MPLs in New NGC holders?

Duane

We are all PCGS-philes here, but has anyone had a matte proof Lincoln housed in the new NGC holders in which the coin edges are viewable, and if so, what are your thoughts?

commoncents05

Bowers & Merena had quite a few in their recent auction.

-Paul

Duane

Did they show the rims off?

RBinTex

You can see them much better than you can in PCGS holders.

ambro51

PCGS, are you listening?

I'd be all over a new holder. I'd resubmit the whole lot of them, just for the heck of it and to get a new edge view holder.


PCGS, are you listening?

Do these forums allow OnLine Petition Drives??

Duane

Ambro-

Do you think most MPL collectors feel that way?

Having some series in those holders does not matter, right, so we are limiting to just matte proof Lincolns, Buffalos, and edge view series?

Comments from other colectors please?

What about the issue of eye appeal? Should PCGS have an equivalent to the NGC "star".

We can do better than that, no?

Duane

DIMEMAN

I DON'T like the new NCG.

I like PCGS holders just fine.

If it's not broke DON'T fix it!!!

Duane

I think the PCGS holder work just fine too ... for dimes. What about series in which you need to see the edges? Like matte proof coins, many gold coins, some of the newer series, heck, even some of the older series were you wnt to read the 'third edge"?

More importantly, haven't you ever seen a dime in an NGC holder with a "Star" designation for having high 'eye appeal' that you thought was an exceptional piece? (tell me know, and I won't beleive you : ) )

Could PCGS improve on this aspect of it's grading? How do you judge a beautiful dime as having high eye appeal? Do you have a private system?

ambro51

Matte Proof Lincolns have a very distinctive edge/rim.

It is the visible differences between this coin and a business strike.

I feel that PCGS should give the option of this holder with MPL cents. Some of the highest value LIncollns are within this series so why not give them some respect? its only a different shape of molded plastic after all, just a minor difference that would improve the appreciation of the coins differences.

lusterlover

I asked this same NGC "*" vs PCGS question last week and never got an answer. I've read posts where people imply that PCGS does not like toned coins and downgrades for it. Call me a rookie but I'm confused.

DIMEMAN

Duane

Don't take me wrong, but don't need a star or a CAC to tell me if a coin has eye appeal or not. And I do understand why you would like to see the edge of some coins for the reasons mentioned. I don't know what the answer is, but to me the new NGC looks dorky.

JMHO

Steve

FYI,
I would spend the reholdering fee to get my nine MPL's in a PCGS holder that showed off the edges.
Steve

renomedphys

I like the idea of a clear plastic edge-view holder. Don't they already do this for the presidential dollars?

In fact, aside from the structural problems, what was wrong with the rattlerdesigs. You could almost see the edges in those.

Duane

No, I do understand. Many people have complained that the actual design of the holder could be improved, as they do not like the 'dork' factor, as you mention. I'm with Ambro's 'give collectors an option' idea. Who's to say a better designed holder could not be invented and both look nice while showing the 'third rim' of the coin as well? They thought had not occurred to me until one of my matte proof Lincolns was slabbed in the new NGC holder - the fact that I could see the third rim made a big difference in not only authenticating the coin, but the actual 'charm' of the coin, too. The rim 'mirrored edges' are impressive. I would pay extra.

You mention that you don't need NGC or CAC to tell you is a coin has eye appeal, but I think we both would agree - eye appeal is a big part of coin value. Not to be a wiseguy, but you do make that statement, but at the same time buy PCGS coins (with labels that tell you what the grade is). So you do rely on the PCGS grading service, but just not for eye appeal? Ironically, some of the most eye appealing pieces are worked on by the most sophisticated coin doctors. They make a coin look better then it really is, and if not caught, that 'eye appeal' is incorporated into the grade, and thereby, price of the coin. So in a sense, you really do rely of services to protect you, and in a sense, give you an opinion about eye appeal (although it's not always looked at that way, or termed in that manner).

So I do respect and appreciate your position, but just respectfully point out that you may rely on the grading services in ways you never intuitively knew.

