Pedigree my 1968 set

clackamas

As many of you know, I worked for years to put together the finest 1968 mint set (my birth year. This set has been #1 since 2004, At that time it was possible to pedigree mint sets but currently post 1965 mint sets can not have a pedigree. I fully understand the reasoning but believe that variances should be made. I don't want to sound brash but my 1968 set is the best mint set ever assembled and is worthy of a pedigree. The set contains a unique coin in the Jefferson series and is chock full of rare coins in the respective series. Do you think that the set is worthy of a pedigree? If you purchased one of these coins, would it be worth while to know where it came from from a pedigree? My 1968 Mint set

Any supporters?

LincolnsRule

I agree it is the finest mint set listed in the registry, that's counting all dates, not just 1968. It's not like you were just some rich guy who paid whatever for whatever coins in low pop holders. You put a ton of time and effort into it and that enough should make it deserve a pedigree.

No one has to worry about knowing where the coins came from if they're sold, because if they're sold I'M BUYING THEM! (except maybe the full step nickels). And I'll proudly give credit to clackamas for them!

Why can't pcgs just do what's right for once.

zkcoins

Really? Post 1965 sets can't get a pedigree!

I was thinking about getting my 1980 set pedigreed, nice to know PCGS shot that down!

I would support a change in the rules for this.

Cgb

Very nice set!

I could go either way on the Pedigree. I do not want to belittle your accomplishment, but I am a bit undecided.

Stooge

Why should there be a limit on pedigrees such as the 1965-date set? Is this for all sets that deal with 1965-date coins, or just the U.S. Mint sets? I was hoping someday to pedigree my 1965-Date Roosie set if I ever made it to the top 5. That SUX!

Anyway, if you had the set pedigreed Clack, I certainly would not hesitate to put those 2 lovely Dimes in my set, especially since it says Nick Cascio next to them.

I vote for Pedro on this one.

Later, Paul.

clackamas

Paul, I think it is just the 65-Date mint sets. Some of the sets are not terribly impressive nor hard to put together so I think that PCGS does not want to water down the pedigree value.

Twincam

Seems to me the rules should be consistent across all the sets. I think you should be able to pedigree that set under the same rules as any other...

cointime

Clackmas,
I feel it does deserve to get pedigreed. My question is are you shooting for PCGS to do this for free? If this were my set and I wanted to get it done even if I had to pay for the service I would ask PCGS customer service and pose the question. I'm sure they would let you get it, but you might have to pay for it. You might ask them to consider your set:

<< <i>The decision will be that of PCGS experts. >>

I copied the below from the "Benefits" section on the Set Registry page.



<< <i>A valuable pedigree. In the rare coin market a pedigree is a contributing factor in the pride of ownership and value of the coin. Coins from famous collections such as Eliasberg, Norweb, Garrett, etc., usually command a premium in the marketplace. If you participate in the PCGS Set Registry program your set may qualify for the free pedigree service. The free pedigree service policy is as follows:

The set must be 100% complete.
The set must be in the top 5 in the Registry.
PCGS does not pedigree modern Mint and Proof sets (1965-present) or Low Ball sets.
Sets with less than 10 coins may be pedigreed if warranted. The decision will be that of PCGS experts.
The Registry member is responsible for shipping and handling costs.
The fee for pedigrees for upgrades to your set submitted after the initial pedigree is $5 a coin ($20 a coin for coins graded MS or Proof 70.) PCGS will not pedigree duplicate coins. You must submit both the upgraded coin and the coin it will be replacing. The coin that will no longer remain in your set will be reholdered without the pedigree and returned to you along with the newly pedigreed coin. Your set must remain 100% complete and in the top five to qualify.

To confirm that your set qualifies for the free Pedigree Service, contact customer service at setregistry@pcgs.com. Then mail with your coins a PCGS submission form and a printed page from the set registry that lists your set in the top five.
Please note: Pedigrees can be up to 22 characters in length. If the coin has a variety designation (i.e. Type 1, Type 2, etc.), this is included as part of the total character count. Indicate on your submission form if you would like your coins sequentially numbered. PCGS no longer certifies coins with green inserts. >>

clackamas

I got word back from PCGS.

Hello Brian

I'm sorry but we can not make an exception to the rule. We can not
honor your variance request for the pedigree.

