be putting my quarters back in the registry where I thought they belonged. In the meantime, I look forward to getting a ms67 ks-p in the mail from a guy that I consider to be a friend. 18 down, 2 to go. This is truly gonna be a financial challenge in the next 3 years.
Time for work, hope to see more of this tonight. Have a great day everyone.
Roger
I think I just caught the "compete " bug,
Start set #2 ,
I got an email from the #3 or #4 set collector (PVS) who also supports the Variety set concept to resolve the issue of SF vs. non-SF coins.
DH emailed me back this morning approving the new State Quarter Registry set, which will include the (12) varieities mentioned here to start the set!
Wondercoin
Mark, what can we do????
Roger: You have NO IDEA!!!
Wondercoin
Wondercoin
<< <i>Sounds like a move in A direction may be in the works. Will it be right? Lots of great points made though out this post on which way it should go. >>
Dear Mas 3387,
Will it be right? This is an outstanding question you ask. If PCGS would just look at it's own home page, they have a link to a page called Lingo. PCGS further defines Circulation Strike as: An alternate term for Business Strike or Regular Strike. A coin meant for commerce.
None of the 2005 Satin Finish coins were meant for commerce, they were produced by a special process (special dies), and do not belong in a set that has CIRCULATED in the title. Put the Satin Finish coins were they belong, in a COMPLETE SET or/and a VARIETIES SET.
To allow the either / or solution, implies that both SF and non-SF coins are equal when in fact they are not.
I hope PCGS looks and read this thread before they make thier decission. I believe more points have been made to keep the SF coins out of the CIRCULATED sets, especially if PCGS wants to use it's own definition: An alternate term for Business Strike or Regular Strike. A coin meant for commerce.
Another suggustion for PCGS to consider, if they are to allow the SF coins into CIRCULATED sets then maybe a -2.5 weight given to the SF.
Sincerely,
Tim
Mitch,
So does this mean that PCGS will allow only business strikes (non SF coins) in the regular SQ set and the only place you can enter SF quarters will be in the variety set?
IF THAT IS THE CASE...then where does this leave lincoln, jefferson, roosie, kennedy & SAC sets???? Shouldn't those sets have the SF coins pulled out of their regular sets as well? I would think PCGS would want to stay consistent and not just do this to the SQ registry. All of the above ARE NO DIFFERENT than the SQ registry, IMHO.
Just take a look at the pop report for 2005 P & D business strike lincolns. If I'm not mistaken, 2005-P shows only 1 MS67 and 3 MS68's....while 2005-D shows 2 67's WITH NON GRADED HIGHER!
Has a can of worms been opened or what?
Wondercoin
Thanks for bringing up another Great Point,
mas3387
<< <i>anyone can place either a SF or a no-SF coin in the regular set. >>
Would this be fair to the set collector who has put a set together by picking up Rolls from a local bank to search and submit his/her own coins to PCGS?
With "Either OR" this will put this type of set builder at a great disadvantage?
7 years into such a set
Funny how all valid points are brushed over
Thanks for the kind words. For several years Doug Rall and I have corresponded off and on and I have always respected his knowledge and insight. I look forward to meeting him one day as I do meeting you. Doug and I have bought coins from each other and traded a few. It is obvious to me he loves the "hunt" and he must spend tremendous amounts of time finding the great coins he does. His comments on this thread are right on and I hope PCGS takes note and fixes what is now an obvious problem. Mitch, I want to commend you for starting this topic and for your efforts on behalf of us collectors. I have come to very much appreciate your tremendous knowledge about coins in general and your insights concerning the business components of collecting coins. I am just a collector who has loves finding and collecting coins for about the last 35 years. I am glad we have an Ambassador like you working in our corner to champion issues like this for us. Your time and efforts on behalf of our collecting community I am sure is much appreciated.
Donn Murphy
<< <i>
<< <i>anyone can place either a SF or a no-SF coin in the regular set. >>
Would this be fair to the set collector who has put a set together by picking up Rolls from a local bank to search and submit his/her own coins to PCGS? With "Either OR" this will put this type of set builder at a great disadvantage? 7 years into such a set
It is tragic in it's implications for the Business Strike collector. If someone wants their Satin Finish set to shine, they can use the Variety Set, but if the business strike collector adds coins to the Business Strike set, they don't have the value they should.
In most instances it appears that a 2 point separation exists in rarity between SF & BS.
If PCGS insists on keeping the Business Strike set as "Either / Or", then wouldn't it be Best For The Hobby to weight the "Either / Or" coins???
Michael; "Brushed over" by whom?
