I think there should be a minimum active time requirement to remain at the top of the all time fines
Russ
Posts: 48,514 ✭✭✭
I think it's a load of crap that somebody can just buy a complete set, register it, turnaround and sell the coins a week or two later, retire the set, and remain at the top forever. There should be a minimum hold time.
Russ, NCNE
Russ, NCNE
0
Comments
TorinoCobra71
Bruce Scher
Can you name names? And sets of #1 all time who have done that?
Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
President, Racine Numismatic Society 2013-2014; Variety Resource Dimes; See 6/8/12 CDN for my article on Winged Liberty Dimes; Ebay
<< <i>I would be ok with that..but lets discuss an alternate view...Lets say we were a little on the shyer side(probably not like us russ) and maybe worked a long time acquiring top coins,making top coins,really searchin it out at the auctions and shows etc..but never registered the set..now its time to sell for whatever reason..Might be nice to get it down somewhere official...just another view. >>
That's a good point. I'm not sure what the workaround would be, but there must be some way to address it. Many of the "flips", though, are pretty obvious to those who pay attention to the Registry and the sales of coins among set owners in their specialty areas.
I just think it's exceedingly unfair to those set builders who have been slowly and carefully building a top set over a period of time to be eclipsed by somebody with a fat wallet buying an entire set just so they can rank it and sell it.
Russ, NCNE
Buying top quality Seated Dimes in Gem BU and Proof.
Buying great coins - monster eye appeal only.
Why does it matter "who" registers the set and for "how long". Shouldn't it be about the coins, and not the owner? And why is it unfair to anyone how long a set is registered? If you have the money, buy the coin(s). If dont it's not the fault of someone who does. Besides, the slow methodical collector may one day achieve the finest set; it may just take a little longer.
If you let it, the Registry can become more about one's finances than the hobby itself. Because money buys the best sets/coins... period. No matter what set you collect.
Just my 2 Cents.
In my mind, there should be less of an emphasis on the "all time finest" and more on the "Current Finest". To me, a simple way to do that would be for PCGS to list the Current Finest sets first. Then put the all time finest sets below for those who want to see what happened historically.
If someone wants to flex their wallet and assemble an all time finest set, so be it. But if they sell, drop it in a listing at the bottom of the page.
“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!
<< <i>I think it's a load of crap that somebody can just buy a complete set, register it, turnaround and sell the coins a week or two later, retire the set, and remain at the top forever. There should be a minimum hold time.
Russ, NCNE >>
When the sets are complete, or say, in the top ten, they should be required to open them as well. Who the hell cares if the "California" Morgan set is #1 if all we know about the set is the set rating of "67.22" or whatever the heck it is.
<< <i>When the sets are complete, or say, in the top ten, they should be required to open them as well. Who the hell cares if the "California" Morgan set is #1 if all we know about the set is the set rating of "67.22" or whatever the heck it is. >>
I agree - in fact I think all sets should be open - no option.
“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!
Putting the Finest Set on the bottom is a great idea. That way people who OWN there sets
can display them at the top.
Great Topic RUSS.
BILL
On the subject of sets being forced to be open for viewing. I know a lot of people believe this, but I do not agree. I think it should remain the owners option as to whether they want to open it up for viewing or not. People have registries for many reasons. Not all of us want them seen. As far as I am concerned, it is their registry set, therefore their choice. An interesting compromise might be to leave viewing optional while the set is active, but require it to be open for viewing after it is retired.
BJ, can you folks move the active sets to the top and the retired sets to the bottom?
I'm sure we could have a 90-180 day waiting period for a set to be considered an "All-TIme Finest". Dealers would think twice about holding up their inventory and it's a short enough time for a collector to put their set on the active site and sell it/auction it.
Looking for Denmark 1874 20-Kroner. Please offer.
