You won't find a Mercedes or Lexus dealer selling used cars with ANY type of problems. Their used cars will be one or two years old, and except for the odometer reading, will be just as nice as their new cars. That's called protecting the brand.
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
<< <i>At least problem coins are real. Perhaps it wouldn't be a bad idea for PCGS to buy the rights to the PCI holder and use that holder for problem coins.
The age of raw coins is over. Asian fakes are poised to overwhelm the market.
"While America slept..." >>
Of course, we know that fake slabs can be made also. Guess the age of slabs is also finished. I guess we can rest assured that they cannot make fake stickers.
(Actually, I must strenuously disagree that the age of raw coins is anywhere near over. I do think you are overestimating the abilities of any counterfeiters to make the perfect fake. Or to even bother trying to make one; fakes just need to pass once to be profitable, after all.)
There is one advantage to giving a details grade and reason for the problem ... it can create interest in registry collecting for problems. Imagine the best holed coin registry set or the best ATed coin registry set?
<< <i>A rigid, no exceptions approach, leaving coins with a minor problem (e.g. a few wispy hairlines underneath vintage toning on a coin in any grade) in a BB would be folly. At the other extreme, netting for whizzing, tooling, plugging would be folly as well. Minor scratches, dings and even light cleaning are reasonably factored in to the point grade by PCGS.
I agree completely. However, there's no harm in encapsulating an authentic problem coin as "genuine". A collector should have the option to display his entire set in a uniform holders, even if only some of the coins deserve a PCGS grade. Again, I am not advocating "net grades" or "details only" grades. I am advocating slabbing the problem coins without any mention of the grade or problem(s). The holders would only state "Genuine". >>
Would putting a genuine coin in a holder reduce the tendency for the owner to send it back in for "another look"?
I think marking coins with a "Genuine" designation is the right way to go. Keeps PCGS from offering a grade opinion yet allows folks like me to get problem coins into aesthetically pleasing holder.
For the umpteenth time, forget asking how it will hurt. Prove a negative, huh? Instead, what's the upside for PCGS? What good does it do PCGS? That's how successful businesses look at things.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
The way I see it there are many thousands of "problem coins" that don't really have that much of a problem. They are great coins and deserve to be in many collections.
PCGS will benefit by getting some fantastic coins in their holders otherwise not possible.
Who is to say what will be acceptable in 5, 10, 20 or more years. With the ever growing population of numismatist and the fact that I keep hearing there is a dwindling supply of new raw coins coming to market each year. Perhaps PCGS is ahead of the curve. If they slab so called problem coins then at least is will allow us on the lower budgets to complete a set with a few "problem coins." I see a number of pictures posted here of coins in albums and raw not slabbed.
How many collections in albums have so called problem coins in them to fill holes until an upgrade comes along? Is it better to have an uncleaned G4 or a cleaned XF in a collection when your goal is to have a complete set in XF?
I say its in the best interest of all collectors to have the choice on what coins and grades they want to buy and enjoy, and in what holder. I would think most of us can read labels. After all it's my money I am spending, If I want a cleaned coin in a PCGS holder then I would like that option.
It will also give us the option to buy a problem coin or not. I like having the freedom of choice in my life.
<< <i>I fail to see how a "Genuine" label could possibly be harmful to the PCGS brand. >>
Because the PCGS brand means more than just "Genuine". >>
That's why PCGS slabs common date coins in PO-01 grade.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>I fail to see how a "Genuine" label could possibly be harmful to the PCGS brand. >>
Because the PCGS brand means more than just "Genuine". >>
That's why PCGS slabs common date coins in PO-01 grade. >>
Its a part of the grading scale and the coin is NOT a problem coin. If you send PCGS a coin and they can't find a legit reason to BB they pretty much have to grade it and slab it.
For people who are always steadfast in their opinions about anything its probably not a good idea for them to have PCGS slab problem coins. From a financial point of view it makes perfect sense and as others have mentioned they do have certain fiduciary responsibilities. It doesn't have to be a black and white issue that some always want things in life to be. They could create another company similar to NCS. There are multitudes of collectors who collect problem coins and it would be advantageous to them and the hobby to have them certified as genuine. The Jules Reiver collection is an example. I don't see the major downside some fear by listening to your customers when something not only makes sense but adds to the bottom line.
I'd rather see this approach then see obviously damaged coins graded because they are classics.