Thank you

Jaye Woodward
Collectors Universe
Set Registry Coordinator

zkcoins

<< <i>I got word back from PCGS.

Hello Brian

I'm sorry but we can not make an exception to the rule. We can not
honor your variance request for the pedigree.

Thank you

Jaye Woodward
Collectors Universe
Set Registry Coordinator >>



Honestly that makes me wanna sell all my Modern Crap! And for the first time I actually feel like it is Modern Crap or at least is being treated as such!

I believe those rules must have changed in the recent past. 2-3 years ago I remember reading that and that is not what I read then!

zkcoins

I just sent out a complaint letter to PCGS. Honestly this makes me really upset and I wish they would reconsider that ridiculous rule. Believe me its not easy building a top mint set. It takes years to assemble them and they are only around 10-20 coin sets. Ask XXX about his 2004 set and how much work he had to do to build that #1 set. Brian has an amazing 1968 set. My 1980 set is really top notch as well and honestly would be really hard to top. And PCGS is basically saying who cares! Lovely!!!

LincolnsRule

Any set of coins can be impressive, and any set of coins can be difficult in the highest quality. And especially any registry set can be difficult. Pcgs is the one who makes it that way! It is clear to me that pcgs draws its lines between grades specifically to make the top grade coins difficult to find. This is so they will be worth a lot and submissions will roll in trying to get that top grade. Think about it, if all the top pops were pop 200/0 (for modern business strikes) then they wouldn't be rare and submissions would drop. (And also, it's clear to me at least that pcgs changes their standards on a whim to keep it this way).

With the exception of 2006 satin finish coins, every single mint set 1965-date has several dates that have a top pop of single digits, usually even some dates that have a pop of 1 or 2, and many dates with a pop of 25 or less. There is not a single easy mint set (I've been working on all of them for 5 years and still have yet to complete any!). There is no reason or excuse at all for pcgs to not include mint sets in the "coins may be pedigreed if warranted" category.

zkcoins

<< <i>Any set of coins can be impressive, and any set of coins can be difficult in the highest quality. And especially any registry set can be difficult. Pcgs is the one who makes it that way! It is clear to me that pcgs draws its lines between grades specifically to make the top grade coins difficult to find. This is so they will be worth a lot and submissions will roll in trying to get that top grade. Think about it, if all the top pops were pop 200/0 (for modern business strikes) then they wouldn't be rare and submissions would drop. (And also, it's clear to me at least that pcgs changes their standards on a whim to keep it this way).

With the exception of 2006 satin finish coins, every single mint set 1965-date has several dates that have a top pop of single digits, usually even some dates that have a pop of 1 or 2, and many dates with a pop of 25 or less. There is not a single easy mint set (I've been working on all of them for 5 years and still have yet to complete any!). There is no reason or excuse at all for pcgs to not include mint sets in the "coins may be pedigreed if warranted" category. >>



Well said!

Bochiman

Brian,

The things you noticed are what I noticed when I decided to sell you back the nickel you had sold me earlier (that put me firmly in the #2 spot). I had thought it would be cool to get it pedigreed and give to my son but when they made the change, I decided to drop down, say "screw it" and use the money from that nickel on something else for him.

Some people still go after the registry but that decision they made left a sour taste in my mouth so I voted with my actions and decided to step down a bit

cladking

This is a remarkable set. Some of the coins are unimprovable.

Incredibly I have a set in the original packaging which is nice enough to compare to it. One of the coins ('68-D quarter) might even be nicer. The Philly package is far and away the most extraordinary mint set I've ever seen. The Denver package came from another set and, while remarkable, only the D 25c is extraordinary. Incidentally the Denver package that originally came with the Philly was extremely nice too, but had a bad nickel or cent.

Your Philly quarter is one of the most PL of all clad quarters (judging by the photo). It's obvious this set won't be displaced anytime soon.

I'd be interested in pedigrees even now but it may be years before there's a grounswell of demand. Of course if we wait for the groundswell many of the pedigrees will be lost. I don't have a strong opinion but do favor the proposal.

XXX

Here is a [ 2004 Mint Set 100% PERFECT SET and the pedigree won't aplly to this either.

zkcoins

<< <i>Here is a [ 2004 Mint Set 100% PERFECT SET and the pedigree won't aplly to this either. >>



Yup I agree Walt. Jaime talked about your set and many others in this thread!

