Has some of the Registry Set-Mania subsided lately?
bgrice
Posts: 1,180
I don't frequent this forum much these days as I sold off most of my collection. A year ago when I had my Walker Short Set(66.11) it took at least a 65.97 to make the Top 20. Four sets in the Top 20 have since been retired or sold and there is absolutely no activity at the top anymore. And the only sets being added are in the 64.XX range. Even the Short Mercury Dime Set that I kept has not lost any ground in the last year with no activity on my end and still at #18.
These are basically easy series to put together in high grades. Has the pizzazz gone away to play the Registry game? I have to admit that although I am not an open buyer, there appears to be zero good coins coming to auction lately that I would even consider.
These are basically easy series to put together in high grades. Has the pizzazz gone away to play the Registry game? I have to admit that although I am not an open buyer, there appears to be zero good coins coming to auction lately that I would even consider.
0
Comments
rainbowroosie April 1, 2003
In the beginning, all of us were putting up our collections to more or less see what the deal was, what was out there, and perhaps where we stood. That revelation certainly stimulated lots of "motion" and spiked the coins needed to fill holes and move up.
It''s only natural that the top tiers have filled with spectacular sets that are impossible to match. So people seem to have moved on--to simply use the Registry for observation, for display and for more casual upgrading. Lots of folks have taken advanage of the Registry to market their sets to move on to other things, which has meant the stronger specimens at the top are "recycling" now to other Registry collectors.
People are still interested in good quality, obviously, and so there is plenty of activity when the good stuff comes out for recycle (and especially when a fresh coin shows up), but the pace and the eye on moving up or down in the Registry clearly has abated. Symptomatic of that abatement is the relative decline in new posts here.
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
A few years age members where on here calling each other names over a upgrade.
Now when someone gets a coin he is pround of everone is wishing them good luck on finding it.
Yes many if not all of us strive for the best, but many are realizing it is not just a matter of points. Many collectors are now going for the right coin for there set, not just the highest grade coin for their set.
It is nice when the highest grade is also the best looking coin for your set though.
But lets get real the fact that we are here at all is a self induced form of mania. And we will always have a little of, mine is bigger, or better than yours, in our lives.
#16 Short Set and no Legend I didn't spend mad money to build it!
Yes, of course the Registry Set-Mania is subsiding. It was a great marketing concept early on, when the top spots were open in the different series. People were competing against one-another, aiming for the best. The competition was exciting. Many people made friends with others of common interest, and yes, a few made enemies. But it was fun and instructive.
But gradually out of the chaos, super-sets emerged, and these super-sets killed the fun of competition. Go look at, for example, the Lincoln sets of 1919 through 1958. Stewart Blay's set, sitting on the top is sooooo close to perfection, a penny collector's competitive spirit is quenched before he even starts. He has no hope for success.
It's not only all but impossible to match Stewart for #1, but #2 is also virtually unattainable, with another great set in that slot. Competiting for positions 3 through 10, isn't the same thing as competing for #1.
Ditto for the Shield Nickels where I hold the super sets in both proof and business strikes. My sets have to discourage the competitive fires. Top possible in every slot. Two pop 1/0s in the business strikes and 4 pop 1/0s in the proofs. Someone who wants to build a top shield nickel set looks at that and has to figure he can find a better series to compete in.
But series by series, the supersets emerge. Go down the dimes, for instance. Two super sets in the Barbers (Law and Blay). Another in the Mercury Dimes. And a third in the Roosies. What's a person going to do who wants to collect dimes and has a burning desire to be "best", numero uno? Punt. It's out of reach.
This is why PCGS keeps on adding new Registry Set. To give collectors a chance to find niches in which to excel. Washington Quarters, for example, are really two sets: Business strikes and proofs.
But those have super sets so PCGS split 'em down the middle: Silver and base metal. So now you have four series. Then they add varieties and who knows what ... and somehow end up with 11 different Registry Sets for the Washington Quarters. Which, of course, is a joke and cheapens the registry for the "real" sets.
So the fate of the Registry Set program is to defeat itself. It's great for business in the early days. Then the supersets emerge and interest dies.
The solution? Just collect what you want and have a ton of fun doing it. That's why I'm collecting US-Philippines, Thai, and coins with elephants on them.