<< <i>I fail to see how a "Genuine" label could possibly be harmful to the PCGS brand. >>
Because the PCGS brand means more than just "Genuine". >>
That's why PCGS slabs common date coins in PO-01 grade. >>
Its a part of the grading scale and the coin is NOT a problem coin. If you send PCGS a coin and they can't find a legit reason to BB they pretty much have to grade it and slab it. >>
So a problem free common date coin in low grade is more worthy of being in a PCGS slab than a chain cent with porosity or a 1796 half dollar that's been cleaned? I totally disagree.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>I fail to see how a "Genuine" label could possibly be harmful to the PCGS brand. >>
Because the PCGS brand means more than just "Genuine". >>
That's why PCGS slabs common date coins in PO-01 grade. >>
Its a part of the grading scale and the coin is NOT a problem coin. If you send PCGS a coin and they can't find a legit reason to BB they pretty much have to grade it and slab it. >>
So a problem free common date coin in low grade is more worthy of being in a PCGS slab than a chain cent with porosity or a 1796 half dollar that's been cleaned? I totally disagree. >>
Well being of low grade/well worn is NOT one of their reasons for bodybagging coins. Thing is if you openly net grade "problem" rare coins then you have to do the same for the common stuff. Who needs a 1881-s Morgan au details net grade vf25?
<< <i>I fail to see how a "Genuine" label could possibly be harmful to the PCGS brand. >>
Because the PCGS brand means more than just "Genuine". >>
That's why PCGS slabs common date coins in PO-01 grade. >>
Its a part of the grading scale and the coin is NOT a problem coin. If you send PCGS a coin and they can't find a legit reason to BB they pretty much have to grade it and slab it. >>
So a problem free common date coin in low grade is more worthy of being in a PCGS slab than a chain cent with porosity or a 1796 half dollar that's been cleaned? I totally disagree. >>
<< <i>I fail to see how a "Genuine" label could possibly be harmful to the PCGS brand. >>
Because the PCGS brand means more than just "Genuine". >>
That's why PCGS slabs common date coins in PO-01 grade. >>
Its a part of the grading scale and the coin is NOT a problem coin. If you send PCGS a coin and they can't find a legit reason to BB they pretty much have to grade it and slab it. >>
So a problem free common date coin in low grade is more worthy of being in a PCGS slab than a chain cent with porosity or a 1796 half dollar that's been cleaned? I totally disagree. >>
I agree with you Perry, 100% >>
I never said one was more important that the other. PCGS my silently do it, but apparently they prefer not to do it openly either, esp since ANACS does.
<< <i>For the umpteenth time, forget asking how it will hurt. Prove a negative, huh? Instead, what's the upside for PCGS? What good does it do PCGS? That's how successful businesses look at things. >>
And it's all about the volume, baby. The brand will surely survive.
<< <i>So a problem free common date coin in low grade is more worthy of being in a PCGS slab than a chain cent with porosity or a 1796 half dollar that's been cleaned? I totally disagree. >>
PCGS won't slab a chain cent with porosity or a cleaned 1796 half today? They do more for those coins than the genuine-only proposals here. They get net grades.
Are you saying all problem coins should be net graded? Or that problem chain cents and 18th century halves should be genuine-only?
<< <i>For the umpteenth time, forget asking how it will hurt. Prove a negative, huh? Instead, what's the upside for PCGS? What good does it do PCGS? That's how successful businesses look at things. >>
And it's all about the volume, baby. The brand will surely survive. >>
A successful business doesn't strive to survive. It strives to thrive.
Besides, the more submissions aspect was demoted to a non sequitur in this thread already. The point is, how does it benefit PCGS? What is the upside? If all you have is more submissions, that's pretty weak gruel. The brand enjoys a place of prominance that is hard to achieve and extremely valuable, yet easy to lose with dumb decisions like this.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>So a problem free common date coin in low grade is more worthy of being in a PCGS slab than a chain cent with porosity or a 1796 half dollar that's been cleaned? I totally disagree. >>
PCGS won't slab a chain cent with porosity or a cleaned 1796 half today? They do more for those coins than the genuine-only proposals here. They get net grades.
Are you saying all problem coins should be net graded? Or that problem chain cents and 18th century halves should be genuine-only? >>
I see no problem putting problem coins in a "GENUINE" only slab. Also, I have no problem with PCGS net grading a problem coin and noting the problem on the label like ANACS does now. I do have a problem with PCGS keeping the slabbing fee and giving you a body bag.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>I fail to see how a "Genuine" label could possibly be harmful to the PCGS brand. >>
Because the PCGS brand means more than just "Genuine". >>
That's why PCGS slabs common date coins in PO-01 grade. >>
I've never seen anyone object to that before, and it's seems trite to me. Just admit I blew away your argument and don't bother replying any more. >>
I don't object to low grade coins being slabbed by PCGS. I don't object to the coins that I see in PCGS slabs that are worth only a little more than their face value being slabbed. I do object to rare and valuable coins that may have a problem getting body bagged because PCGS refuses to slab them.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
If all one cares about is genuine then what is wrong with an ANACS opinion? Its pretty black and white; its either genuine or it isn't. BTW if ANACS was smart they would make their holders the same size and thickness as PCGS so that the ANACS coins would fit neatly into those blue boxes.