He brings up a good comment. If any set deserves it, your 2004 Mint set does. I mean the best anyone can do it tie that set so how can you go wrong with a pedigree there? I just think their thinking on this is completely backwards.

fcloud

My vote would be for you to get the pedigree. There is a way for it to happen, you just need to be creative.

If you can get the coins into another set, you can get them pedigreed. I just had my "Modern Type Set (1950-present)" pedigreed. It includes coins all the way to 2007. Here is a link to the shared page (hopefully the link works). 1950-present set.

I would guess at this point I am probably the only person to have a 2007 Presidential Dollar with a Pedigree and there could be a few other later date coins which I am the only one with that pedigree.

cupronik

I happen to think PCGS quietly instituted a "population control" practice to maintain the very low populations
of top-pop modern coins. I also believe that many of these coins are not nearly impossible to find in these
top grades; certainly not as difficult as PCGS implies via their continued "program."

Are the 95% copper Lincoln Memorial Cents really that tough in MS-66RD/+ , considering their enormous
mintages and readily availability in OBW form?

Does PCGS really think the coin submitters want to receive grades of MS-64RD & MS-65RD for these cents
after paying out $12-14./coin for each grading submission.

Does PCGS even care?

clackamas

<< <i>I happen to think PCGS quietly instituted a "population control" practice to maintain the very low populations
of top-pop modern coins. I also believe that many of these coins are not nearly impossible to find in these
top grades; certainly not as difficult as PCGS implies via their continued "program."

Are the 95% copper Lincoln Memorial Cents really that tough in MS-66RD/+ , considering their enormous
mintages and readily availability in OBW form?

Does PCGS really think the coin submitters want to receive grades of MS-64RD & MS-65RD for these cents
after paying out $12-14./coin for each grading submission.

Does PCGS even care? >>



You tell us, you have been one of the top submitters as have I. I will tell you an MS67RD 68-D or D is a ultra tough coin to find. Full step coins from the late 60's? Tough!

cladking

<< <i>I happen to think PCGS quietly instituted a "population control" practice to maintain the very low populations
of top-pop modern coins. I also believe that many of these coins are not nearly impossible to find in these
top grades; certainly not as difficult as PCGS implies via their continued "program."

Are the 95% copper Lincoln Memorial Cents really that tough in MS-66RD/+ , considering their enormous
mintages and readily availability in OBW form?

Does PCGS really think the coin submitters want to receive grades of MS-64RD & MS-65RD for these cents
after paying out $12-14./coin for each grading submission.

Does PCGS even care? >>




I can't argue with someone as knowledgeable as you but I know that
a lot of these Lincolns are super tough. You've probably looked at as
many or more than I but my experience has always been that solid
strikes are tough in rolls and clean coins are tough in mint sets. You
can look a thousand sets and see only a few nice coins of some of
these dates. My experience with rolls tends to be even worse.

I'd be more inclined to believe that some of the early submissions were
graded exuberantly than that there is a population control. It' so hard
to get a feel for the numbers of rolls and sets getting checked and com-
pare it with the pops that these are really more hunches than observa-
tions.

It seems like every time I get a chance to see a batch of mint sets that
I'm surprised by the low quality. Well made and well preserved coins of
many moderns are simply scarce. This can apply to even some grades
that are really pretty low. Just nice choice '82-P 25c's seem to be much
tougher to me than pops indicate. Try finding this coin with a decent
strike from decent dies that doesn't look like it was attacked by a file.
Those in holders seem to usually have significant problems and raw
coins are about as likely to be lightly circulated as not. Choice examples
just don't seem to be seen. I don't believe they are being hoarded but
rather snapped up by collectors as they appear.

How many thousands of mint sets get checked each month? It seems
as though only as few as a couple hundred of some dates come availa-
ble and all these aren't checked. It seems like it's not so much popula-
tion control as a dearth of top-notch coins appearing.

cupronik

Thanks for the compliment, Clackamas. I may have had my successes in the past (pre-2005) regarding modern circulation strike coinage, but have been spinning my wheels ever since. And I don't think my
grading skills have changed. PCGS graders might throw in a winner or two to pay for the grading fees but not always.

I have to think a whole different group of individuals have been grading moderns since early 2005. Perhaps,
they employ the same standards for circulation strike coinage as they do for mint-sealed boxes of MS ASE's
and modern proofs???

