<< <i>If PCGS knew any of what is in the MINT's press release, then it is an out right scam. >>
If they didn't know (and also NGC, IGC, etc.) it would be negligence. Either way, it hurts all TPG's credibility, which is why they were needed in the first place.
its what the people with "common sense" have been stating all along.
wonder if there will be a backlash?
I hope there will be, especially for the TV hucksters who make a HUGE deal over the First Stikes and then charge a fortune more than everyone else. I know one person who saw this canceled his TV order and sent the show an e-mail- needless to say he hasn't heard back yet-
<< <i> For proof versions of the American Eagle Coins, the yield is an average of about 300-500 coins per die set. >>
Doesn't that make just about ever coin a First Strike?
"Please help us keep these boards professional and informative…. And fun." - DW --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BONGO HURTLES ALONG THE RAIN SODDEN HIGHWAY OF LIFE ON UNDERINFLATED BALD RETREAD TIRES
<< <i>My prediction: no coinguy1 reply to this thread >>
So much for your predictions, buster. >>
Hey Mark hit the 10K post milestone. Doesn't the mean he has to give something away? Like a Frist Strike SAE MS70 in a PCGS slab?
"Please help us keep these boards professional and informative…. And fun." - DW --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BONGO HURTLES ALONG THE RAIN SODDEN HIGHWAY OF LIFE ON UNDERINFLATED BALD RETREAD TIRES
WOW! THe US Mint really suprises me. Why go on the record in this manner?
I think the mint has a case our "sour grapes" because the TPG companies are doing what they do better..... that is charging a premium for a product of their own making.
The term "First Strike" is a trademark not a statement of fact I think.
The TPG's get them back though went they slab the Mints mistakes and sell them for a premium, again...much better!
I have said it before... TPG's are a solution to a problem that never existed. Perhaps for people who want the assurance or certification of another party to bolster their confidence, there is a perceived value. For a true collector, the value lies in evaluation and procurement. The coin I have is of far more value to me than the coin belonging to someone else - no matter the degree of perfection. Cheers, RickO
Everybody is hinting at it, but no one wants to outright say anything for the fear of the almighty PCGS banning and censoring them for speaking the truth.
Congratulations to PCGS for revealing their business ethics to be equivalent to those of The Coin Vault and ACG. You've proven that there are no depths to which you won't sink for the sake of a stinking buck. Attaboy!!!
I won't use the "F" word, but PCGS's behavior on this issue is unethical as hell.
<< <i>I have said it before... TPG's are a solution to a problem that never existed. >>
You must not remember the days when any banged up shiny silver dollar was called MS65 (Redfields), or almost every 1916-D dime or 1909-S-VDB cent had an added mintmark, or more fake US gold coins were on the market than genuine ones, or it was impossible to trade coins sight unseen, or if you had bought a fake coin, and the dealer had died or gone out of business, you were screwed....
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
<< <i>Everybody is hinting at it, but no one wants to outright say anything for the fear of the almighty PCGS banning and censoring them for speaking the truth.
Congratulations to PCGS for revealing their business ethics to be equivalent to those of The Coin Vault and ACG. You've proven that there are no depths to which you won't sink for the sake of a stinking buck. Attaboy!!!
I won't use the "F" word, but PCGS's behavior on this issue is unethical as hell.
*spit* >>
The mint said "Consumers should carefully review the following information along with each dealer’s or grading service’s definition of first strike when considering a purchase of coins with this designation." PCGS has always defined what context they use the term. Stupid marketing ploy - yes. Calling them "unethical as hell" is way out of line.
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
<< <i>I have said it before... TPG's are a solution to a problem that never existed. >>
I would disagree. There were problems that existed. People buying cleaned, whizzed overgraded EF/AUs as "BU" coins. People buying fake coins.
However, it WOULD be fair to say that TPGs, in helping to resolve some problems facing collectors, created their own *new set* of problems in their place.
<< <i>Everybody is hinting at it, but no one wants to outright say anything for the fear of the almighty PCGS banning and censoring them for speaking the truth.
Congratulations to PCGS for revealing their business ethics to be equivalent to those of The Coin Vault and ACG. You've proven that there are no depths to which you won't sink for the sake of a stinking buck. Attaboy!!!
I won't use the "F" word, but PCGS's behavior on this issue is unethical as hell.
*spit* >>
The mint said "Consumers should carefully review the following information along with each dealer’s or grading service’s definition of first strike when considering a purchase of coins with this designation." PCGS has always defined what context they use the term. Stupid marketing ploy - yes. Calling them "unethical as hell" is way out of line. >>
Then please explain why PCGS pulled their definition of "First Strike" from their website? If there's nothing to hide, why would they? I stand by my contention re: their lack of ethics (on this issue).