<< <i>The point is, how does it benefit PCGS? What is the upside? >>
It increases PCGS revenue and its expands its customer base (it will also take some customers from ANACS and NGC) it fills a need for collectors, it keeps collectors of PCGS coins from going to its competitors in the 1st place. (why chance losing a customer to your competition)
<< <i>So a problem free common date coin in low grade is more worthy of being in a PCGS slab than a chain cent with porosity or a 1796 half dollar that's been cleaned? I totally disagree. >>
PCGS won't slab a chain cent with porosity or a cleaned 1796 half today? They do more for those coins than the genuine-only proposals here. They get net grades.
Are you saying all problem coins should be net graded? Or that problem chain cents and 18th century halves should be genuine-only? >>
I see no problem putting problem coins in a "GENUINE" only slab. Also, I have no problem with PCGS net grading a problem coin and noting the problem on the label like ANACS does now. I do have a problem with PCGS keeping the slabbing fee and giving you a body bag. >>
<< <i>If all one cares about is genuine then what is wrong with an ANACS opinion? Its pretty black and white; its either genuine or it isn't. BTW if ANACS was smart they would make their holders the same size and thickness as PCGS so that the ANACS coins would fit neatly into those blue boxes. >>
This is close but they do not stack well with PCGS slabs and it is impossible to share these "probelm coins" in the PCGS registry. If they at least have a serial number from PCGS even with no grade or a net grade we should be able to put them in the registry.
<< <i>If all one cares about is genuine then what is wrong with an ANACS opinion? Its pretty black and white; its either genuine or it isn't. BTW if ANACS was smart they would make their holders the same size and thickness as PCGS so that the ANACS coins would fit neatly into those blue boxes. >>
Unless all your slabbed coins happen to be PCGS...then the coin sits around loose in a box, is taken out every once in a while while I'm left wondering whether it's worth it to resubmit it or not, only to remind me again and again that I have to be more careful with my purchases!
<<I do have a problem with PCGS keeping the slabbing fee and giving you a body bag. >>
Well its not like they are pullin a fast one on you; most submitters know the rules goin in that if a coin bags per the grading company's rules/policy the coin is returned ungraded and unholdered and the fee is kept. There are probably coins that they would like to give a booby prize/genuine designation to, but if they do it to some then they need be consistent and do it to all.
Comments
<< <i>At least problem coins are real. Perhaps it wouldn't be a bad idea for PCGS to buy the rights to the PCI holder and use that holder for problem coins.
The age of raw coins is over. Asian fakes are poised to overwhelm the market.
"While America slept..." >>
Of course, we know that fake slabs can be made also. Guess the age of slabs is also finished. I guess we can rest assured that they cannot make fake stickers.
(Actually, I must strenuously disagree that the age of raw coins is anywhere near over. I do think you are overestimating the abilities of any counterfeiters to make the perfect fake. Or to even bother trying to make one; fakes just need to pass once to be profitable, after all.)
Ed. S.
(EJS)
I say no to listing details on the holder.
I like the idea of listing it as Genuine.
It wouldn't include anything tooled, nosed or whizzed.
It would include cleaned or artificially toned.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>no it is not time and it will only be time if PCGS introduces a different brand name for such coins... >>
<< <i>A rigid, no exceptions approach, leaving coins with a minor problem (e.g. a few wispy hairlines underneath vintage toning on a coin in any grade) in a BB would be folly. At the other extreme, netting for whizzing, tooling, plugging would be folly as well. Minor scratches, dings and even light cleaning are reasonably factored in to the point grade by PCGS.
I agree completely. However, there's no harm in encapsulating an authentic problem coin as "genuine". A collector should have the option to display his entire set in a uniform holders, even if only some of the coins deserve a PCGS grade. Again, I am not advocating "net grades" or "details only" grades. I am advocating slabbing the problem coins without any mention of the grade or problem(s). The holders would only state "Genuine". >>
Would putting a genuine coin in a holder reduce the tendency for the owner to send it back in for "another look"?
keoj
<< <i>Would putting a genuine coin in a holder reduce the tendency for the owner to send it back in for "another look"?
