Registry Counsel? Ok... But ONLY Dealers should run it.

ModMan

Lets say PCGS buys into this Registry Councel idea (that's a big 'if'- personally I don't see it happening).

You've got to have perfessional Registry Dealers run it.
If you think I'm joking, I'm not.

Sorry, but I don't want some unknown enity* running things. I'm sure PCGS doesn't either.
Dealers though- the ones that have built up a reputation with PCGS and operate full time coin businesses are the best source for this type of 'councel' or opperation.

The trick won't be in deciding who would be best, but talking them into spending their valuable time donating their efforts into this cause.

*There is a reason Full time Dealers are successful in this industry and this 'enity' is driving a school bus or works as a pastry chef for a living. Update: I nominate Wondercoin. Who will second it?

Spooly

I see what your saying, I would have no problem with say a TomB. But the Dealers do not always represent the Collectors interest. Plus the dealers already have influence with PCGS. When was the last time PCGS responded to us here? Even when good points are brought up? PCGS really doesn't need to OK this Collectors Counsel. I bet if PCGS gets 50 letters about the issues we might get some respones. Plus YOU were the one to say we need to FIGHT FOR A BETTER REGISTRY! There is power in numbers!

dbldie55

The registry was supposed to be for Collectors. Full time dealers did well before the registry, and will do well after it. If the interests of the Collectors, which are not always in the best interest of dealers, are not addressed, the registry will fail. PCGS does not need dealers for the registry to succeed, but they do need collectors.

This councel is just a group who would submit the ideas presented to them to PCGS to hopefully make the registry better. PCGS may or may not adopt these ideas. If presented in a professional manner, they will listen to the group. It would be like the commitee that congress has in other coinage issues. These people are not politicians, but just citizens who voice opinions into coinage decisions.

wondercoin

Spooly: Actually: The twist should be that a few dealers should select the proper collectors. It would be more problematic to let the collectors pick the collectors. Just my thought. Wondercoin.

RegistryCoin

.

dbldie55

RegistyCoin is correct. I agree that collectors choosing collectors may not be efficient, dealers doing the choosing would be no better than just have a dealer there to begin with.

Dog97

I agree with Modman & Wondercoin, most of you are too stupid to come up with any good ideas and effectivly communicate these ideas to PCGS. Only a dealer knows how to make a phone call or properly format a professional business letter style email.

Spooly

Wondercoin you post sounds like you would like to "Load the Deck" with your picks.

ModMan

Dog97- Yours is the non-watered down version of what I was communicating. I'm afraid if I approached it as you did the focus wouldn't be on the Thread content but instead on what a continued jerk I am.
Bottom line. You want a professional mechanic to work on your car, right?
Not some weekend warrior with a set of Sears Craftsman tools who believes high literature is 'Car Craft'.

If there is an problem with the Registry- turn to those who deal with these and other more serious problems daily!

That is, of course, if you really want to accomplish something. It very well might be you simply want to make some noise- splash around the deep end of the pool for a while, then just get out, towel off, and go about your business.

Again, the effort is going to be in recruiting someone like Mitch to take HIS TIME to politic these changes. It very well may be he decides to take a pass in light of what has been happening lately.

Last point: There is NO conflict of interests between the Collector and the Registry Dealer. Think about it. What benefits you, benefits the Dealer and vice versa.

The Dealer and Collector are on the same team.

AquilaRose

I don't think any dealers should be on this council. The Registry is for collectors to have fun and build the "worlds finest sets", not for dealers to control and manipulate for profit and prestige.

Wondercoin - explain the problems with collectors choosing collectors as opposed to dealers choosing collectors. I can see that if dealers choose collectors, the collectors decisions on the council can be easily influenced or bought.

Why do you suppose that some entities that are involved in grading coins don't sell coins?

Do I see snakes in the grass?

dbldie55

So Modman, you are saying you would want the dealer (salesman) who sold you your car to work on it. More power to you, but I would prefer to do it myself over using a dealer to do the work.

Would you have your dealer choose what you collect and how to collect it, or do you feel more comfortable doing it yourself?

The next question is What constitutes a dealer? Someone whose name I read as having a table at FUN, someone who sells their extras on Ebay to fund their collection, people who sell on these boards.

I would love to have someone like Q. David Bowers doing the representation, as he is a collector at heart. Others, I would just as soon quit collecting than have them doing the decision making.