"You must not remember the days when any banged up shiny silver dollar was called MS65 (Redfields), or almost every 1916-D dime or 1909-S-VDB cent had an added mintmark, or more fake US gold coins were on the market than genuine ones, or it was impossible to trade coins sight unseen, or if you had bought a fake coin, and the dealer had died or gone out of business, you were screwed.... "
I remember well... and still, collectors chased the coin.... yes, heartaches when issues arose, and are still encountered. Many collectors never knew they had a 'cleaned' coin... and artificial toning did not exist.... counterfeit coins have existed always... and people still get duped. TPG's are for those who cannot or will not learn, yet want to be 'instant' possessors of fine coins to brag about. There are those who buy the slab, not the coin. Do you have a third party buy your new car? Your vegetables at the market? How do you know you are getting the best deal?.... TPG's are a solution to a non-existent problem... unless of course, the problem is your lack of skills or patience. Cheers, RickO
<< <i>Consumers should carefully review the following information along with each dealer’s or grading service’s definition of "first strike" when considering a purchase of coins with this designation. >>
Where do I go again to find PCGS's definition? >>
Hmmm. Interesting question. Is this an unreasonable question, PCGS?
so its saying if every coin was bought that they minted in that first month, and everyone that was bought was sent to a TPG that designates First Strike, there would be 50% of the total mintage of that specific coin designated as First Strike, That is totally amazing
The 1st Strike business is all about marketing b .s......this why you can buy a low priced car or throw on a sports label and get more money and on and on. Look at the Buffalos..F . S. In the last 3 weeks the NGC PRF 70 First Strike has gone up $$ 200.00 - $ 300.00. while the PCGS F.S. PRF 70 has dropped $$ 400 - 500.00 from an over valued level as more PCGS PRF 70 F . S. supply hits the market.
The mint can end this first strike business by not labeling when the coins were packaged. Its simple and would end this nonsense. Then the TPG's would have no choice but to end this misleading labeling. Anybody want to petition the mint about this?
<< <i>The TPGs should be ashamed of themselves. They have crossed the line from being a protector of collectors to used car salesman.
To be fair, I doubt that the TPGs had all of this information when they decided to label coins "First Strike".
Of course, it will be interesting to watch them extricate themselves from this mess.
A public "thank you" to the US Mint for clearing this stuff up! >>
If one really needed smoeone to clear this up, the MINT is the ultimate source for definition.
Having seen the discovery channels show "Inside the US Mint" the coin I would consider first strike would be the one punched out at an opening ceremony. Only other possible senario would be video of a mint employee clearly shown dumpster diving ALL THE WAY TO THE BOTTOM of the first barrel filled at the first press started and digging out that first coin ejected from the hopper, and documenting fully its trip to and thru the TPG, maybe then i'll buy it
This topic is so old hat. I will sum it up for you. The Mint, PCGS, NGC, and ANACS have no clue when a coin was struck. You could get the first coin struck from a die set or the last. When a green monster box is sent out, it is dated and sealed. All it means is that the coin was struck in the first month of production, period. I'm proud to say I have only purchased one first strike coin. 96eagle
<< <i>The mint can end this first strike business by not labeling when the coins were packaged. Its simple and would end this nonsense. >>
That wouldn't stop it, in fact it would possible make the premium on them even higher. Even without packing dates they could still do First Strikes on coins shipped to them in the first 30 days. So all that would do is either reduce the numbers of First Strikes (and potentially increase their market demand) or cause an even heavier increase in submissions during that first 30 days. (Forget about getting your other coins graded during that 30 to 45 day period.).
<< <i>To be fair, I doubt that the TPGs had all of this information when they decided to label coins "First Strike" >>
I might buy that for the 2005 coins, but not the 2006. These same concerns were voiced last year and it became clear at that time that the dates in the boxes were packing dates and not coining dates. (Although you can say that you do know that the coins had to have been struck before the packing date so you still know they were struck before Jan 31st.)
<< <i>You must not remember the days when any banged up shiny silver dollar was called MS65 (Redfields), >>
By the standards of the day they were. This was several years before the Official "Sheldon" grading scale was codified and adopted by the ANA. It isn't really fair to criticize coins graded by one set of "standards" because they don't measure up to another set of "standards" defined at a later date.
