Classic Commem subsets in the registry

RegistryCoin

I think a good idea for boosting the interest in the classic commems and the registry, in general, would be to add (6) individual classic commem. series to the registry as subsets, located right under the 50 piece type commemorative set. Registry classifications would be created for the larger series, the Ark. (15 coin set), Boone (16 coin set), BTW (18 coin set), Oregon (14 coin set), Texas(13 coin set) and W-Cs(12 coin set). I'll bet that there are a lot of people willing to begin a registry set with something less than a goal of 50 or 144 pieces. What do you think?

Chippewa

The beauty of collecting commems is the variety in the designs of the coins. If you collected a series of BTW's or Oregons with no variety it would be booooring. If you were going to do that you might as well collect something really boring, like Jefferson nickels.

RegistryCoin

Point well taken, (with a giggle) Chippewa. But some may find the size of the set overwhelming, while a home state, other interest or attraction, ie, boone, or just the Oregons because, well, from your icon, you know why the Oregons, would be attractive to them. Perhaps, after completing one of the six sets I mentioned, they would "get the bug". What do you think?

ModMan

I like the idea. A set of Oregon Commemoratives would make for a beautiful display and is certainly 'do-able' even in the upper grades.
I hope PCGS decides to take up this idea.

RegistryCoin

Yep, A BTW set in 66 is a nice goal too. Boones can be done in 66, or 67 if more bold. The Arks. would be a challange in 66. The Texas series can be realized in 67, and the W-C set in 66 would be an uncommon goal.

FullSteps

I think the subsets are a great idea, but only if RegistryCoin doesn't list those MS67 and MS68 coins he has hiding in the safe

In all seriousness, I have thought about a set of Oregons myself.

--Tim

RegistryCoin

.

RegistryCoin

I think there are probably people who already have registry quality sets, ie., Washington-Carver Sets, Oregon Sets or Booker T. Washington Sets, but have no place to compare with others, or to show them off. Those sets certainly would not be given their just recognition within a 144 pc. minimum registry.

PS. I am willing to bet that if you come up with brillant ideas such as this one, pcgs will somehow hear you, like it, and put it into production. I don't think it needs a vote, nor announcement. Just do it. Its a terrific idea.

Mark

Registry sets for commemorative subsets is a very good idea. I, naturally, would be favorably impressed by this idea because I am working on sets of BTWs and Oregons. One cavet I might add to the suggestion is that a set must include more than 3 coins; I, personally, don't think a "set" of, say, 3 Columbia commemoratives or a "set" of 2 Alabama commemoratives is much of a set, though, of course, I'd LOVE to own these coins.

Mark

keithdagen

I can see where a group of Oregons or BTW's might be boring, but nothing wrong with a lot of Texas. I'm slightly biased of course.

Keith

Higashiyama

The concept of an Oregon registry set is an interesting topic for discussion. I believe that this stunningly beautiful coin is no more attractive in MS67-68 than it is in MS65-66. (or, said differently, that it is possible to assemble an Oregon set grading MS65-66 that is as attractive as any set available -- this is perhaps a more interesting challenge than building a "registry" quality set)

RegistryCoin

I think it will consist of the larger sets only, the ones I mentioned. And just to start things off: Forget the cluttered Texas coins.
Texas may be big, but give me a break. Sixteen different references on one side of the coin, alone? How much can a coin say? Geez,
Oregon, the most beautiful state is trunks and trees above the Texas. Ask anyone.
Now you want boring and insulting and dull? Look at the Arks. Ms Liberty as a "flapper" indian girl?
The BTWs and WCs actually are "where it's at".

keithdagen

RegistryCoin,

You just can't do anything in Texas halfway. If they had done it right, they would have made the Texas piece another of the $50 slugs. Then we could have got all of the necessary designs out of the way and made it a little more organized. Just wait till you see what we have in mind for our state quarter.

Keith

gmarguli

How about year sets? What about PDS sets? Columbian sets? Where's it stop? Some Registry Sets were never meant to be. These small sets are too easy to put together in all but the really upper grades. I say get rid of all the Registry Sets!

madmike

The Early Commemoratives by type (not by mintmark) are already on my to-do list.

someday!

The more I study up on them, the more attractive I find them.

For some reason type collecting appeals to me much more than mintmark/date. I think I just enjoy the "newness" of each individual one.

But anything we can add to the Registry that will encourage collectors is (I think) a good thing.

madmike

BigE

RC should not be allowed, and they should get rid of Tiger Woods too-----BigE

RegistryCoin

I already promised, if they announce it soon and don't ask me to be in there for any particular reason, I'll gladly stay out. My "seconds" could take each catagory though...

michael

sounds like a good idea to me..... especially the ark set.......

wondercoin

"I already promised, if they announce it soon and don't ask me to be in there for any particular reason, I'll gladly stay out. My "seconds" could take each catagory though..."