AquilaRose

Didn't the british say the american colonies were too stupid to govern themselves?

wondercoin

Spooly: You forgot your smiley face on that last comment.

"Stack what deck"? Dog97 suggests there isn't even a "full deck"

Seriously, here is a list of 17 candidates that would be perfect for your idea. I would go with any 6 of them and feel they would do a great job. It took me 5 minutes to create this list. Some I have never done a dollar of business with. Of course, I left someone off the list and for that I apologize. I could narrow it down to 10 names in 5 more minutes. Spooly: Does this seem like a "stacked deck" to you?

1. Registrycoin
2. Typetone
3. Dennis
4. Dog97
5. Keith Dagen
6. Cosmicdebris
7. Merz (he just shut down his set?)
8. Don Dolga (he just shut down his set?)
9. Solid
10. Wingsrule
11. Keith H
12. keifercoins
13. mustangman
14. dpoole
15. Gerry
16. Braddick
17. Colorman3

Wondercoin.

ModMan

Yes, that's what I'm saying. Why do you assume the Dealership would work against me?
I want someone who does this for a living to work on it!

You may have a fulltime job as a sixth grade gym coach. More power to you. Between that hectic schedule and taking care of your family's needs, how do I know you're going to spend the time required to make sure this all happens?
Where's the accountability? What if you flake out? No, I want someone who is 'hands on' daily. They know their coins and they know the coin business. Someone who has a built in reputation among collectors and other Dealers, including a reputation with PCGS.

Do you believe the professionals will take this new "but-we-voted-for-him!" newbie seriously? Will this 'elected' Forum Member even know what he is doing and who the contacts are?
Can this newly elected "Collector" do the job via the internet and phone?

Look forward and straight ahead.
If you want the job done, turn to someone who has done this before and can take on this responsibility running.

I know I'm not alone here. I also know, for the most part, I'm communicating with intelligent people. Please think this through before becomming so easily dismissive.

Dog97

The reason I said most of you were too stupid to do it is because last time I checked Spooly's polls the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY wanted dealers who didn't even do Registry
Sets to be on the council.

braddick

The reasoning behind having someone like Mitch run this is valid. Mitch has a great relationship with PCGS and is able to take face to face meetings with them.
He would be a likely canidate for this position I would think.

I even endorse him although he didn't put me on his short list of canidates!

WILDCAT

Dog97, with all the trolls with different IDs, probably making them as we speak, how can that vote be legitimate?

wondercoin

Braddick: You are on the list. I actually realized I forgot you and Colorman3 in the car on my way back! My mistake. You are at the top of the list in most everyone's book as far as I know. Wondercoin.

Spooly

Where have all these great Dealers been until now? Looking out for us? Why did it take Collectors to start this movement? Adding four new varieties to the Reg Set just gave some dealers MORE sales! Why are there large cents in the Large Cents sets that have 0 pops? How come the "professionals" haven't got anything done about hundreds of issues about the Reg Sets? NO MONEY in it! We bring up good points and problems PCGS doesn't respone? Why aren't the Dealers putting pressure on PCGS to answer us? Remember if their where no collectors... their would be no Dealers. Remember who is paying the bills!

merz2

Just for the record,I said it should be a combination of both.With the final decision being made by PCGS.They should give an explanation of why.

WILDCAT

Braddick, you are very funny. Maybe you should go back and read all the threads leading up to this one. This creation of a counsel was spawned from the shennanagans, arrogance, and power tripping of WC. Are you afraid that WC will shut off your supply of plastic or what??
Im not questioning your loyalty, he evidently has done very wonderful things for you personally. I do however think your views are ROSE COLORED.

PTVETTER

I want to reply to this thread but, the true intent isn't clear. It is human nature to resist change, but here is another change comming. Be careful!
Pat Vetter

Dog97

Strange that members who didn't dare go up against Wondercoin in his thread are now concerned about their names being on The List

wondercoin

"shennanagans, arrogance, and power tripping of WC."

Wildcat: Yes, the "power trip" was incredible introducing a flaw in the Registry the other day. Especially when I could have simply had the "powerless trip" of revealing exactly who had unowned coins in a current set and avoided it all. But, can you give it a rest now? It was discussed enough wasn't it? Wondercoin.

ModMan

I actually respect people like Braddick for not stepping into the fray. Why should he?
Whatever his "relationship" is with Mitch is their business.

