PCGS vs NGC Registries and one coin wonders

CarlWohlforth

The more I think about it the stronger I feel. I hope PCGS doesn't weigh one coin wonders as heavily as NGC.

Pop1 is right to suggest a Gallery. That is were we can ogle these wonder coins.

To me the registries should be for coin collections. We should compare collections, not individual coins. It just doesn't make sense to me to compare unfinished sets with finished sets beyond saying one is less complete than another.

Aren't unique coins super and important? Yes. Shouldn't they help make a collection better than the others? Yes. In fact you can't beat a pop 1 coin for that date/mint mark.

Can you compare one coin to a collection? That is the real question. Some say "of course, that coin costs more then this other entire collection." Others say "no way, that one coin collection isn't even close to being finished."

NGC choose to value one coin sets. I hope PCGS continues to value complete sets. This way you can list your awesome pop 1 over at NGC or you can list your top collection here. That way we have NGC and PCGS competing for who has the best Registry system.

Keyrock

I agree.

It is the journey which makes it enjoyable. I have minimal respect for a one coin collection, and alot of admiration for the collector who completes a set regardless of the grade.

I would have to eat my words if they made a type set out of the "power coins"

Rich

pop1

As I am sure you know, Carl, no one, I think, has only a "one-coin" collection to be registered. The posting of one outstanding coin has been an ongoing test by a few collectors, to try to gain a better handle on the ngc weighting system. That's all.
From what I see, these few collectors have all the "other" coins to support their rank and position.
We do see that a registry set can be dominated by one coin, but nobody, to my knowledge, has this in mind. Have fun. This is only a test.

CarlWohlforth

Thanks for reminding me Pop1. All the extreme examples we come up with are hypothetical. In fact I will register my single best proof Jeff over on the NGC Registry as another test Of course it is only a pop 3 so shouldn't dominate the way pop 1 coins do. It will be fun to see.

None the less my opinion is that NGC weighs these coins way too heavily. Why is a pop 2 coin worth %6 of a pop 1 coin? To me they should be weighed almost the same. It is quite possible I don't know enough about those proof Franklins and am missing something.

pop1

I think the questions and concerns about one coin sets are most valid. Let's learn more. NGC knows how their system works. We don't. Tests, of this kind are a way for us to get a better idea how it works.
Not to mention, it's fun to see what your coin will "do" and, it sure generates a lot of discussion, which is good.
Also, you can coordinate these tests with others from this forum who collect coins within your series, as some have been doing. This should further our understanding.
A group effort can shed more light on the system, than, perhaps they would be willing to divulge.
Maybe we can make some sense of it.
Have Fun.

cointime

Carl,
I am sure most feel the same as you. I wonder that if my wife added her partial set of 1965-Present dimes to NGC, how it would rank. The 1982 No P is the key to the series and very pricey in MS67. Of the current Sets only 3 (now 4 as of today) have the coin (there are 2 hidden sets, but I'm sure they do not have it). I wonder if this coin, may have enough rarity steam to hold back most sets registered at NGC. I think this is similar to the example as previously stated, yet I too feel this type of weighting would be way out of wack.

I feel PCGS has all our best interests in mind. I am curious what type of weight this coin will get. Have a great night

cointime

Ok. It got the best of me. I set my wife up in dimes 1965-date on NGC so I could see how long it takes to update and I only added the 1982 No P against only one other member (also on PCGS) to see how his 8 coins stack up against just 1 key coin. This is just a test, so... I do have to say joining was easy, putting up a set and adding this coin was so so. Navigation leaves a lot to be desired, but it was my fist time. I took a quick look at their message board... The drab green,maroon, and off white must go, but I saw no way to customize it. Maybe it just me, but I'll gladly stay here if PCGS will still have me. Ha Ha. After adding a coin it said "Your e-mail has been sent". I'm not sure to whom, but I'll see what and how their system works.

Carl, I must say that I am not one to venture out into unknown territory normally, but your thread got me thinking, and I could not resist. Thanks.

Kenny

Spooly

Carl I agree! The one coin Frankin set is a joke! One coin = a Sets! Please!

braddick

When this forum first opened up my first question was "should there be a minimum amount of coins registered before that set is a RegistrySet?"

I thought 30% was a nice, round number. The majority of the collectors responding then to that thread voted there should be NO MINIMUM.
Are we now changing our minds?

PQpeace

I have just added my Peace dollars to the NGC registry. # 1 with all PCGS coins
I see no score? weighting ?

I am also adding my Morgans.

Maybe I am missing something here ?
Maybe I have to wait til someone is close to my set to see what weighting does ?
Thanks for the help.
Larry

Macqui

Hello everyone-
This is my first post. I have been reading these boards for several months now and have learned alot from all of you. I have a set in the PCGS Morgan registry(GC's,now #40) and I have entered it in the NGC set(#2). When my NGC set was about 45% of CEO's I added an 1896 MS66 DMPL, NGC accidently entered it as a 1896 S MS66 DMPL and my set jumped to #1. When it was corrected I fell back to #2 again. I don't know if that helps any in trying to figure out their weighting system, but it sure surprised me.
Thanks again for all of the great discussions of the last few months.
PS: pqpeace it will be tough to stay in #2 if you enter your set in NGC

braddick

Macqui, Welcome! Your Dollar set sounds terrific! -That was honest of you to correct NGC's error! It would have been tempting to leave well enough alone, at least for a few days to make "#1" set owner sweat it just a little!