THE SUMMARY
wondercoin
Posts: 16,953 ✭✭✭✭✭
To sum it all up:
1. Over the past four years, I have assisted both NGC and PCGS with Registry related issues involving "modern" coins, which I personally define as 1932-date. PCGS recognized my efforts in their 1999 Registry book. I also worked extensively with NGC in 2000 to assist NGC with their Registry program.
2. While I have collected Morgan and Peace Dollars since I was a kid and also have a nice collection of pattern coins, which I have enjoyed studying over the years, my strengths are in having studied extensively coins dated 1932 to date. I will never suggest I am an expert in Seated material, large cents, or any coin area pre-1932. Then again, most Seated Dollar experts are not well versed in finest known Clad quarters either, so I have no shame in my (admitted) limitations.
3. I have no interest in having any fancy title or job in connection with the Registry. Yesterday, Rick M. preferred me as a laison between PCGS and the collector base as a whole, as he believed dealing one on one with me would be easier for him on any suggestions collectors had to improve the Registry, as opposed to other alternatives. But, I have watched these boards over these past 24 hours and personally believe my effectiveness as a laison would be greatly diminished by the fact that a meaningful percentage of collectors on this board honestly do believe their needs would be better served by an all-collector group dealing with PCGS directly.
4. I really do believe the interests of coin sellers such as myself (and nearly all coin sellers assuming "classic" coins take on a larger role in the Registry in the future) are more closely aligned with collector interests than several collectors have expressed during this debate. For example, if the Registry were to include year sets (an idea I have supported for the past several years), that change obviously wouldn't hurt my business or anyone elses business. It would likely improve it greatly. Since I truly believe the interests of collectors are closely aligned with the interests of coin dealers, I have no interest whatsoever to try to exert a will upon collectors where a meaningful percentage of collectors are not in full support of the laison concept.
5. Based upon the foregoing, I respectfully decline acting in such a laison capacity. I am always here to "kick ideas off of" and most of you will conceed I am as dedicated to "modern" registry issues as anyone. So, in summary, there is no "Registry Czar" or "Registry Puppet" for that matter. But, perhaps everyone on the boards can get back to proposing neat ideas for making the Registry even a better game. And, I would hope the right proposals are swiftly adopted by PCGS and NGC to make Registry as fair and enjoyable as is possible.
Wondercoin.
1. Over the past four years, I have assisted both NGC and PCGS with Registry related issues involving "modern" coins, which I personally define as 1932-date. PCGS recognized my efforts in their 1999 Registry book. I also worked extensively with NGC in 2000 to assist NGC with their Registry program.
2. While I have collected Morgan and Peace Dollars since I was a kid and also have a nice collection of pattern coins, which I have enjoyed studying over the years, my strengths are in having studied extensively coins dated 1932 to date. I will never suggest I am an expert in Seated material, large cents, or any coin area pre-1932. Then again, most Seated Dollar experts are not well versed in finest known Clad quarters either, so I have no shame in my (admitted) limitations.
3. I have no interest in having any fancy title or job in connection with the Registry. Yesterday, Rick M. preferred me as a laison between PCGS and the collector base as a whole, as he believed dealing one on one with me would be easier for him on any suggestions collectors had to improve the Registry, as opposed to other alternatives. But, I have watched these boards over these past 24 hours and personally believe my effectiveness as a laison would be greatly diminished by the fact that a meaningful percentage of collectors on this board honestly do believe their needs would be better served by an all-collector group dealing with PCGS directly.
4. I really do believe the interests of coin sellers such as myself (and nearly all coin sellers assuming "classic" coins take on a larger role in the Registry in the future) are more closely aligned with collector interests than several collectors have expressed during this debate. For example, if the Registry were to include year sets (an idea I have supported for the past several years), that change obviously wouldn't hurt my business or anyone elses business. It would likely improve it greatly. Since I truly believe the interests of collectors are closely aligned with the interests of coin dealers, I have no interest whatsoever to try to exert a will upon collectors where a meaningful percentage of collectors are not in full support of the laison concept.
5. Based upon the foregoing, I respectfully decline acting in such a laison capacity. I am always here to "kick ideas off of" and most of you will conceed I am as dedicated to "modern" registry issues as anyone. So, in summary, there is no "Registry Czar" or "Registry Puppet" for that matter. But, perhaps everyone on the boards can get back to proposing neat ideas for making the Registry even a better game. And, I would hope the right proposals are swiftly adopted by PCGS and NGC to make Registry as fair and enjoyable as is possible.
Wondercoin. Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
0
Comments
So you won't be acting in a laison capacity.
But will be here to "kick ideas off of"
Kind of sounds like the same thing.
What we want is somebody who Rick, PCGS and CU will listen to whether it be you, or somebody a council comes up with to address our changing needs as the Registry evolves. Now we are back to square 1.
Who will this person(s) be?
Registry 1909-1958 Proof Lincolns
No harm done, and we have the past four days ideas to build on.
This isn't anything that has to "done now" - we're probably better
served in the long run by thinking things through.
Ken
With that, I bid you all goodnite.
Tim to call it quits for the night. Wondercoin.
You are quite the gentleman.
Well, I'm sorry. But I have to agree with Mitch on this one.
I'm ashamed of you all. Here, I've been thinking of you as close friends, just to find that you betray the Registry like this.
Have you no shame? Have you no heart?
