Everybody wanting Year Sets, this is YOUR thread.
Dog97
Posts: 7,874 ✭✭✭
It has been pointed out to us what we have to do to implement changes in the Registry so lets put our heads together in this thread and come up with some ideas to present to PCGS. My PM is on and my email is in my profile.
Open for suggestions.
Open for suggestions.
Change that we can believe in is that change which is 90% silver.
0
Comments
Year sets? Please.
Yes, I am in favor of including Year sets (one example of every MS and proof coin minted that year, including bullion and commems). It's something I'm doing anyway for my two kids (1996 and 2001), and this would give me a place to display this accomplishment.
I certainly don't see any downside to this. For PCGS it means a new type of set, which will only help sell coins and foster participation. For collectors, it provides that many more possibilities to be listed as having the #1 set in a category.
I also think that for now, this is the proper way to address specific registry issues; create a single thread regarding a specific topic and let everyone chime in.
Ken Claypool
You're in trouble because if you include commems, you have the Jackie Robinson $5 in MS. That one won't help the pocketbook at all.
Keith
I feel a year set should contain one example of each U.S. coin produced by the mint in the given year. That would include every MS coin and every Proof.
For example, my 1996 Year Set, which is far from complete, will include:
Lincoln 1c - P, D, S proof
Jefferson 5c - P, D, S proof
Roosevelt 10c - P, D, W, S clad proof & silver proof
Washington 25c - P, D, S clad proof & silver proof
Kennedy 50c - P, D, S clad proof & silver proof
Swimming 50c - MS & Proof
Soccer 50c - MS & Proof
Tennis $ - MS & Proof
Paralympic $ - MS & Proof
Rowing $ - MS & Proof
High Jump $ - MS & Proof
Flag $5 Gold - MS & Proof
Cauldron $5 Gold - MS & Proof
N.C.S. $ - MS & Proof
Smithsonian $ - MS & Proof
Smithsonian $5 Gold - MS & Proof
Silver Eagle - MS & Proof
Gold $5 Eagle - MS & Proof
Gold $10 Eagle - MS & Proof
Gold $25 Eagle - MS & Proof
Gold $50 Eagle - MS & Proof
Whew...that's 51 coins (I think)...why am I doing this, am I crazy??? Oh, yeah...it's for my little girl. Well, I'm crazy about her so I guess it's ok.
Maybe I should have picked an easier year...like 1796, 1804 or 1907!
Ken
Keith, no problem, Dog can dig Jackie, who being unusual for the modern commems is quite an investment coin.
1796 is an excellent choice, Whitney's set only had 96 coins in it, with the most expensive one going for $460,000 and another 12 going for over $100,000 each. Are you sure you would have preferred this year?
Hey year sets are a great idea, and the more you talk about them, the more I am happy I don't collect them. Wow, 51 coins for 1996, My three sons were born in 94,96, and 98, how many is that? Thank god I missed 1997, I would have to compete with Dog.
And then I went and had a son this year, so I've started a 2001 set for him. I don't even know what's involved with that one yet, thought I have bought a few, including the Buffalo $'s.
Don't bad-mouth my commems, I kind of like the series as a whole. You have it about the same as Solid, because you didn't have as many commen issues. Botanic, Robinson, FDR, and Officers, so only 10 commems.
Keith
We haven't heard from Carl, he probably won't go for the idea as it stands now since his year of 1907 would be tough. Gold Proofs are expensive. I also do 1797 & 1897 and have the same situation. Doing a complete POS mintmark set could be tough too.
The modern sets would be tough too with 50-60 coins. Some collectors might not want to buy $700-800 Platinum coins but rather stick with Mint State, Proofs, or Commems only. We need to consider those collectors also.
I can handle the 50+ coin main set, that's a must have.
We can also use subsets-like in the Morgan set.
I mostly sit in front of the computer all morning. But in the afternoon and evening I usually don't check on the latest messages. I missed this post yesterday.
I thought I was almost done with my 1907 set. This because in my mind I am collecting MS gold and Proof smaller stuff for my type set. So that is what I bought. I realized yesterday that a year set should include both proof *and* business strikes. While that makes 1907 harder for me it also makes '07 harder for everybody else.