Of course, I'm not just saying all this because he agrees with me!!

braddick

My view is Rose Colored?
First off, my view is a better Registry. If a problem/flaw was revealed to us (whatever the format)- what's wrong with addressing that?

Please, instead of questioning my motives or intent, how about addressing my points?

Secondly, for what it's worth: I haven't purchased a coin through Mitch in about three months or so. Not that I wouldn't, his inventory has just been a bit pricey for me as of late.
Do I consider Mitch a friend and an honorable man? Absolutely. THAT I would defend.

But, from all I read of the last two days worth of threads- nothing was really presented that appeared Mitch needed anyone's help in defending.
It sounded of Troll Talk and misc. rah-rah that had very little, if anything to do with the issue of fraudulent Registries.

RegistryCoin

.

mansco

Wondercoin...you forgot me and all the other little guys...please let me be on..please, please, please...Okay, before another debate starts, I'm only joking...but I believe Mitch should be on the council even if only in an advisory capacity. My vote for Mitch is that he's knowledgable and has a vested interested to keep the Registry vibrant. I believe that the council would be most effective if it contained a cross section of collectors and dealers and a PCGS representative who could provide input regarding what may or may not be tolerable or cost effective from a PCGS perspective.

Rather than spending so much time on who should be on the yet to be sanctioned council, it might be worthwhile to solicit thoughts about
1) why a council is needed?
2) what benefits PCGS might derive from it?
3) how this council would seek comments from collectors, dealers and registry users at large?
4) if there is some more effective and efficient way for PCGS to solicit and/or react to Registry user suggestions, complaints, or concerns other than creating a bureaucracy., or
5) distill if most of us are just upset because we don't believe PCGS cares if we exist or not and we are made and don't want to take it any more.

Wondercoin...thanks for not nominating me. I think that the council is a good idea, but by the time it gets through thread gristmill I fear its going to be a political nightmare with Democrats on one side, Republicans on another, Whigs in the lobby, Tories in sniping position , and the Federalists waiting to knock them all off.

RegistryCoin

.

RegistryCoin

.

RegistryCoin

.

braddick

Steve and others: You do know what the scary point of all of this is, right?

We're actually agreeing with Modman.

Mitch: you've got my vote and full support.
Modman: pass me a glazed Krispy Kream.

Spooly

Oops!!

RegistryCoin

.

danarchy

as i just posted in spooly's thread, dealer's are the only people i feel that should be excluded for this!


dan

wondercoin

mansco: You post proves several points to me at least:

1. You possess many of the skills needed to be on the counsel. Just your well outlined thought process alone speaks volumes;

2. No question there there are 50 highly qualified collectors on this board that would do a great job in any of the 6 spots.

3. Maybe the counsel needs 9 spots like the US Supreme Court, especially with so many highly qualified persons?

The "counsel" will have to consist of highly qualified numismatists as well. After all, there is more than throwing a dart at the board to propose whether the 1955 Doubled Die Lincoln should be required but not the 1917 Doubled Die Lincoln, or if the 1950s/d Roosevelt Dime recognized by nearly every grading service BUT PCGS should be included, or whether all 3 types of 1972(p) Ike Dollars should be required, or whether certain 20th Century overdate coins should be included or excluded and whether the 1954s/d and 1955d/s Jeffersons should be required, but not the 1946d/d and some of the other war varieities, etc., etc., etc.

Can everyone who volunteered themselves to be on the counsel stand up in the room at PCGS and make a presentation on all of the above-mentioned topics and all the other topics as well? Modman raised a realistic point. Wondercoin

keithdagen

Mansco,

<< <i>
1) why a council is needed?
2) what benefits PCGS might derive from it?
3) how this council would seek comments from collectors, dealers and registry users at large?
4) if there is some more effective and efficient way for PCGS to solicit and/or react to Registry user suggestions, complaints, or concerns other than creating a bureaucracy., or
5) distill if most of us are just upset because we don't believe PCGS cares if we exist or not and we are made and don't want to take it any more. >>



I'll take a stab with my view of your questions:

1. PCGS gets lots of input from dealers who do business with them on how to shape the Registry. Collectors feel that they are the "little guy" in this situation and want a representative voice.

2. PCGS can get direct feedback from the collector. Although the dealer has to market the coins for PCGS and assist the collector, the end person is the collector and that is PCGS's eventual target market.