Not if the submitter had to decide in advance whether to get authentication only or authentication with a grade.
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>I fail to see how a "Genuine" label could possibly be harmful to the PCGS brand. >>
Because the PCGS brand means more than just "Genuine".
Free Trial
PCGS will benefit by getting some fantastic coins in their holders otherwise not possible.
How many collections in albums have so called problem coins in them to fill holes until an upgrade comes along? Is it better to have an uncleaned G4 or a cleaned XF in a collection when your goal is to have a complete set in XF?
I say its in the best interest of all collectors to have the choice on what coins and grades they want to buy and enjoy, and in what holder. I would think most of us can read labels. After all it's my money I am spending, If I want a cleaned coin in a PCGS holder then I would like that option.
It will also give us the option to buy a problem coin or not. I like having the freedom of choice in my life.
"If I say something in the woods, and my wife isn't around to hear it. Am I still wrong?"
<< <i>
<< <i>I fail to see how a "Genuine" label could possibly be harmful to the PCGS brand. >>
Because the PCGS brand means more than just "Genuine". >>
That's why PCGS slabs common date coins in PO-01 grade.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I fail to see how a "Genuine" label could possibly be harmful to the PCGS brand. >>
Because the PCGS brand means more than just "Genuine". >>
That's why PCGS slabs common date coins in PO-01 grade.
Its a part of the grading scale and the coin is NOT a problem coin. If you send PCGS a coin and they can't find a legit reason to BB they pretty much have to grade it and slab it.
I'd rather see this approach then see obviously damaged coins graded because they are classics.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I fail to see how a "Genuine" label could possibly be harmful to the PCGS brand. >>
Because the PCGS brand means more than just "Genuine". >>
That's why PCGS slabs common date coins in PO-01 grade.
Its a part of the grading scale and the coin is NOT a problem coin. If you send PCGS a coin and they can't find a legit reason to BB they pretty much have to grade it and slab it. >>
So a problem free common date coin in low grade is more worthy of being in a PCGS slab than a chain cent with porosity or a 1796 half dollar that's been cleaned? I totally disagree.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I fail to see how a "Genuine" label could possibly be harmful to the PCGS brand. >>
Because the PCGS brand means more than just "Genuine". >>
That's why PCGS slabs common date coins in PO-01 grade.
Its a part of the grading scale and the coin is NOT a problem coin. If you send PCGS a coin and they can't find a legit reason to BB they pretty much have to grade it and slab it. >>
So a problem free common date coin in low grade is more worthy of being in a PCGS slab than a chain cent with porosity or a 1796 half dollar that's been cleaned? I totally disagree. >>
Well being of low grade/well worn is NOT one of their reasons for bodybagging coins. Thing is if you openly net grade "problem" rare coins then you have to do the same for the common stuff. Who needs a 1881-s Morgan au details net grade vf25?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I fail to see how a "Genuine" label could possibly be harmful to the PCGS brand. >>
Because the PCGS brand means more than just "Genuine". >>
That's why PCGS slabs common date coins in PO-01 grade.
I've never seen anyone object to that before, and it's seems trite to me. Just admit I blew away your
argument and don't bother replying any more.
Free Trial
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I fail to see how a "Genuine" label could possibly be harmful to the PCGS brand. >>
Because the PCGS brand means more than just "Genuine". >>
That's why PCGS slabs common date coins in PO-01 grade.
Its a part of the grading scale and the coin is NOT a problem coin. If you send PCGS a coin and they can't find a legit reason to BB they pretty much have to grade it and slab it. >>
So a problem free common date coin in low grade is more worthy of being in a PCGS slab than a chain cent with porosity or a 1796 half dollar that's been cleaned? I totally disagree. >>
I agree with you Perry, 100%
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I fail to see how a "Genuine" label could possibly be harmful to the PCGS brand. >>
Because the PCGS brand means more than just "Genuine". >>
That's why PCGS slabs common date coins in PO-01 grade.
Its a part of the grading scale and the coin is NOT a problem coin. If you send PCGS a coin and they can't find a legit reason to BB they pretty much have to grade it and slab it. >>
So a problem free common date coin in low grade is more worthy of being in a PCGS slab than a chain cent with porosity or a 1796 half dollar that's been cleaned? I totally disagree. >>
I agree with you Perry, 100% >>
I never said one was more important that the other. PCGS my silently do it, but apparently they prefer not to do it openly either, esp since ANACS does.
<< <i>For the umpteenth time, forget asking how it will hurt. Prove a negative, huh? Instead, what's the upside for PCGS? What good does it do PCGS? That's how successful businesses look at things. >>
And it's all about the volume, baby. The brand will surely survive.