You, as much as anyone, should know Registry "progress" is made ONE STEP AT A TIME. We have come together on a very important issue concerning a State Quarter variety set this week (now approved by all of the top 4 sets and PCGS for that matter). Now, it needs to be implemented - (i.e. the set needs to get out there not just talked about). This is no time to throw into the discussion the entirely separately discussion of weighting for the various registry sets. That will require another "100+ post thread" - believe me!
Tim suggested -2.5 weight for SF coins if I read that correctly. In that case, an MS68 non-SF would be worth 1/2 point more than a SF MS70 coin!! I can almost bet the ranch that will never happen and I can almost guarantee that even Douglas who loves his non-SF coins will never agree to weigh them as 70.5. Would it be approrpriate to give the non-SF coins at least an additional 1 point weight? I personally think so. BUT, again, this is not the time for that entirely separate topic - here on this thread. Once the State Quarter variety set is up and running, let's visit the issue of an adjusted weight for non-SF coins - I think it is a good idea.
Wondercoin
I do not know 'wondercoin', but the impression that I get from this thread is that he is a dealer who buys many, many, many mint sets and then cherrypicks them for coins to be grade and then sold. If this is the case, then he is trying to protect his interest and I'm not surprised that he believes and has politiced for PCGS to have the either / or policy as it relates to SF or non'SF coins being in the circulated sets.
PCGS should be looking out for the 'Best Interest' of the hobby and of the Registry, not what is best for dealers. I wonder how wondercoin got DH's ear.
My first reply to this thread, I made it clear that I felt the SF coins didn't belong in the circulated sets and the reply I got from wondercoin was to "flame on". I took it that wondercoin doesn't like anyone to dissagree with him or have thier own opinion. So I felt it necessary to reply back and refer to him as the five year old he was acting like.
Sincerely,
Tim
The SF coin gets a minus 2.5 points in the set, is what I suggusted.
Tim
Mitch to clear things up
I don't know who TAClough is or have I ever had any conversation with TAClough other than this post. And NO PM's as well. But don't mind having him as a new friend,
<< <i>This is now your 58th post on these Message boards >>
And this means?
Got to give the guy credit, He's a Reads well into things?
What will be will be, the Right thing to do many of us know. What will be done we all need to live with?
I've made many good points here and now will be done.
Mitch, I see like you
Donn - Thank you for the kind words.
Wondercoin
Now I need to find a Wisconsin Variety for my set.
Hey, on that pop report issue - I am waiting to hear back from Dennis H. on the email I sent him the other day. I agree with you guys that just his serial number alone might clear up (19) or so big mistakes in mislabeled SF coins. Let's see if PCGS can fix these (19) mistakes this week - that would be a great start - no?
Wondercoin
<< <i>Mark: It is true - you've got the great looking hair and appear to be a "chick magnet". >>
Yeah but you're the one with the ms69++wife and family!
Brian
Mark: That is very kind - even though I beg to differ with you on the grade. I can tell the difference on this MS70
Wondercoin
Just my thoughts.
Comments Welcomed...............
The question is, how many people would (or could) actually put one together at this point?
<< <i>It would be neat to have a business strike "Circulation Set". In this case, I believe the Satin Finish coins are correctly placed in the "2005 Mint Set" for registry purposes. Wouldn't we need to call the other set a "2005 Circulation Strike Set"? Likely, the best way to do it would be to simply put a business strike set together and enter it separately from your Satin Finish set and then ask PCGS for the different category.
The question is, how many people would (or could) actually put one together at this point? >>
I think John could, he seems to be running things over in the mint sets and shq's these days. Maybe we should ask him what PCGS should do, God knows he polluted the NGC registry this year with his mixed sets and PCGS/ NGC slabs.????
<< <i>God knows he polluted the NGC registry this year with his mixed sets and PCGS/ NGC slabs.???? >>
Isn't this the way NGC does it, accept PCGS or NCG Coins? And the problem is? Can't speak for others but is your set / sets 100% PCGS on the other side,
Sounds like the heat is too much for you with the new kid in town
Any updates?
Mark,
How's progress with the Humpback Bison?
I have not received a reply at all
I think this is one cool coin, any suggestions as to how to get through to PCGS on this????
The time to politic for new varieties, adjusted weights, etc. etc. in a Registry variety set that doesn't even exist right now is AFTER the set is established IMHO.
Wondercoin
I feel enough points & facts have been presented as to which coin is the Variety IMHO. As I said before what will be - will be.
I have not run into Mis-labeled 2005 coins personally so I can not be of much help there.
<< <i>
<< <i>God knows he polluted the NGC registry this year with his mixed sets and PCGS/ NGC slabs.???? >>
Isn't this the way NGC does it, accept PCGS or NCG Coins? And the problem is? Can't speak for others but is your set / sets 100% PCGS on the other side,
Sounds like the heat is too much for you with the new kid in town
Yes, 100% PCGS, thanks for asking
XXX, or Michael or Mark - can anyone get those problem serial numbers from Brian to get this train rolling?