Steve (Registrycoin): Just my own opinion here and you know we have
not discussed this issue before. You have assembled the greatest collection of classic Commems EVER assembled. You accomplished this task over a 3-4 year period due to a number of factors, including, but not limited to: (1) your commitment to "step up" and "pay the price" for pieces where you had to be the highest buyer in the country for the "big time household name dealers" to sell you the coins above all their other customers for the same material; (2) your fabulous personality and disposition where these same "big time" dealers came to know that it was a pleasure to call you and offer you a "pop 1" coin first because they would get nothing but a thank you from you and not 2 weeks of "haggling" back and forth on price; (3) your decision to pursue these coins at a time when they were not "in favor" as the "hottest set out there", a condition I believe you would agree is still the case today, although the coins are now getting "looked at" a lot closer than in the recent past; (4) your keen knowledge of "making your own coins" and not being afraid to pay excessive money for a "super high end" coin that you strongly believed should be in a 1 point higher holder. So, where did this all take you?

If I am not mistaken, even the incredible Sheppard collection ended up with more than a dozen MS65 coins out of the 144 coins in the "big" series" that he could not ever locate in an MS66 grade. Correct me if I am wrong, but your set presently contains 1 MS65 COIN ONLY!!!!!!! Where am I going with this?

Steve: I would PROUDLY get your set back up in both the PCGS and NGC Registries and, in the event either service elected to create subsets of certain Commems, I would PROUDLY list your coins in every subset AND WIN EVERY REGISTRY HANDS DOWN!!! Why agree to not list coins like you have done here in this thread, so that other collectors can have a chance at #1? Let's face-they are not #1 AND NEVER WILL BE UNLESS THEY BUY YOUR SET OR SUBSETS!!! You are #1 and will likely be until the day you decide to sell your set!! I view your kindness of giving collectors a shot at #1 similar to a grading company giving an MS68 silver quarter the weight of a circulated coin. Neither instance skews the reality that there is only ONE #1 and in the case of classic Commems it is YOU both as the current finest and also ALL-TIME FINEST!!!!

Wondercoin

BigE

So, which coin is the 65?-------BigE

Coinguy

Commemorative sub-sets I love the idea of a registry set of Oregon’s in ms-67, I am already ¾ way their. Commems are my only registry set so far any way. Using subset I might go for the 144 big set.
Mike

ModMan

You know it's not the Columbian.

BigE

If they go to set weighting it might be mathmatically possible to figure it out---BigE

BigE

On the other hand it could be a 46 BTW, and he is just might be using it as an ace in the hole----BigE

ModMan

He just might be using it as an ace in the hole. Against who? Is there anyone who is even distantly in second place?

BigE

Anyone knows an ace in the hole can be used at any time, someday someone will be close, and right when the other person has spent years getting there, BOOM, he pulls out the old 65 BTW and sticks in the 68 and he immediately causes his competitor to commit suicide. End of story, edit out the 68, put the 65 back in and lay in wait for another insect. Just like a spider you see-----------------------BigE

ModMan

BigE (You may not appreciate this-) the more I read your threads and posts the more I realize we have more in common than not.

BigE

Modman, we do have something in common, everytime I see your icon it reminds me to wipe my butt--------BigE

BigE

Whoa, sorry man! Can't believe that post went through-----------BigE

RegistryCoin

Wow, interest in Commems. How'd this happen? Let's have some fun with this newly found interest. Perhaps we could come up with an exciting idea to further this new-to-me and mostly overlooked facet of U.S. coinage.

keithdagen

Steve,

I think that the general lack of interest in commems is caused by dealers. Very few dealers at the local shows I go to have nice commems in their cases. Rows upon rows of Morgans of course, and a smattering of the rest of the coins. The commems I see are usually toned ugly.

If that is happening across the country and not a local phenomenon, it is no wonder commems get no credit. You rarely see even the national dealers spotlight the series.

If the coins were highlighted more, I think that collectors would start to notice that several of the designs are very attractive. Of course, there are some that aren't, but there are enough to get many hooked on at least the 50 coin type set.

Keith

ModMan

BigE: Just do what you alway have done: Edit the post.

You've soiled my icon.
I'll never be able to look at it the same again.