<< <i>or almost every 1916-D dime or 1909-S-VDB cent had an added mintmark, or more fake US gold coins were on the market than genuine ones, >>
Much of this problem was taken care of long before the TPG came along by the authentication services that preceded them. Mainly ANACS and INS.
<< <i>it was impossible to trade coins sight unseen >>
It is still impossible, or al least VERY foolish to buy coins truly sight unseen. Even after 20 years of the major TPG's the vast majority of the people here would still insist on having a return priviledge even for PCGS and NGC slabbed coins.
One modification to what 96eagle said. All it means is that it was struck before the end of the first month after the release. (Because they slab coins struck as much as five months or more before the releasedate.
To me, this one line forces you to really question how you could defend the first strike (trademarked or not) fiasco.
"By the release dates for 2005 and 2006 bullion coins, the United States Mint had already minted approximately 50% of the projected sales numbers for these coins. "
I can not see how anyone can ethically support this.
Is it Fraud- No Is it good for collectors- No Should it have been done-No Should it be stopped-Immediately and Permanently
I also think that the TPG's need to issue some type of a response to this bold statement by the US Mint , not just the usual defense argued by our resident gatekeeper(s)...AKA...well we all know...
"In 2006 ANACS began its “Mint First Strike” program. This exciting program for collectors coincided with the arrival of Miles Standish as ANACS’ Director of Coin Grading. The Mint First Strike program applies to modern coins manufactured by the United States Mint and struck within specified and documented dates. For a coin to qualify as a “Mint First Strike” it must have been struck within the first month of release by the United States Mint and have full and proper documentation from the Mint attesting to this. Furthermore, the coins must have been submitted to ANACS sealed in the original Mint packaging."
There is nothing more powerful than the power of goodbye
Based on the information in this thread, as of August 28, 2006, 99.34% of all 2006 MS gold buffalo coins submitted for grading to PCGS "qualified" for the first strike designation.
Comments
its what the people with "common sense" have been stating all along.
wonder if there will be a backlash?
Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
<< <i>If PCGS knew any of what is in the MINT's press release, then it is an out right scam. >>
If they didn't know (and also NGC, IGC, etc.) it would be negligence. Either way, it hurts all TPG's credibility, which is why they were needed in the first place.
its what the people with "common sense" have been stating all along.
wonder if there will be a backlash?
I hope there will be, especially for the TV hucksters who make a HUGE deal over the First Stikes and then charge a fortune more than everyone else. I know one person who saw this canceled his TV order and sent the show an e-mail- needless to say he hasn't heard back yet-
<< <i> For proof versions of the American Eagle Coins, the yield is an average of about 300-500 coins per die set. >>
Doesn't that make just about ever coin a First Strike?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BONGO HURTLES ALONG THE RAIN SODDEN HIGHWAY OF LIFE ON UNDERINFLATED BALD RETREAD TIRES
<< <i>
<< <i>My prediction: no coinguy1 reply to this thread
So much for your predictions, buster.
Hey Mark hit the 10K post milestone. Doesn't the mean he has to give something away? Like a Frist Strike SAE MS70 in a PCGS slab?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BONGO HURTLES ALONG THE RAIN SODDEN HIGHWAY OF LIFE ON UNDERINFLATED BALD RETREAD TIRES
<< <i>
<< <i> For proof versions of the American Eagle Coins, the yield is an average of about 300-500 coins per die set. >>
Doesn't that make just about ever coin a First Strike?
And a Last Strike too.
<< <i>I can't believe this didn't hit 100!! >>
the present forum poultry are afraid to push the issue any farther
Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
I think the mint has a case our "sour grapes" because the TPG companies are doing what they do better..... that is charging a premium for a product of their own making.
The term "First Strike" is a trademark not a statement of fact I think.
The TPG's get them back though went they slab the Mints mistakes and sell them for a premium, again...much better!
Tbig
Congratulations to PCGS for revealing their business ethics to be equivalent to those of The Coin Vault and ACG. You've proven that there are no depths to which you won't sink for the sake of a stinking buck. Attaboy!!!
I won't use the "F" word, but PCGS's behavior on this issue is unethical as hell.
*spit*
1/2 Cents
U.S. Revenue Stamps
<< <i>I have said it before... TPG's are a solution to a problem that never existed. >>
You must not remember the days when any banged up shiny silver dollar was called MS65 (Redfields), or
almost every 1916-D dime or 1909-S-VDB cent had an added mintmark, or more fake US gold coins were
on the market than genuine ones, or it was impossible to trade coins sight unseen, or if you had bought
a fake coin, and the dealer had died or gone out of business, you were screwed....
<< <i>Everybody is hinting at it, but no one wants to outright say anything for the fear of the almighty PCGS banning and censoring them for speaking the truth.
