What do you think of NGC's new Variety Plus Numbers (and are they necessary)?

Longacre

I received the email below about the new expanded Variety Plus Service at NGC. I have never used this service, but if I understand what I is written below, the "old time" variety designations will not change (like VAMS, Cohen numbers, etc.). If this is the case, what is the purpose of expanded Variety Plus designations, especially if this service and numbering system is specific to NGC graded coins? For example, if I have a speared buffalo coin, I assume that it would be designated as a "Buffalo VP #123". However, if I had the coin graded by PCGS, the VP number would be meaningless. What is the point of this expanded service (and the additional fee to be paid)?


***********************************

NGC Restructures VarietyPlus Service



One of the valuable services offered by NGC is the attribution of coin varieties. By varieties, we mean coins which differ from their basic design type in some distinctive way and are thus differentiated by collectors. Advanced collectors have already begun to notice subtle changes in VarietyPlus, NGC's coin variety attribution program. Starting in October 2006, NGC will introduce a new attribution system for die varieties.

NGC will immediately begin attributing coins by VarietyPlus number, noted with a VP on the NGC certification label. This new attribution system is the culmination of two years of work by NGC researchers and attributors. By relying on the considerable experience of the NGC attribution team, a streamlined and improved catalog of varieties has been created, encompassing the most widely collected and desirable die varieties.

By the end of November 2006, a comprehensive guide to VarietyPlus will be made available for free on NGC's Web site, with a print edition to follow in 2007. Since a procedure has been designed to recognize varieties which were previously not attributed by NGC, the online edition will be updated and expanded regularly. This revision to VarietyPlus will allow the catalog to immediately grow and respond to important new discoveries.

NGC's Director of Research, David W. Lange, has led the company's variety attribution program and is enthusiastic about this new direction: "NGC's VarietyPlus service was first launched ten years ago, and it has now matured to the point where we are able to understand more fully which varieties are significant to the hobby in the long run. The creation of a VarietyPlus numbering system is the synthesis of everything we've learned through both firsthand experience and talking to our customers about varieties."

VP numbers will not be used in place of many of the varieties currently recognized and much of the VarietyPlus program will, in fact, remain the same. NGC will continue to attribute the following varieties:

Half cents by Cohen numbers
Large cents by Sheldon (1793-1814) and Newcomb (1816-57) numbers
Half dimes (1794-1837) by Logan-McCloskey numbers
Dimes (1796-1837) by John Reich numbers
Quarter dollars (1796-1838) by Browning numbers
Half dollars (1794-1836) by Overton numbers
Silver dollars (1794-1804) by Bowers-Borckardt and Bolender numbers
Silver dollars (1878-1935) by VAM numbers (8TF, 7/8TF, TOP-100, HOT-50, TOP-50, and a handful of other select varieties only)
Redbook varieties
Under the new guidelines of VarietyPlus, NGC will no longer attribute die varieties by FS number, as assigned in The Cherrypickers' Guide. Additionally, VP numbers will be assigned to many coins not previously recognized by NGC.

To receive a variety attribution with uncertified coins being submitted for grading, simply choose VarietyPlus on your submission form, fill in the Variety column for that line with the type of variety you're seeking (Overton, VAM, VP, etc.) or, if known, the exact variety number. Either way, NGC will examine your coin and enter the correct variety attribution on its grading label. A $7 fee is charged for this service in addition to the regular fee for the grading tier you've selected.

In the case of coins already graded and encapsulated by NGC, you may have the correct variety attribution added by submitting the encapsulated coin under our Designation Review service. The fee for Designation Review is $10.

Future announcements are forthcoming, and we invite collectors to send questions or comments directly to VarietyPlus@ngccoin.com

Coxe

I got it too. They are moving in the right direction and PCGS should follow quickly. And ANACS should be scared as this is an area they have held onto some dominance in for some time now.

What they also need to do, but are reluctant to, is add the month and year of the attribution to the tag. New discoveries that differentiate varieties that were lumped together as indistinct happen now and then. That will at least help bracket the reliaility of the attribution on the tag and easily identify candidates for reinspection. I am sure it won't happen though. That just makes for easier opportunities for informed cherrypickers.

I know with VAMs timing and credibility is key to the ultimate champion in this contest. Right now ANACS is the only of the top 3 to tag any VAM they can identify with pretty comprehensive and regularly updated resources. The other two still don't even do the entire 1878-P date even though hundreds of collectors are working that. 1921-D is another date that they are throwing away opportunities on because they are not there today to attribute all varieties. There are a lot of collectors of that date who send to ANACS but probably would rather send to PCGS and have a 21-D registry set there.

MadMarty

<< <i>They are moving in the right direction and PCGS should follow quickly >>




[koolaid on]Why should PCGS care they are to top dog and they can do whatever they want![/koolaid off]

dbldie55

I thought I read a while back that PCGS was doing the same thing.

RYK

I personally have no use for them, but I think it's great that others do.

Longacre

<< <i>Are you sure that he was a practicing attorney? I thought he was just a "rich guy". >>




Wrong thread!

Conder101

<< <i>They are moving in the right direction and PCGS should follow quickly. >>


What start assigning their own variety numbers to everything and disregarding the standard references? So now people who want to collect varieties will have three different numbers for everything? Because you know PCGS won't use the same numbers that NGC uses. And now after waiting all this time for the CPG to come out we are now being told that it is a waste because they aren't going to bother using the CPG numbers.

Collect cents by Snow numbers?, catalog two cent by Flynn or Kilman?, Shields by CPG or SNV numbers?, Post half dimes by Valentine?, Seated dimes by Ahwash or Fortin?, Seated quarters by Briggs?, Seated halves by WB? Barbers or Mercuries? Sorry all those cataloging systems are going to be ignored and replaced by two more incompatible systems. Doesn't sound like the right direction to me.

koynekwest

I agree with Condor. It just confuses the issue. Everyone should settle on one attribution system, such as the CONECA listings and be done with it.

BlindedByEgo

[confusion]

<< <i>Are you sure that he was a practicing attorney? I thought he was just a "rich guy". >>

[/confusion]