BigE

SSSHHHHHH, Keep this quiet, this is another ploy by RegistryCoin to thin the market------BigE

BigE

ModMan, I promised the other guy I wouldn't do it anymore, now I am stuck----BigE

BigE

Well, it looks like TP to me-------BigE

RegistryCoin

I think the market in classic commems is about as thin as I'd like to see. Like it is smart to buy stocks low, when there is a less-than-favorable environment for the stock, then wait until everybody "gets it", I am getting to the point where I'm wondering if ever, the collecting community will "get it" concerning classic commems, but I suppose commems, like my Jeffs, Washington quarters, Kennedys, state quarters, and most all of the other sets I've sold, they'll get "hot" right after I give up. Or maybe not...

dbldie55

Well Steve, it looks like you may be the trigger. Let us know when you are going to sell, so we can get in at the right time

Hey, I like the commems too, I just can't have everything

BigE

Why don't you let people view the composition of your set, if there is a good reason, maybe I should cover mine up also. If you don't want to answer, thats OK---BigE

RegistryCoin

Well, if your interested in getting in at the right time, just keep in mind something that wondercoin told me when I entered the commem fray. He said that the commems, if you want to be #1, will be done only at the expense of all your other collections. I said "HA".
But now that I've built the #1 set, I've rid myself of Lincolns, Jeffersons, Roosies, Wash 32-date, Franklins, Kennedys, and Cal. gold I now boast a couple of 911 quarters left in addition to my commems. Have fun.

dbldie55

Sounds like a stacked deck. Going up against the guy with all of the aces. I will stick to what I enjoy for right now. I will eventually do the set for an album, but even that is not getting the attention it should.

ModMan

Good advise. Better to have one absolutely killer top shelf set than a half dozen mediocre ones.

RegistryCoin

I think that Mitch's description of my feelings that there is no need for quibbling over a couple of hundred dollars on a pop.1 commem, make it clear that the upgrade specialists would/could/may/do "target" a coin that they knew would be desirable to me, and put a little more effort into finding that particular date. I'd have the privelege of paying a bit "extra" for "personal service". So I just let 'em guess what I need.
But since our contest has just abruptly ended, I see that making 'em guess isn't possible anymore. dbldie55 seems to have my set memorized. Congratulations dbldie55. Wow!

wondercoin

Modman: The only problem was most of Steve's dozen other sets were #1 or #2 as well!! Not medicore sets! But, I saw that the 144 pc. Commems were a massive undertaking and predicted it would result in Steve having to give up virtually every coin type set he collected. He did laugh it off at the time only to then sell off every coin type set he collected over the next 3 years, one by one. But, all kidding aside, I envy the position Steve is in with his 144 pc. set. It is a world-class set worthy of the Smithsonian!!

I also predicted 10 out of the last 2 recessions as well Wondercoin

dbldie55

Steve think of it this way. If everyone wanted to create a high grade Commemorative set, would you have been able to build the one you did? Perhaps, but I bet it would have cost more.

I think the old saying goes: Buy low, Sell high. Now that you have them, I can see why it would be nice to build some interest up in the set. I think it is coming. I had a chance to see a complete Mint State type set a few years ago. That was the first time I had ever seen many of the coins from the Early Commemorative Era. Quite an impressive group of coins.

Subsets would be interesting. Would you have the finest in each one? If you didn't, it would give you something else to shoot for. With the Bicentennial of Louis & Clark coming up, I think many of these coins may start to find their way into the limelight.

RegistryCoin

dbldie55. If there were ANYONE out there interested in the same coins I am/was, I wouldn't have even started. I'm still amazed that I get offered some of this stuff. I really don't pay the premiums they're asking for these days. I guess, like Mitch said, the big commem dealers like me. I make a sale easy. They ask me if I'd like the coin, I say "yes, please", they ship it to me, and I pay for it. Now if there were another interested party in the entire marketplace, I doubt that it would be so easy.
PS. I would have the finest of each catagory. Not much of a competition.
I probably would stay out, or enter them, then retire them to the all-time list to give everyone else a goal.

ModMan

Awesome set. Wondercoin is right, I'm sure all of your other "Finest Known" sets you owned were equally as great.
I just place the complete set of early Commemoratives in a different catagory than the Kennedies, for example.

It would be a near impossible act to not only duplicate Steve's efforts but to then surpass it.
I believe if you threw enough money at the Kennedy set it wouldn't take much looking/sweat to quickly build the #1 set.


edited NOT for content, but to correct my referring to Steve in the third person.

RegistryCoin

Interesting comparison, MM. You just may be right.

RegistryCoin

Mitch said that he'd put this "in the works" for us. Yippee. And yee haw.
I hope you can do it, Mitch. Good luck.

wondercoin

Registrycoin (Steve) and all others interested in these classic Commem subsets: The subsets should be added to the PCGS Registry before 2/15/02.

I also own one of those (3) MS67 Wash Carvers ever graded PCGS-MS67! Don't be so sure I couldn't beat you Steve in the W/C subset one day!!! Wondercoin.

RegistryCoin

9:06
Wow, Mitch. Were you awaiting the opening of the pcgs office doors, like the day after Thanksgiving at Macy's, to check on this issue?
Thank you for your efforts.
Well, if there were to be competition in the commems, I would welcome it be you.
And, Yes, I am worried. Seriously.
Thanks again for adding to my/our fun with the registry.

RegistryCoin

Oh, and thanks alot, Mitch. I said that if pcgs promises to do this, I'd not enter the fray. I didn't think it possible.
Thanks alot.