Clackamas, Lincolns Rule, Wondercoin, etc. have numerous similar experiences I'm sure.

cupronik

As an afterthought, if the truth be told, "How many PCGS-graded coins would PCGS just love to have back
so that they could reassess and reholder with today's grading standards in mind?"

dbldie55

Most pedigrees degrade coins in my mind. Unless it came from a notable historic collector (like Eliasberg), I would send it back to be re-holdered.

coinkat

I really do not know enough about the do's and don'ts of the Registry and Pedigree stuff to offer an opinion... just remember this is a hobby and take it all in stride.

FullStepJeffs

Clackamas,

I completely support you with this. It is truely sad PCGS has decided not to allow a set like this to be pedigreed.

Either all or none!

Steve

zkcoins

<< <i>Clackamas,

I completely support you with this. It is truely sad PCGS has decided not to allow a set like this to be pedigreed.

Either all or none!

Steve >>



Steve,

That is my main point here. If they allow some to have it, then they need to lets us all have it. If they don't want the modern crap to have it then NONE of us should be allowed to get it. There is no reason to play favorites with the sets.

tgilliams

Your set is by far the finest Mint Set on the Registry. PCGS has to be more flexable recognizes fine sets like yours. Keep up the fight, it's well worth it.
TG

quarterguy

Informative thread.

I recently found out you can pedigree your mint set if it is in the top 5.

I made my mind up to put together 4 different mint sets, one each for the birth year of my 4 children. The plan was to get each set at least in the top 2 position, have them pedigreed with their name, and pass them to each of them upon my death. Now I find out from this thread "no pedigree for mint sets after 1965". All of my children were born after 65.

Needless to say my plans have changed and PCGS is the loser, not only from me not playing the game but all the others as well.

Not even a completed set that can not be improved upon can be pedigreed? I think it is a bad decision on the part of PCGS.

JMO

MORGANHUNTER2

I brought this up in part to a thread that was on the CU board awhile back- by Boom with regards to the Omaha Bank Hoard.

The majority of those coins submitted were 'Pedi- greed" and for the majority of them it is a waste to have in a set - IMO- buying a said Pedigreed coin is one thing- if it is from a infamous collector but a hoard? no way.

I have multiples of hundreds of coins dated prior to 65 still wrapped up like they were back in 61,62, 56, 57 ,58 etc. - should I send them all in and ask for a MH2 Hoard pedigree? Just like the Omaha thing- they have been sitting for mega years..

I firmly feel that PCGS and NGC needs to re evaluate the Pedigree programs a bit and allow maybe the top 7 percent that qualify for it. in other words if your coin is a 67rd and the pop comes back as 12/2 higher- then it should qualify, but by the same token if your 67rd is a pop-1500/50- then it should not be designated with a Pedigree.

This is only my thought on the subject.

Another consideration might be where you place in the category of your set- a person who is tied for 5th but there are 17 people in 5th place should be able to have there set pedi'd if they wish- but there should be a cost factor for such. just another thought.

Connecticoin

IMO, an exception for the Clackamas set is warranted because:

1. The set rating is more than a full point better than other 1968 sets or other sets of the 1968-1972 era
2. The set rating is, by far, as a percent of finest set rating possible, better than other sets of the 1965 to 1972 era.

Good Luck!

Mark

At the very least, PCGS could roll forward the "pedigree year" by 1 every calendar year. For instance, PCGS might say "We will not pedigree mint and proof sets that are less than 40 years old." In that way, PCGS can make sure that it will not, at least in the near future, pedigree sets that are "too recent" and "too common" but it will pedigree older sets that are presumably not quite as common.

Dan50

The Melissa A Espejo set below yours must have been pedigreed before the rule change.
That makes it a double strange, IMHO, since your set has a GPA much much higher.

clackamas

<< <i>The Melissa A Espejo set below yours must have been pedigreed before the rule change.
That makes it a double strange, IMHO, since your set has a GPA much much higher. >>



that is a fairly new set. I don't know how they did it, except maybe photoshop????

cladking

Whether the services identify pedigree or not many
of the moderns will have known pedigrees and they
will often be important to future collectors. These
might not raise prices in most cases but pedigrees
will be of interest. This will especially apply to disco-
very coins and highest grade coins.