Congratulations to PCGS for revealing their business ethics to be equivalent to those of The Coin Vault and ACG. You've proven that there are no depths to which you won't sink for the sake of a stinking buck. Attaboy!!!
I won't use the "F" word, but PCGS's behavior on this issue is unethical as hell.
*spit* >>
The mint said "Consumers should carefully review the following information along with each dealer’s or grading service’s definition of first strike when considering a purchase of coins with this designation." PCGS has always defined what context they use the term. Stupid marketing ploy - yes. Calling them "unethical as hell" is way out of line.
<< <i>I have said it before... TPG's are a solution to a problem that never existed. >>
I would disagree. There were problems that existed. People buying cleaned, whizzed overgraded EF/AUs as "BU" coins. People buying fake coins.
However, it WOULD be fair to say that TPGs, in helping to resolve some problems facing collectors, created their own *new set* of problems in their place.
<< <i>
<< <i>Everybody is hinting at it, but no one wants to outright say anything for the fear of the almighty PCGS banning and censoring them for speaking the truth.
Congratulations to PCGS for revealing their business ethics to be equivalent to those of The Coin Vault and ACG. You've proven that there are no depths to which you won't sink for the sake of a stinking buck. Attaboy!!!
I won't use the "F" word, but PCGS's behavior on this issue is unethical as hell.
*spit* >>
The mint said "Consumers should carefully review the following information along with each dealer’s or grading service’s definition of first strike when considering a purchase of coins with this designation." PCGS has always defined what context they use the term. Stupid marketing ploy - yes. Calling them "unethical as hell" is way out of line. >>
Then please explain why PCGS pulled their definition of "First Strike" from their website? If there's nothing to hide, why would they? I stand by my contention re: their lack of ethics (on this issue).
1/2 Cents
U.S. Revenue Stamps
almost every 1916-D dime or 1909-S-VDB cent had an added mintmark, or more fake US gold coins were
on the market than genuine ones, or it was impossible to trade coins sight unseen, or if you had bought
a fake coin, and the dealer had died or gone out of business, you were screwed.... "
I remember well... and still, collectors chased the coin.... yes, heartaches when issues arose, and are still encountered. Many collectors never knew they had a 'cleaned' coin... and artificial toning did not exist.... counterfeit coins have existed always... and people still get duped. TPG's are for those who cannot or will not learn, yet want to be 'instant' possessors of fine coins to brag about. There are those who buy the slab, not the coin. Do you have a third party buy your new car? Your vegetables at the market? How do you know you are getting the best deal?.... TPG's are a solution to a non-existent problem... unless of course, the problem is your lack of skills or patience.
Cheers, RickO
<< <i> Do you have a third party buy your new car? >>
If I buy a used car, I have my mechanic check the car out before I buy it.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
<< <i> yes, heartaches when issues arose >>
Heartaches? When the girl who sat next to me in freakin' third grade threw out my Valentine, THAT was a heartache.
Losing substantial amounts of money on an overgraded or non-genuine coin is a bit more than that.
<< <i>
<< <i>Consumers should carefully review the following information along with each dealer’s or grading service’s definition of "first strike" when considering a purchase of coins with this designation. >>
Hmmm. Interesting question. Is this an unreasonable question, PCGS?
<< <i>I have said it before... TPG's are a solution to a problem that never existed. >>
More accurately, a bad solution to a problem that had already been (or was being) solved. Oh, and they got rid of the (good) old solution also.
Ed. S.
(EJS)
Now the ball is in the TPG's court - I wonder how they will respond. What would you do if you were the TPGs?
Right now they seem to be hiding and hoping this all blows over.
And here is how Teletrade hypes the PCGS First Strikes link
I wonder how long it will be before PCGS politely asks Teletrade to cease and desist.
“In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." - Thomas Jefferson
My digital cameo album 1950-64 Cameos - take a look!
Look at the Buffalos..F . S. In the last 3 weeks the NGC PRF 70 First Strike has gone up $$ 200.00 - $ 300.00. while the PCGS F.S. PRF 70 has dropped $$ 400 - 500.00 from an over valued level as more PCGS PRF 70 F . S. supply hits the market.
Then the TPG's would have no choice but to end this misleading labeling. Anybody want to petition the mint about this?
Box of 20
<< <i>Can't wait to hear the TPGs response to this. >>
You won't hear anything from them---only from the self appointed gatekeepers...or as they are more commonly referred to..a$$kissers
<< <i>Thanks for the post.