<< <i>What is different about this than other mega sets that were sold intact long before the registry? Is there a difference? >>
It's a different subject than Russ's title, but still something that needs to be addressed. It doesn't matter if they were sold intact or not. WHY are sets (Bass, Eliasberg, etc.) listed that were not in existence at the time the registry started?? Obviously most were not slabbed and grades posted are opinions based on previous descriptions. These sets should absolutely NOT be listed in the Registry !!! If PCGS wants to set up a different area for all time great sets prior to the registry, then that would be acceptable. These were great sets and deserve the praise of a job well done, but not in the registry ranks.
My #1 Low Ball Peace Dollar Set
<< <i>Gerry's Lincoln set, if he ever registers it, would be an all time set and AFAIK he won't register it. If he wanted to sell I think it would be fine in my book for a few weeks. >>
If he wanted to register it for one day and sell it I would have no problem at all with him remaining at the top. He didn't buy the set lock stock and barrel to flip it.
Russ, NCNE
I think most of us here can appreciate the coins and the sets but once they are sold who cares, obviously not the previous owner. I especially do not care for “investors” who buy and then sell. But there are NO rules when it comes to collecting coins.
Most here just want a crack at the recognition of their sets and the current system prevents this in so many ways. I was miffed when PCGS changed requirement that you had to have 100% instead 90% completion in order to qualify for pedigree nomination if you are in the top 5.
I think PCGS would do us all justice if they would come up with other recognition like:
Keep the active sets just that, ACTIVE. Move the retired sets to some other location.
Remove sets with one year of NO activity.
Recognize with postings or comments or highlights sets that have grown the most, in a year by number of coins or grade or maybe even a rare pop condition/grade coin.
Asking to display other sets from folks who live near the shows they plan to attend. Not just the mumero uno sets.
They do not even have to do this with staff time. This could be an earned requirement of the big dealers who want advertising or dump huge amounts to be slabbed. Heck, even we collectors could be solicited to make recommendations as we watch each others like hawks.
But just like our other recommendations it will ALL fall on deaf ears.
WS
<< <i>
<< <i>What is different about this than other mega sets that were sold intact long before the registry? Is there a difference? >>
It's a different subject than Russ's title, but still something that needs to be addressed. It doesn't matter if they were sold intact or not. WHY are sets (Bass, Eliasberg, etc.) listed that were not in existence at the time the registry started?? Obviously most were not slabbed and grades posted are opinions based on previous descriptions. These sets should absolutely NOT be listed in the Registry !!! If PCGS wants to set up a different area for all time great sets prior to the registry, then that would be acceptable. These were great sets and deserve the praise of a job well done, but not in the registry ranks. >>
Oh my ..... don't let TDN see this .....
I think the board term for what you are describing was "ghost sets."
I suppose that works in sets like Barbers, where the Philly coins aren't such a high percentage of the set - but if they ever do it in Seated Dollars I'll be screaming like a banshee!
I have 80% in the flowing hair and draped bust half dollar basic set, the next two coins are $75,000 each for a VF 1796 and 1797. The coins are actually readily available, just expensive. Under the current rules, I could negotiate a sale with a pre-arranged contractual buy-back after a few days (essentially a rental), list the coins, see my set as the all time finest, and retire my set.
Of course I will not, as I plan to keep my set for a lifetime and do not need the ego boost. It is only a small part of my early half variety collection.
Russ has a good idea. The turnover of registry sets is very high, as set owners go into debt to finance their short-term top ranked sets to stroke their ego's.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
I recently flipped a short set,and will try to have mine removed from the all time finest..
Good point,
Larry
POB 854
Temecula CA 92593
310-541-7222 office
310-710-2869 cell
www.LSRarecoins.com
Larry@LSRarecoins.com
PCGS Las Vegas June 24-26
Baltimore July 14-17
Chicago August 11-15
<< <i>I agree with Russ..
I recently flipped a short set,and will try to have mine removed from the all time finest..
Good point,
Larry >>
If the coins were together in a set (group) what does it matter if it was for six years or one day?