Wondercoin
<< <i>The time to politic for new varieties, adjusted weights, etc. etc. in a Registry variety set that doesn't even exist right now is AFTER the set is established IMHO.
Wondercoin >>
Mitch, I think I understand what you're trying to say about getting it started first as that's the hardest part. As long as true varieties are given their notice regardless of who's in control of which variety. It can obviously make a few people a lot of money like the speared bison crack. I personally don't own a humpback, but I think it should be authenticated in a PCGS slab (like the speared bison) and put in the variety set. I too have an Error coin that's currently in the same boat as mas3387's Humpback. Mine is a 2005 P Bison SF DDO Type 1 that would be nice to see as a nickel variety and given the same notice as the speared bison, but so far I too have sent them to ANACS for authentication (and they authenticated them) because I understand that PCGS is reluctant to give error designations to even the humpback. Honestly I have not contacted PCGS about it and maybe I should, but it seems that you need to know who to talk to about it to get through to the right people.
Any suggestions anyone? Straight to David Hall? or is there someone else @ PCGS that's capable of making a decision on this?
Any help is greatly appreciated,
Seth
Speaking of mislabled, I have one that has the right coin # (914040) and when you do cert verification it says Satin Finish, but they didn't put Satin Finish on the holder. SO, it appears to be a 1 of 1 $,$$$ coin, but it's obviously just a very nice Satin Finish Coin. It's going back to PCGS, so the coin won't be in the wrong hands with any funny business, but it's another word to the wise about checking the coin # on a coin that appears to be a Business Strike...
Edit: I have a 2005-P Oregon MS69 that's the same way too. 914038, but no mention of SF on it. It too is going back to PCGS.
Just an FYI for you buyers out there to watch for.
Obviously, everyone can agree that the (12) varieties PCGS is starting with are the "no brainers" for state quarters. But, perhaps there are a few other potential state quarter (and silver Wash quarter) varieties for the sets to consider. I think it would be a good idea to have PCGS select a "point man" to preliminarily assess proposed additions to the variety sets. The gentleman at PCGS that currently handles their Price Guide actually loves variety coins - I'll ask him next week if he would agree to be such a "point man" if we all think that would make sense?
Wondercoin
Seth, Great Job
Thanks for reporting those mis-labeled coins.
<< <i>Anyone interested in the only 2005 P Kansas MS68 in town? Speaking of mislabled, I have one that has the right coin # (914040) and when you do cert verification it says Satin Finish, but they didn't put Satin Finish on the holder. SO, it appears to be a 1 of 1 $,$$$ coin, but it's obviously just a very nice Satin Finish Coin. It's going back to PCGS, so the coin won't be in the wrong hands with any funny business, but it's another word to the wise about checking the coin # on a coin that appears to be a Business Strike... Edit: I have a 2005-P Oregon MS69 that's the same way too. 914038, but no mention of SF on it. It too is going back to PCGS. Just an FYI for you buyers out there to watch for.
You know, if someone was evil enough they would send that coin to NGC for crossover. Get it crossed and then cross it over at PCGS. Then it would be in a non Satin holder with the correct non Satin coin number on the insert. . .
Time consuming but, again if someone is evil enough, worth it.
peacockcoins
It seems Seth's motivations are not driven by money, at least not at the expense of his integrity. Way to go. I have seen many of your auctions at ebay, bid a few, but I don't think I have ever had the pleasure of winning any of your coins. Your to be commended, truly an
asset to coin collecting.
Kicked to the curb again, might as well stay here. With one vote aginst looks like I'd be wasting my time
I feel enough points & facts have been presented as to which coin is the Variety IMHO. As I said before what will be - will be.
You want some company Michael. I feel like a little kid screaming for attention here. All I seem to have gotten for the trouble is
"Here kid, have a sucker. Now go outside and play."
1. NGC crosses the PCGS coin (we can discuss the PCGS cross rate as they publish it every month in the dealer newsletter, but, NGC, best I know, is fairly tough on its crossovers as well).
2. NGC misses the fact that the coin is truly SF. Unlikely and the probable reason the coin would not cross from the PCGS holder.
3. PCGS crosses the NGC coin
4. PCGS misses the fact that the coin is truly SF.
Chance of all 4 events happening - HIGHLY UNLIKELY I BELIEVE.
Seth: Good job catching the mechanical errors.
Wondercoin
Sorry we pay a lot of money for the difference in a 67 and a 68 coin they grade. The difference in SF and regular is greater to my old eyes and I don't even call myself a grader.
Thats why I buy graded coins, or maybe why I used to buy graded coin if this keeps up.
And I was asking on these boards what PCGS was going to do with the mint set special finish coins before they were released.