To summarize for those who don't want to take the time...US Mint says the use of First Strike by the TPGs is meaningless and bunk.
edited to add: I am impressed with the low mintage per die set for all of these bullion coins.
edited to add (2): The TPGs should be ashamed of themselves. They have crossed the line from being a protector of collectors to used car salesman. >>
All they care about is $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
To be fair, I doubt that the TPGs had all of this information when they decided to label coins "First Strike".
Of course, it will be interesting to watch them extricate themselves from this mess.
A public "thank you" to the US Mint for clearing this stuff up!
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>The TPGs should be ashamed of themselves. They have crossed the line from being a protector of collectors to used car salesman.
To be fair, I doubt that the TPGs had all of this information when they decided to label coins "First Strike".
Of course, it will be interesting to watch them extricate themselves from this mess.
A public "thank you" to the US Mint for clearing this stuff up! >>
If one really needed smoeone to clear this up, the MINT is the ultimate source for definition.
Having seen the discovery channels show "Inside the US Mint" the coin I would consider first strike would be the one punched out at an opening ceremony. Only other possible senario would be video of a mint employee clearly shown dumpster diving ALL THE WAY TO THE BOTTOM of the first barrel filled at the first press started and digging out that first coin ejected from the hopper, and documenting fully its trip to and thru the TPG, maybe then i'll buy it
Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
The ball is now out of their court.
<< <i>Looks like Codder left a legacy. >>
Just re-read that entire thread--- makes you open your eyes.
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
It won't change the premium, because the people buying the "first strike" coins are still going to be those who buy from HSN and Coin Vault.
Maybe now the reputable TPG's will stop putting that designation on the slabs.
Dennis
Looking for PCGS AU58 Washington's, 32-63.
96eagle
<< <i>The mint can end this first strike business by not labeling when the coins were packaged. Its simple and would end this nonsense. >>
That wouldn't stop it, in fact it would possible make the premium on them even higher. Even without packing dates they could still do First Strikes on coins shipped to them in the first 30 days. So all that would do is either reduce the numbers of First Strikes (and potentially increase their market demand) or cause an even heavier increase in submissions during that first 30 days. (Forget about getting your other coins graded during that 30 to 45 day period.).
<< <i>To be fair, I doubt that the TPGs had all of this information when they decided to label coins "First Strike" >>
I might buy that for the 2005 coins, but not the 2006. These same concerns were voiced last year and it became clear at that time that the dates in the boxes were packing dates and not coining dates. (Although you can say that you do know that the coins had to have been struck before the packing date so you still know they were struck before Jan 31st.)
<< <i>You must not remember the days when any banged up shiny silver dollar was called MS65 (Redfields), >>
By the standards of the day they were. This was several years before the Official "Sheldon" grading scale was codified and adopted by the ANA. It isn't really fair to criticize coins graded by one set of "standards" because they don't measure up to another set of "standards" defined at a later date.
<< <i>or almost every 1916-D dime or 1909-S-VDB cent had an added mintmark, or more fake US gold coins were on the market than genuine ones, >>
Much of this problem was taken care of long before the TPG came along by the authentication services that preceded them. Mainly ANACS and INS.
<< <i>it was impossible to trade coins sight unseen >>
It is still impossible, or al least VERY foolish to buy coins truly sight unseen. Even after 20 years of the major TPG's the vast majority of the people here would still insist on having a return priviledge even for PCGS and NGC slabbed coins.
One modification to what 96eagle said. All it means is that it was struck before the end of the first month after the release. (Because they slab coins struck as much as five months or more before the releasedate.
"By the release dates for 2005 and 2006 bullion coins, the United States Mint had already minted approximately 50% of the projected sales numbers for these coins. "
I can not see how anyone can ethically support this.
Is it Fraud- No
Is it good for collectors- No
Should it have been done-No
Should it be stopped-Immediately and Permanently
I also think that the TPG's need to issue some type of a response to this bold statement by the US Mint , not just the usual defense argued by our resident gatekeeper(s)...AKA...well we all know...
"In 2006 ANACS began its “Mint First Strike” program. This exciting program for collectors coincided with the arrival of Miles Standish as ANACS’ Director of Coin Grading. The Mint First Strike program applies to modern coins manufactured by the United States Mint and struck within specified and documented dates. For a coin to qualify as a “Mint First Strike” it must have been struck within the first month of release by the United States Mint and have full and proper documentation from the Mint attesting to this. Furthermore, the coins must have been submitted to ANACS sealed in the original Mint packaging."
Draw your own conclusions.
PCGS, ANACS, & NGC Certified Coins on My Website.