The set that PQpease is talking about, I think, is the short set of silver MS Kennedy's. That set will probably never be put back together as I know it is now broken up and is part of three different sets and all three collections are avid Kennedy Collector's. My son has the currently highest set of silver MS Kennedy’s and he has no interest in parting with them. On the same note, he doesn’t have a problem with being listed as the third finest set either. I hope Larry keeps his set listed in the finest group because in my son’s set we list where we were able to locate the coins (we think it adds to the pedigree of where the coins came from).
JMHO,
Tim
RR
Also, I agree with the others who think all sets should be open to see by the rest of us!
JMHO Jon
<< <i>I agree with most everything mentioned here except the removal of a set from current list after one year of no activity. When or IF I ever complete my complete dime set I would still want to upgrade when possible and I never really would consider it done. It WILL be a current project to me for the rest of my life. If for some reason I would lose interest or quit looking for upgrades I would then retire the set, but it should not be retired without my permission because of no activity for a certain time period.
Also, I agree with the others who think all sets should be open to see by the rest of us!
JMHO Jon >>
What if Jon gets to a point where he only needs the extremely tough early dimes and doesn't add in 1 year. Sometimes it takes years to find the right coin.
Later, Paul.
Later, Paul.
<< <i>
<< <i>I think it's a load of crap that somebody can just buy a complete set, register it, turnaround and sell the coins a week or two later, retire the set, and remain at the top forever. There should be a minimum hold time. Russ, NCNE >>
When the sets are complete, or say, in the top ten, they should be required to open them as well. Who the hell cares if the "California" Morgan set is #1 if all we know about the set is the set rating of "67.22" or whatever the heck it is. >>
As the Registry is a place where some collectors inform other interested people about the state of their collection (or collections) keeping the collection "secret" should not be a problem while the set is being built. I think it is safe to say that a Morgan Dollar Registry set that includes 2 or 3 common date MS62's or MS63's will not be visited very frequently.
I agree with the other posters about:
a) a minimum time span of ownership to qualify for the All Time Greatest list
b) any sets in the top 10 should be obliged to not keep their sets publicly viewable.
My Morgan with Variety set is among the top 10 (for the time being) and is fully visible with images so I am not preaching about the behavior of others.
If somebody has security concerns about revealing the composition of their sets they should not be participating in the Registry program in the first place.
When you do something that involves the Internet staying anonymous is dicey at best.
Collecting since the 1980's
Morgan Dollars Circ. Strikes
- Basic Set - Varieties - Prooflike Basic Set - Date Set
- Carson City - Early S Mint Short Set - Mintmark Type Set
Morgan Dollars Proof
- Basic Set - Varieties
Peace Circ.
My Registry Sets
there is a notation that my set was sold.
personally, I wouldnt mind seeing a date when the set is first registered, and a second date when the set is sold.
however, reconstructing that time line might be impossible now.
adding a start date to new set listings on the registry is something that can be done easily. perhaps someone has a history of when sets were first listed.
I still have the "2001 PCGS Set Registry" softcover publication showing my set's ranking... interesting to see how the sets stacked up back then when the Registry was in its infancy.
www.AlanBestBuys.com
www.VegasBestBuys.com
Casabrown
<< <i>Has anybody brought this subject up on the Q&A with CoinKing or Homerunhall? >>
You're serious right? Have you looked at the Q & A board? In the last 30 days CoinKing has answered a total of just 3 questions. I myself still have 3 questions into CoinKing that he hasn't answered and they were simple questions.
Later, Paul.
Later, Paul.
<< <i>Was hoping we could find an easy question to wake them back up. >>
Understood...
Here is a question I posed to CoinKing:
What do you think of the Roosevelt Dime? Have you ever collected it yourself? What do you think of FB's vs. Non-FB's? Where do you see its future.
I also asked this one: Why after 14 Multi-million $$$ auctions is John Ford Jr. not in your H.O.F.?
Can't remember the 3rd right off hand.
Later, Paul.
Later, Paul.