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
<< <i>So a problem free common date coin in low grade is more worthy of being in a PCGS slab than a chain cent with porosity or a 1796 half dollar that's been cleaned? I totally disagree. >>
PCGS won't slab a chain cent with porosity or a cleaned 1796 half today? They do more for those coins than the genuine-only proposals here. They get net grades.
Are you saying all problem coins should be net graded? Or that problem chain cents and 18th century halves should be genuine-only?
<< <i>
<< <i>For the umpteenth time, forget asking how it will hurt. Prove a negative, huh? Instead, what's the upside for PCGS? What good does it do PCGS? That's how successful businesses look at things. >>
And it's all about the volume, baby. The brand will surely survive. >>
A successful business doesn't strive to survive. It strives to thrive.
Besides, the more submissions aspect was demoted to a non sequitur in this thread already. The point is, how does it benefit PCGS? What is the upside? If all you have is more submissions, that's pretty weak gruel. The brand enjoys a place of prominance that is hard to achieve and extremely valuable, yet easy to lose with dumb decisions like this.
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>
<< <i>So a problem free common date coin in low grade is more worthy of being in a PCGS slab than a chain cent with porosity or a 1796 half dollar that's been cleaned? I totally disagree. >>
PCGS won't slab a chain cent with porosity or a cleaned 1796 half today? They do more for those coins than the genuine-only proposals here. They get net grades.
Are you saying all problem coins should be net graded? Or that problem chain cents and 18th century halves should be genuine-only? >>
I see no problem putting problem coins in a "GENUINE" only slab. Also, I have no problem with PCGS net grading a problem coin and noting the problem on the label like ANACS does now. I do have a problem with PCGS keeping the slabbing fee and giving you a body bag.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I fail to see how a "Genuine" label could possibly be harmful to the PCGS brand. >>
Because the PCGS brand means more than just "Genuine". >>
That's why PCGS slabs common date coins in PO-01 grade.
I've never seen anyone object to that before, and it's seems trite to me. Just admit I blew away your
argument and don't bother replying any more. >>
I don't object to low grade coins being slabbed by PCGS. I don't object to the coins that I see in PCGS slabs that are worth only a little more than their face value being slabbed. I do object to rare and valuable coins that may have a problem getting body bagged because PCGS refuses to slab them.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>The point is, how does it benefit PCGS? What is the upside? >>
It increases PCGS revenue and its expands its customer base (it will also take some customers from ANACS and NGC) it fills a need for collectors, it keeps collectors of PCGS coins from going to its competitors in the 1st place. (why chance losing a customer to your competition)
"If I say something in the woods, and my wife isn't around to hear it. Am I still wrong?"
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>So a problem free common date coin in low grade is more worthy of being in a PCGS slab than a chain cent with porosity or a 1796 half dollar that's been cleaned? I totally disagree. >>
PCGS won't slab a chain cent with porosity or a cleaned 1796 half today? They do more for those coins than the genuine-only proposals here. They get net grades.
Are you saying all problem coins should be net graded? Or that problem chain cents and 18th century halves should be genuine-only? >>
I see no problem putting problem coins in a "GENUINE" only slab. Also, I have no problem with PCGS net grading a problem coin and noting the problem on the label like ANACS does now. I do have a problem with PCGS keeping the slabbing fee and giving you a body bag. >>
Very well said.
<< <i>If all one cares about is genuine then what is wrong with an ANACS opinion? Its pretty black and white; its either genuine or it isn't. BTW if ANACS was smart they would make their holders the same size and thickness as PCGS so that the ANACS coins would fit neatly into those blue boxes. >>
This is close but they do not stack well with PCGS slabs and it is impossible to share these "probelm coins" in the PCGS registry. If they at least have a serial number from PCGS even with no grade or a net grade we should be able to put them in the registry.
<< <i>If all one cares about is genuine then what is wrong with an ANACS opinion? Its pretty black and white; its either genuine or it isn't. BTW if ANACS was smart they would make their holders the same size and thickness as PCGS so that the ANACS coins would fit neatly into those blue boxes. >>
Unless all your slabbed coins happen to be PCGS...then the coin sits around loose in a box, is taken out every once in a while while I'm left wondering whether it's worth it to resubmit it or not, only to remind me again and again that I have to be more careful with my purchases!
Well its not like they are pullin a fast one on you; most submitters know the rules goin in that if a coin bags per the grading company's rules/policy the coin is returned ungraded and unholdered and the fee is kept. There are probably coins that they would like to give a booby prize/genuine designation to, but if they do it to some then they need be consistent and do it to all.