Options
Why discuss registering coins not owned Free and Clear?
RegistryCoin
Posts: 5,111 ✭✭✭✭
.
0
RegistryCoin
Posts: 5,111 ✭✭✭✭
RegistryCoin
Posts: 5,111 ✭✭✭✭
RegistryCoin
Posts: 5,111 ✭✭✭✭
RegistryCoin
Posts: 5,111 ✭✭✭✭
Comments
In God We Trust.... all others pay in Gold and Silver!
Give us facts. Give us even ONE example of where this is happening.
If someone knows someone with a million dollar collection that will let them register coins out of it, who cares! Call it the "My Friends Collection". If the Registry is all you collect for, you may need to re-evaluate your desire to collect. Not everyone can be an Eliasberg (not that he collected what most people here do), if you cannot be proud of your collection, you should sell it and find something else to do.
As I said before, the "usual suspects" will respond, and they have in this thread.
Do you thank someone who robs your bank, if they only did it to show you it could be done?
PCGS needs to listen and read this exchange and all the spin off posts. Hopefully this loophole will be closed. Not only leasing, but anyone could cruse Eaby, Yahoo, or other auctions and "add" coins to thier list. Just because a coin is on an auction and ends up being bought doesn't mean it is on its way to Registry set.
When I win a coin and pay for it, I add that coin to my set, before I have physical custody of it. Only once did I run into the problem of it being in a set already. When the coin arrived I went to add it to my set and bingo, it was taken. The previous owner did the right thing and had that coin accounted for in some set.
Maybe PCGS should start a program similar to that of Heritage, a My Collection of some sort. Make it a place for people to "register" thier coins and keep track of owener ship. Heck that way we could establish a path of ownership for a coin and ensure that a coin belongs to the proper person. You could even put out an "alert" if a coin is stolen too. Sort of like the Horse Registry my wife and I run.
Leasing a coin to add to a registry set, in my mind, is wrong. Buy a coin, or don't add it.
Wondercoin and HighDesert were two of the best and worst people yesterday. They opened eyes all over the boards and made people think. We should all consider how to keep the registrys clean and honest. I
PCGS seems to be "leasing" us labels with grades until we spend enough money for a coin to wind up with the label it deserves. Yes, I submit and get items back lower than expected, but re-examination sometimes reveals undetected flaws. I also get submissions back graded higher than expected. I'm in a dilemma. It's hard to sell the overgrades. Nobody but an educated collector wants to pay what the undergrades are worth. Deleting registry sets is one option. Maybe there are people hacked off enough with the grading problems that they actually use deleted labels.
Now, a pedigreed set of 100% sliders might really illustrate the point!
David
#1 Is this lease/rent deal really a problem?
Throughout numismatic history the true great rarities were in strong hands which manipulated the market after aquiring the coins under questionable circumstances.
#2 If so, then how big of a problem is it?
Is it limited to the 2 or 3 top State Quarters sets offering to rent their coins to the 3rd set which is mostly ms67 with a few ms68 sprinkled in?
#3 How does it affect my collection?
My collection is still my coins, am I jealous or envious because I can't/won't pay absurd amounts of $$ to actually own these Top Set coins? After all I can't/won't pay ½ million dollars for a Jack Lee DMPL but I have enjoyed Morgans for over 30 years.
#4 How does it affect HD, RC & WC?
I'm still trying to figure out Wondercoin's Henny Pennyish thread that the sky is falling and Registrycoins repeated comments as to this being a "loophole."
If this "loophole" and the way it hurts the dealers, collectors and the hobby in general could be explained to me maybe the rest of the members and myself could work toward solving this problem if it indeed even exists.
For question #2, How big of problem is this? If this question means "How big of problem is this to me?" The answer is none. If someone is listing a set that has coins they do not own, it does not affect my set in any way. When I look at, and enjoy, my coins I do not feel they are slighted by the fact someone somewhere may have listed a coin which they do not own.
If this is happening, which no one has shown to be the case, then someone has to own the coin. For the person that said something like "Why don't I just pay Bowers & Merena a few grand to lease the rights to some Bust Dollars and create a great set?" The answer is they would not let you. They are a dealer, and dealers have to move inventory or go out of business. So leasing from a dealer would kill the dealer. This would only leave leasing from a collector who does not want to register his collection. If someone does this, you cannot stop it. If the coins exist, they can be registered. The thought of saying you have to send them in to be pedigreed brings up a variety of problem. One, some people do not like the idea of sending their coins anywhere. Two, I would not want to buy a coin with a pedigree, unless it was of some substantial collection like Eliasberg or Norweb, so it could hurt selling a collection.
The only thing that really needs to be addressed is someone Registering a set that does not physically exist. Since PCGS has no incentive to return inserts now, this brings up an entire new market for them. I just don't see a real collector doing this.
It seems like the deepest discussion capable here regards whether a 32-D quarter has more "weight" than a 67 DDO or something of that nature.
Also, in the last 48 hours, what have we learned?
Nothing new really.
What suggestions have been raised to cure, or put a stop to this problem?
Only one, that I've read (send PCGS your coins for verification). And, it was an unworkable idea.
So, where are we?
Pretty much right where we were before all this drama.
I'm sure someone can refine this more
My Merc Dimes