One good thing is this would solve my upgrade problem for my type set. To compete with some folks here my PR 61 Barber half should be upgraded. But it is a matched piece with the rest of my original '07 proof set. I didn't want to sell that. So the answer is simple: buy a higher grade business strike and update my type set with that. That might work as long as there is a mixed proof/business type set. It might not work as I'm running out of budget.
I knew there were lots of coins minted recently. However it is surprising exactly how many there are. More than 50 pieces each recent year!! Holy moley! PCGS has to love this idea. Well PCGS executives must love this idea while the programmers might not like it much
Tom
Dog et al,
Maybe they could do the sets like they already do the series. Have 2 sets for each year, one proof, one MS, so that collectors only have to get 30-40 coins each unless they wish to do both.
Keith
I am imagining a list of years. When you select the year of interest from the list up would pop another list of those who have entered coins for that year. So there would never be a direct comparison from one year to another.
It would be super interesting if PCGS automatically entered coins for you in the various year sets. After all we have already entered coins in various other sets. There would be instant competition. (Hey PCGS, think of the grading fees when folks rushed to complete year sets they didn't even know they had!) My '07 set would be completely entered already.
It would be super clutter.
<<<So there would never be a direct comparison from one year to another.>>>
Cool! My 1907 set would compete with yours but my ave grade 69.1 1997 set wouldn't.
I'm adament on 50+ coin main set, that's a must have.
Then have a Biz Strike Year Set. This set could would include all mintmarks & denominations from that year with a subset of 1 example of denomination for collectors like tjkillian.
Or it could simply be a "Type" for that year.
And a Proof Year Set. Plain & simple. No discussion needed here.
Year Set for Commems-the Commemorative guys would love this one, no longer need 150 coins and they could use coins from their main Commem Set. Probably be the most popular set. Maybe with a subset for gold????
Year Set Bullion-nobody collects this mess so let's include silver gold and platinum both ms & prf in 1 set. Subject to change. Possible breakdown or subsets of gold & plat.
Chris
Keith I had to think about the 49 Double Eagle. I guess it should be an optional coin so the collectors of 1849
Anybody else?
Bullion sets? Out. Memorial penny sets? Gone. Proof coins? (this group??) Waste of bandwidth.
YEAR SETS? Please.
Am I the only one who thinks a Registry of Modern coins only ending in prime numbers is feasable?
Year sets are a great idea. I hope that PCGS will consider them strongly in the future. Coin collectors tend to give their kids and grandkids year sets to get them started. Getting them started on a slabbed year set makes a lot of sense.
Keith
Of course you can't compare one year to another, the sets for each given year would only be competing against each other.
And I don't think weighting is necessary for these sets - just a simple calculation taking the average-grade x percentage-complete will suffice.
Let's hear from more people out there on this subject!
Ken
1901 1907 1913 1931 1933 1949 1951 1973 1979 1987 1993 1997 1999 2003 2011 2017
Looks like Dog will get his set, as will Carl. I would start planning for next year, looks like it will be a great one. If this is to many year sets, lets do Twin Prime year sets. Looks like there would only be three groups.
EMAIL:
relictrader@suddenlink.net
sets in the registry.
Having a separate comparison for each year creates way too many
sets. That is, other sets have been rejected when there has
been more demand. Maybe a few years will end up with enough
people collecting them but the huge majority of years will have
few or no entries.
On the other hand having one registry where all year sets are
compared will create an "apples and oranges" situation.
In the interests of full disclosure, I am generally in favor of
fewer sets than more sets. I like sets that are "significant".
This is a very small point but I liked that PCGS sent free Registry
Cataloges out last year to people in the top five. Would they do
that next year if potentially hundreds of new entries were added?
I could be wrong here, it just sounds unlikely to me.
What does everyone think?
-Keith H
Too ambiguous for my liking.
No, let's go back to my original idea of dropping half of the piddly sets now already in the Registry.
50 coin sets or 15 coin sets, everybody can play.
Even if you're just buying a couple of coins per year, it can be exciting for them to add a new coin to their set. Doesn't everyone get a kick out of adding new coins to their sets of interest?
If you put photos up there, the kids can share their sets with friends without needing to get out the actual coins.