3. I would suggest through the use of polls, e-mails, threads, Private Messages. I think that Spooly is looking for a committee to sift through the threads and get the pulse of the community and make sure that PCGS knows what that beat is.

4. There may be, but PCGS has not solicited anything specifically from the user. We have the power to e-mail or call PCGS, but many collectors don't feel that this is working.

5. The last month or so has shown an increasing discontent with PCGS and the changes being made to its #1 marketing program, the Registry. And so far, only a handful of sets have been changed. Something needs to be done and a grass roots campaign of respected collectors and dealers needs to happen. In the long run, an effective campaign like this could really benefit PCGS by strengthening user satisfaction with the product and the collector by giving them a voice.

Keith

Spooly

Keithdagen I don't think I could have said it better! If the Dealers want to form a counsel to advise PCGS please do! Please do! I think the "PCGS Registry Sets Collectors Counsel" should be that a "Collectors Counsel". Back by 1730+ "Collectors" sets! But it will be the vote that counts. If Dealers can run... then we still get to vote for them or not! How fair is that.




Great feed back everybody! Keep it coming!

cjmbuffalo

WC et all:

Too many cooks spoil the stew.

1)Keep the number of people to six or smaller. This is sound business management practice and your not bring in an enitre football team to Hammer PCGS.

2) A mixture of experienced collectors and new collectors. Sometimes new people have great insight into problems that old people overlook. This would be the smae for the professional dealers.

3) I think PCGS would listen as Mansco put it so elequently, we are there market. If you don't listen to your customers you die.

RegistryCoin

.

ModMan

Right. Why train a new monkey to do this job?
(No offense Mitch, you know what I mean).

dbldie55

I thought, but I could be wrong, that PCGS already has a substantial group of well known, respected dealers who give them advice in many aspects of their business including the Registry. Is this incorrect? What spooly has brought up is a group of "Collectors" (which I read:non-dealers), to voice the concerns from our point of view. I do think it is more important to have an agenda before you have a committee.

For those of you who insist on using an analogy of a car salesman, I personally have never seen a service manager who would allow a salesman to supervise work being done on someone's car. Perhaps this is something that goes on in your area. All of the salesman I know are more worried about making quota's and keeping their job.

RegistryCoin

.

madmike

First let me say, I'm glad to see everyone putting their time and effort into fixing something, not just complaining that it's broken!

My observations:

I think this is a fantastic idea. If we can put together a well organized group with some direction, PCGS would be crazy not to at least listen to our input.

I'm not sure that there shouldn't be some dealer presence in the council (but I'm also not sure there should). I'd be happy with anyone who had the best interests of the Registry and the Reg Collectors at heart.

Should we try to map out how we envision this council operating and pitch our idea to PCGS before we start selecting members?

Just some unorganized thoughts,

Thanks everyone for the work,

madmike

Askari

I feel like Alice in Wonderland posting here in "Slab City", but some folks have asked me for inputs from a "disinterested party." I'm still running through the threads, but I notice there seems to be some indecision as to whether this is a "Registry Council" or a "Collectors Council". Perhaps there should be a poll as to whether the purpose of the Council is to be, respectively, a narrow or a broad approach to providing PCGS with collector inputs and concerns. I would suggest focusing on a Registry Council for the time being, since the Registry program has become the primary lightning rod for collectors' concerns and suggestions. True, PCGS appears to have cast us adrift and no longer perceives its forums as a great way to get direct feedback from its primary customer base, but the best way to tackle a big problem is one bite at a time. If a 5-6 member council works in principle, it could easily be later expanded to 7-9, say, that would cover a fuller range of issues.

Should dealers be included? Yes, at least one. If nothing else, that person would be able to identify probable dealer reactions and suggest strategies for increasing support among them for Council recommendations. Such a person could help weed out the more unlikely to work approaches and might even serve as the Council's liaison to dealer groups like the PNG. There should also be at least one collector/dealer, someone clearly able to understand both sides of important and sensitive issues. The majority, though, ought to be collectors and if the focus is on a Registry council, participating collectors should form a majority of the Council membership. If you want a single non-Registry collector to have a seat, fine, but I don't see any real purpose in that (other than perhaps serving as a sort of 'arbitrator') unless and until the Council should be expanded beyond encompassing only Registry-related issues.