Please, I beg each and every ONE of you. Gather your thoughts. Repent of your wrongs deeds over the last couple of days and PM Mitch! I think if enough of you do so Mitch may reconsider. Don't just half@ss tell him your sorry. Really MEAN it. And then YOU beg him to stay on as our Registry liason.
This is the Registry's last hope. It's do or die.
Please, don't disapoint me again.
Greg: Any comments?
<<Since I truly believe the interests of collectors are closely aligned with the interests of coin dealers,>>
I think that is backwards isn't it?? I think collectors interests lie in aquiring a properly graded coin at a fair market value, and dealers interests lie in maximizing the cost of their coins, and maximizing their market value. Or is it the wonderful coin dealers who make it possible for us lowly collectors to aquire any coins??
I'm really sorry, but am totally turned off by the actions of some of these wonder, super, registry, guys. I have heard too many times how some have been belittled because maybe these guys thought they weren't serious, or didn't have the $$ to mess with or something. Then they suck up to each other like they are some kind of gods or something. I still can't get over the fact that some should not be bothered to have or send a scan of a coin they are selling because they are soooo reputable, they are beyond question......It really doesn't matter to me who, what, when, where, why, or how. I haven't been involved in the registries for a few months, but that may change. Just read Tad's thread, that pretty much sums up how I feel about it. For what that is worth
the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed
Join the NRA and protect YOUR right to keep and bear arms
To protest against all hunting of game is a sign of softness of head, not soundness of heart. Theodore Roosevelt
[L]http://www.ourfallensoldier.com/ThompsonMichaelE_MemorialPage.html[L]
I remember a computer maker with this thought process, they are a company called Compaq, you may have heard of them. They figured that the enduser would always buy the computer the corporate world designed, and the enduser has no say in the product. Well, along comes this small company called Dell, which allows the purchaser to actually buy something they want, and pretty soon you can pick up a Compaq, that no one wants, for near nothing. Just about bankrupted them, probably did, they are still trying to recover.
Now to this registry thing, It is consumer driven. (period). I am trying to see how the interests of the dealer are the same as the interests of the consumer. Compaq had that point of view. Look at the Full Page ads in CoinWorld by David Hall (you know the biggest big wig at PCGS), if it was not for the registry, he would not be selling these over priced hyped up coins, but be selling what he used to. So, without the Registry, many of these dealers would go broke (not DHRC, but others), the ego maniacs in the registry would not exist, and the collectors would be unchanged. So, while the collectors want to fight for a better registry, they will certainly live life unchanged without it.
<< <i>
3. I have no interest in having any fancy title or job in connection with the Registry. Yesterday, Rick M. preferred me as a laison between PCGS and the collector base as a whole, as he believed dealing one on one with me would be easier for him on any suggestions collectors had to improve the Registry, as opposed to other alternatives. But, I have watched these boards over these past 24 hours and personally believe my effectiveness as a laison would be greatly diminished by the fact that a meaningful percentage of collectors on this board honestly do believe their needs would be better served by an all-collector group dealing with PCGS directly.
5. Based upon the foregoing, I respectfully decline acting in such a laison capacity. I am always here to "kick ideas off of" and most of you will conceed I am as dedicated to "modern" registry issues as anyone. So, in summary, there is no "Registry Czar" or "Registry Puppet" for that matter. But, perhaps everyone on the boards can get back to proposing neat ideas for making the Registry even a better game. And, I would hope the right proposals are swiftly adopted by PCGS and NGC to make Registry as fair and enjoyable as is possible.
Mitch,
Addressing these points:
3. I don't think that the poll taken shows that there was enough of a majority to say that only "collectors" should have a say in this process. I agree that there needs to be a council of some kind, that represents all interests in the Registry. Knowledgable dealers are as important as knowledgable collectors and should be included on that council.
5. I hope that you will genuinely reconsider. A council of a couple of respected board members with you at the head would be very beneficial to the Registry. PCGS trusts you to communicate with you, and I believe that a majority of board members trust you to represent the beliefs that we have with PCGS, even if the will of the people might not match your personal view. I can't think of a better person to chair any committee that the board can come up with, and hope that you might be willing to participate in that regard.
Keith
I hope you will reconsider. I'm in favor of a single point of contact from our side with you being that person. The details of WHAT will be communicated can be worked out here on the boards, be it everyone shouting ideas at once, committee, "counsil", council, whatever. WHO should communicate, though, is you.
Even BJ's post shows PCGS is trying to listen but they can't quite figure out what is being said. With one person presenting our case, the message is much clearer.
is reached and then have Mitch be our liason to PCGS.
09/07/2006
You "please reconsider" & "please come back" pleas are totally useless and uncalled for.
I think you made a wise decision. You already have PCGS's ear when ever you need it. You also have a loyal group of supporter/clients whose interest(as registry participants) I'm sure you already well represent. I think the council approach is beneficial because it draws in a wider group of views. It also gives participants, who feel that expressing their views is important, a venue to do so. Having a czar by its nature implies a filter where the czar's personal bias effects the flow of information with the potential for the appearance of a conflict of interest.
Well reasoned choice.
_____________________
My Other Hobby
People can change their minds, people do change their minds, and I hope Mitch changes his.
This Registry is REAL LIFE.
Other than that, you had me going there for a moment or two.
Now, as far as you, jmwarren: You are but a child. Trust me when I tell you this, If you choose to take on any member of this Registry, YOU WILL LOSE. I mean that in the most sincerest form.
You will lose. Scamper away now. Be gone with you.