Best wishes from an ex-registry set collector,
Just Having Fun
I do not agree for the most part. A young collector starting out would be thrilled to be in the top 20 of a registry set rating someday. Having a super set such as yours or Stewart Blay gives a collector a goal to shoot for but knows he cannot achieve immediately. Is that a bad thing?
No. Someday the younger collector hopes that you and Stew will someday retire and consider selling your sets which then gives him or her an opportunity to upgrade.
To me, having the opporunity to rub shoulders (even on the internet) with the best of the best gives the younger and older collector incredible hope to be among the best, if not absolutely the best.
Offsetting the above positives are the negative traits we now see in our society; impatience, a "must have it now" thyinking, and competition in which nice guys finish last, etc., etc.,
We are seeing the cross confluence of both behavior aspects.
Some great points made in this thread. One of the reasons I believe registry "fever" may also be cooling a bit is that collectors across the board are becoming much more focused and strategic. For example, of late, I have come across a number of collectors in the field of Proof Plats who after recognizing that the 2003-2005 sets are the keys to the enitre 1997-2006 Plat collection decide that instead of building a complete 1997-2006 40 pc. registry collection, they would much prefer buying 2 units, even 3 units of just the 2003-2005 key date year sets. They have no interest in building a "set" - just collecting keys (and in duplicate quanity). Same story with Modern Gold Commems as numerous collectors try to hoard a handful of J. Robinson or LOC "keys" rather than even considering a complete collection of the "good, the bad and the ugly" coins. Overall, this is a good shift I believe. Wondercoin
I look at your set not as this superset that is completely out of reach and unattainable, I look at it as a set that I would love to own and someday whether it be 10 days, weeks, months, or years down the road thats where my set will be. You don't take the fun out of it, you put the fun into it. You give my set a prupose and that drives my goal...to knock you out of first place!
By the way, your set looks terrible lately...try adding a couple FB's...it helps!
Later, Paul.
Later, Paul.
There are so many factors influencing what "appears to be" a waning of the mania in Registry set collecting that we are not going to remember to identify them all.
I still like the registry collecting program for what I always thought it was; a good bookkeeping device to keep track of your coins.
As for the supersets, I know some collectors that switched series to have a shot at a #1. I agree that without more than one serious, active collector in a series the prices are cool. The top top coins don't seem to be coming to market (I collect silver proofs) to really test the activity.
Coins with good eye appeal are still bringing good prices for the grade.
Badger
Link to 1950 - 1964 Proof Registry Set
1938 - 1964 Proof Jeffersons w/ Varieties
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
I hope you're right and the super-sets provide inspiration as well as discouragement. Probably, it's some of each.
But there are other problems with the registry sets including, for instance ...
(a) The Registry Set program de-emphasizes the coins and emphasizes the plastic. . The 1960-D so-called full stepper Jefferson was a case in point. A nice $1,000 coin, for which some collector paid $1,000 -- and then an extra $38,000 for PCGS's plastic.
Or that so-called proof 70 Lincolon penny, arguably worth $100 raw, selling with the PCGS plastic for what was it, $39,000? Does it make sense to pay $38,900 for PCGS plastic?
But if you want to play the Registry Set game, then this is the necessary baggage that you pick up with it.
(b) The registry set devalues great coins slabbed by NGC and ANACS. I LIKE the PCGS slabs -- to me they’re by far the best graders. But NGC and ANACS get it right more often than they’re given credit for, but that doesn’t count in the registry set game.
I have, for instance, what’s probably the finest 19th century Liberty Head nickel in existence. 1897 in proof 69, almost cameo. But it’s a reject from the registry set because it’s in NGC plastic not PCGS plastic.
So again, it’s the plastic that rules, not the coin. And excuse me, but I’m a coin collector, not a plastic collector.
(c) The Many Registry Sets are poorly formulated . The so-called basic set of the Standing Liberty Quarters doesn't include the overdate, arguably the single most interesting and important coin in the series. Does any Standing Liberty Quarter collection deserve the name: "Best Ever" without the 8/7? overdate?
Ditto for the penny set doesn't include the '55 double die. How can someone even conceive of the best ever Lincoln set lacking that coin?
And the Jefferson nickel set, which I adore, doesn’t include the two most interesting (to me) coins in the series -- the doubled Monticello and the doubled eye. To me a Jeff set without those great and glorious coins cannot possibly be the “best ever.”
So why listen to strangers who give you absurd instructions about what to collect and what not?