Ken
BigWigs.
My granddad gave me a nice set of coins from my birth year, 1974, as a gift. They grade about MS-63 and are housed in a Capitol Plastics type of holder (no Ike, but the rest). Those 5 coins mean more to me than any other that I currently have.
Keith
edited for spelling
I don't know that I would ever put a set together, but I can't see how this would be bad for PCGS. There would be a lot of interest in the sets. The only problem is the logistics, which I think that everyone agrees will not be easy. However, not easy and impossible are 2 different things, and I foresee these sets in the future.
Keith
edited cause i cant spell tonight
Put it in prospective: What if you recieved a set of Bicentenial coins today? They're 25 years old now.
I still think the grandkids would be more excited to see a complete set of high grade circulated Peace dollars than any 'year sets' from the nineties.
Dog97: Your 1997 set for your child is the exception. I commend you for what you're doing. Certainly though you don't need a "registry" to acknowledge this good work.
Regarding the Peace dollar set. I'm glad you own one. Some collectors don't. Also, don't you plan on having more than one grandchild?
I do have customers who have put together year sets, and I personally think they are a very cool thing to do when done to commemorate a significant year.
I think the personal significance of sets put together like this goes far beyond what can be gained by registering them as some shallow number in the bowels of PCGS.
That said, I can't seen any compelling reason against registering them either, IF they could be done in the spirit of good fun. But bizarre weighting schemes and some of the other various stuff discussed here lately doesn't strike me as good fun.
Also with the direction the registry has taken, I would be a bit worried that registering year sets -- many of which would be moderns -- might cause rankings to hinge on the acquisition of a few MS/PR70 coins, contributing to crazy-prices for those coins, which would be a bad thing in my opinion.
So, I guess if forced to vote, in today's climate, I'd be mildly opposed. But if not forced to vote, I'd gladly stay home on the couch and watch the exit polls over a bowl of popcorn. Wait... that's the other election.
The funny thing is, you apparently agree with me, after all of that.
Flip flop my opinion? You bet. It's called learning from others and not being so stuck in my own world of thought as to not listen and learn. Take the blinders off Tad- you might pick up a thing or two too.
Think about your last several posts re: clads. The Set Registry aint all about clads.
Year sets interest me because:
I have a 1997 set that even amazes even Wondercoin
I have a 1997 error set that amazes even Mike Byers & Fred Weinberg
I have a MS 1897 set (no Proofs)
I have a 1797 (slow go, 1 coin)
I have a 1697 set (DarkSide)
I have a MS&PR 1963 set (yawn)
All constantly being bought, sold, and upgraded.
I will soon start a 1897 Proof set. And that PCGS Proof 66 Barber Half in the Benson sale looks mighty nice but unfortunatly I have squandered all my extra money on a High Grade Modern Type Set 1900-Present.
Well since my 1963 set is mostly Teletrade $6 per coin MS-65 your MS-66 would outrank mine.
On the 1800 series where there is a BIG difference, like an O vs P mint 1897 Barber Half this could be a problem.
Your previous "creator of chaos" signature (can't remember the exact wording) was more apropos. Though your new icon is on the mark -- give a roll of TP a quick yank and listen to that flop-flop-flop sound.
Damn, you've even got me responding to you. You are good at what you do!
Let every PCGS collectors club member (as a way to weed out fake identities) register any collection they want, organized however they want, to show off to the world, in a sort of "open class" category.
Others can be inspired as to various ways to collect (your xx97 set, braddick's worst-known, someone else's crazy toned type set, whatever...)
No numeric rankings, just bragging rights. Photos preferred.
Bump it up one notch though Tad and you're in stalking territory.
-I'm afraid this will have to be my last response to you by the way.
I know when I'm out gunned and when it comes to the verbal jab and nitwit comments- you've got me beat hands down.
Your ability to blow into a thread and post your narrow-minded opinion (the exception being the one running right now regarding Registry grades. You've pinned a rose on that one- dead on) is not to be outclassed by ANYONE. You're good. Too good for me.
You win.
MM
Dog, hey-hey-hey, quiet with this ANACS/SEGS stuff, that is if you actually want PCGS to consider the idea! New open class thread.