What is really wrong with our PCGS Registry?

braddick

Maybe I'm not as clued in as others, but I'm not seeing what the problem is with the Registry Set.

-Logging in is easy. The Registry site is easy to navigate. Adding or editing a set is easy and the coins consistantly update on time.

-Is it the weighing system? If so, it appears to be fair to all.
Is it the addition of required coins into the sets?
If so, I'm sure if the Registrants of that set (Washington quarters, for example) email the Registry people I'm sure adjustments will be made.

-Is it the threat of collectors adding coins to their sets without owning the coin(s)?
I don't see this as a widespread problem, and it seems PCGS is aware and has been aware of this for awhile now and is implementing safeguards to prevent (or at least slow the abuse down) this.

I'm fairly happy with the Registry. Much more so than I am with NGC. Their site is difficult to navigate and isn't set up clearly. Adding coins to a Registry there too is a difficult proposition and task.

All PCGS needs to do is continue with the improvements they have on line for us.

keithdagen

Pat,

I would like to see a little more advance notification on set changes. Overall I am quite satisfied, but I can think of many ways the Registry could be improved.

As for NGC, I signed up and added my Kennedys about 3 weeks ago and they still aren't approved to add to a set.

Keith

merz2

Pat
The way they did the Proof Quarters definitely upset me.I told both BJ and David Hall that IMHO it was a mistake.The giving of (1) bonus point for DCAM only and nothing for Cameo(1936-1942).While deducting (1)point for Cameo and (2)points for plain on 1950-Present,is wrong.The decisions being made without some notification or imput,after we've made it the popular thing to do.We've made it what it is.It is mentioned in auctions,dealers sales,and the coin publications.All of this has put PCGS in the lime light(GOOD).The other problems I discussed weren't in regards to the Registry Sets.I hope this helps.

Fairlaneman

Twenty Years ago I would not be sitting here talking back and forth with Coin Collectors across the Nation. With that in mind,and seems how this is a Hobby,personally I cannot find fault with the Enjoyment PCGS and NGC has provided me. Some problems have been addressed and if viable PCGS will address them,as seen by BJ's Post today. Folks life is not always a bowl of cherries as you wish it were. There will always be Complainers and there will always be Silent people,somewhere in between the two lies the answer. See Ya: Ken

Spooly

The point system for Proof Lincolns is crazy. Adding varieties without notice. Having POP 0 (That are Varieties) coins in sets.


What about the future of the Reg Sets? Is PCGS going to add all the Varieties to the MS Sets? That is the trend.

I say make a Reg Set for varieties.

Their are atleast 30 to 40 Lincolns varieties alone! That would make a cool set.... but still leave the MS Lincoln set the same. You know most collectors don't do varieties. You would have the best of both worlds! But PCGS would have to start grading (and noting it on the holder) alot more varieties.

ect.... ect...

RegistryCoin

Pat: It seems you may have missed some or all of the most recent stirrings, but you seem to have a pretty good idea what went on. Basically it was just the usual plea: "Collectors Want to Add More Hoops To PCGS's Job Providing Free Services", but devisive. We even had big-time dealers join this "free-for-all, divide and conquer" thing. Don't bother going back to look for astute comments by Mod Man or myself. Checking out my Tirade Thread should suffice. Here's an excerpt:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
What's really wrong with our PCGS Registry? NOTHING. That's not the issue.
The real questions before us were, are, and should be:
What can we do to improve our registry? and more importantly and specifically,
How do we come to a consensus of our collective thoughts and ideas?, and
How do we best relay those thoughts and ideas to Rick?

We were offered, nay, given, a simple, tried and true way to relay our thoughts, a way suggested and acceptable to Rick, and ALL YOU HAD TO DO was improve your ability to come to a consensus of thoughts and ideas, and put them into a compact form.
Now, while y'all are voting for polls, and polling to see if a vote is necessary, BJ has to come in and hold your hands,
David H. (you got 'em all hoppin' now) pacifies y'all with questionaires-to-be, and
Rick probably won't drop in again, because NOBODY HERE LISTENED TO HIM. You do know he is the President of PCGS, don't you, for pete's sake?

Go into your virtual committee meetings and discuss things. Fill out the questionaires. But tell BJ she's off baby sitting duty for a while. (and thank her sincerely, this time)
And while your in your virtual meetings, think what about you've done to your credibility with Rick, while you've tried to snatch the credibility from Rick's chosen confidant, the one who CANNOT lose credibility, in Rick's eyes.
Now go to your meetings, so we can get something done.

For the full version of this tirade, please see the Tirade Thread

braddick

Exactly. You can't fix what isn't broken but you can improve it to get better gas mileage and performance.

Isn't the Registy kind of like your favorite classic automobile? You tinker with it, wash and wax it, and occassionally proudly display it for all to see. Heck, you might even drive it on the weekends, right?

You certainly don't want some unknown internet guy working on it. Who knows what kind of generic paste wax he'll use on your baby?

No, you want the guy who appreciates what you've got and respects your anal attitude.
You had that guy- then you just bickered & p!ssed him away.
Too bad.
Such a shiny, pretty car too. Oh well.

ModMan

Steve, you and Braddick are dead on with this issue.

RegistryCoin

Thanks, MM. I know, but, what's a collector who thinks past his nose going to do? (ding-a-ling) Oh, sorry I have to go, another virtual meeting.