I did that at one time. I empowered them. I don't do it any more. I collect what makes sense to me, not to them.
(d) Then there's the other side of that coin, that when the registry set adds an obscure variety to a set, its value can rise 10-fold. A coin that had been selling for $1,000 is suddenly sellling to the registry set collectors for $10,000.
Now think about that for a moment. One day, dozens of collectors won’t look at a coin priced for a thousand dollars.
Then PCGS says “bark” and all those collectors go “Woof, let me at it.” And the coin that they rejected on Tuesday for $1,000; they’re eagerly seeking for $10,000 on Wednesday. And the only difference is that PCGS added it to the registry set.
I see this happen and I say to myself: "This is a joke. This is absurd.” And it is.
And I’m no better than the next fellow on this. I paid a gazillion dollars for the best-known d/horizontal d Jefferson. Lovely coin and if you have a strong loupe, you can make out the d/horizontal d very clearly -- and it IS interesting.
But is it worth the gazillion dollars I paid for it? I don’t think so. I was dumb.
At least I learn from my errors, and no longer empower those people to tell me what to collect. Instead, I now collect what I want to collect, not what PCGS tells me to collect.
Mitch once said that PCGS was discussing the possibility of a 6 step Jefferson registry set. He wanted to know what I thought about it. I simply said: "If they threw that party, I wouldn't go."
There are other problems with the registry sets, but think I've covered the main problems ...
(I) The emergence of the super-sets which sit on top of various series, which often discourage other collectors from building great sets.
(II) The de-emphasis of the coins in coin collecting and the false emphasis on PCGS's plastic.
(III) Part and parcel of this de-emphasis of the coins in coin collecting is the contempt bred for great coins “unfortunate” enough to be surrounded by ANACS or NGC plastic.
(IV) The absurd exclusion of key coins from various sets
(V) The inclusion of absurd varieties, which a normal person with a normal loupe can barely see, in other sets.
Now aif you want to go on collecting Registry Sets, go to it. I have no bone to pick with you. It’s your money, your life. If that gives you pleasure, I’m all for it.
As for me, I’ve even stopped updating my registry sets, except when Mitch gets on my duff about it. Me: I'm collecting Thai and elephant coins (no registry sets here) and am ...
Just Having Fun, and lots of it.
But, it left me thinking...
Does the "Registry" do all of those things you say it does, or, rather, is it simply the pure obsessive nature of coin collecting with the resultant compusive behaviors that follow to satisfy such obsessions that are the "culprits" at play. And, if so, could it be that the Registry does not need "fixing" at all, but, each and every one of us, as Registry participants, needs to understand exactly what is going on in our own minds and whether we are comfortable with it before laying down large sums of money for a coin that will "help our collection", albeit officially registered or not.
Wondercoin
Right on, Leo! That's exactly my experience as well, and in a broader range than just the Jeffersons.
"each and every one of us, as Registry participants, needs to understand exactly what is going on in our own minds" -- Mr. Wondercoin.
Thank you for your kind words, Mr. Wondercoin, and I agree with you. But it's clear that the Registry Set participants don't do that. As I pointed out above, when PCGS says "bark" dozens of otherwise rational, intelligent collectors go "woof."
Hello MikeKing: I like your icon and admire the brevity of your response.
Welcome Bond007! Your enthusiasm for and pleasure with the Registry Set is the set program at its best. Go to it. Enjoy yourself and build multiple good or great collections.
Warm regards,
Just Having Fun
yes, I think the registry concept by the TPG's was purely business motivated and pushes the plastic to the advantage of the auction firms, dealers and of course, the TPG's. And I also agree that not everyone who uses the registry does so to compete. Personally, I can't compete. I don't have that kind of money AND even if I did, I might do the complete opposite and try my darndest to put together a set of bust halves in f-vf condition...no mean task and try to 'prove' myself as a collector. Just how I feel.
Anyway, I like the registry concept because you can look at your collection anytime, no vault to deal with and can use it as a stimulus to study. That's my take on it.
edited to add: and I am not going to convert all my ngc coins to pcgs (grade 'demotion' is not the issue). When I do that, it's for the simple reason that I can see the coin better through pcgs plastic...much better optically than ngc. I don't trust ANACS, but I do trust my ability to judge a coin so would not say no to buying a coin just because it's in an ANACS holder.