As to 'lustelover's comment, I never saw your comment. What was the actual comment or question? My point is not a NGC v. PCGS postion, but more of a question as to whether NGC holders are valuable for collectors (and which ones) and especially, what people think of the NGC star system of giving a star for a high eye-appeal coins.....

DIMEMAN

The rattlers were dorky....the new PCGS holders ARE the best holder they have ever had..........period!

Duane

I was not crazy about the rattlers either. I had a 1909-VDB in one, and could not see the edges.

When you say "the new PCGS holders" are you referencing the same holders that Matt is talking about for the presidential dollars?

DIMEMAN

1 - No, I'm not talking about the prez dollar holders, but the regular ones.

2 - I do not depend on PCGS to tell me the grade.....I buy slabbed coins or make coins in PCGS holders for the following reasons.

A - Protection and safety for the coin.

B - In case something happens to me and my heirs, who know nothing about coins, have to deal with the coins.

C - The coins are worth more, because some dealers will try to downgrade your coins.

D - So they will go in my registry set.....I want to be the first person to have a complete dime set in PCGS holders.

Duane

Thanks Dimeman.

Matt-what PCGS ppresidential holders are you writing about? Are they shown on a webpage anywhere?

Also, does anyone know of any method that any grading services uses (aside from the NGC star) to indicate high eye apeal?

illini420

If I could get all of my PCGS in the PCGS edge view holders I'd pay a reholder fee to do it, they are very nice, much better than NGCs attempt I think.

Here's one I recently sold to a forum member:

Duane

That IS a very attractive holder! I'll bet PCGS will hear the collector's requests on the issue, and respond. By and large, my experience has been that they are a very responsive group, and customer service is important. I think most feel that way.

I'm going to submit my entire matte proof buffalo collection for reholdering. Up until this note, I was strugling with how to handle. The 'third side' rims are so important to authentization, I feel it's almost required so one can see the entire coin. The rims on a matte Buffalo must be mirror-like and reflective.

The holder alone actually slows down the doctoring efforts to certify MS coins as proof (a widely-known trick).

Thanks for the effort!

Duane

Nelrak

Very good points by all. But for the sake of authentication, there is a need for an improved holder...not so much for all coins but atleast for the ones that there are differences that can only be attributed by such things as a three side holder rather than just taking the word of the TPG.

As far as the NGC * grading, personally I have seen some *'s that I wouldn't own except to flip it and try to get a premium from someone who the * is important. I agree beauty is in the eye of the beholder and there isn't really any need for a grading company to try to tell us something is "pretty" when some of us may think not!

WaterSport

David Lawrence has a NGC new edge holder 1909 Matte if you need to take a peek.



WSTextDLRC

Duane

I had one of my PR66 MPLs holdered by NGC - with the rimes showing, it looks great - the rims are mirrored, as we have been told, but the fact that they are tremendously colored just adds to the charm of the 3rd side. It is quie an invention, and I would bet that PCGS is working on a design-around. With little ingenuity and creativity, there is no reason it cannot be done, and in a cost effective way. The question is, truly, is whether the bulk of PCGS-ittes would find it useful. As is is an important pat of many coins, I think the answer is almost self explanatory.

Duane

robec

I do like the look of the Mattes in the rim view holders. I wouldn't hesitate to switch to that type holder if PCGS would come up with something similar.

Duane

Well, we had the answer under our noses all the time, but no-one thought to ask......

The holder depicted above in the photograpgh in this string is called the Tri-pod gasket, and one's coins can be housed in that holder for no extra charge. All one has to do upon submission is just check the box for that holder.

I am literally going to have my entire 8 coin proof Buffalo Nickel set cased in the Tri-pod holder, so other viewers can see the mirror edge on the proof nickels, which is a must for authentication. Tru-views are not a bad idea, as well.

Hope that is helpful for owners of MPL and MPB coins.

Duane

Steve

<< <i>

The holder depicted above in the photograpgh in this string is called the Tri-pod gasket, and one's coins can be housed in that holder for no extra charge. All one has to do upon submission is just check the box for that holder.


Duane >>



Duane,
I pulled out one of my paper submission forms which were issued with a revision date of 03/08 and supposidly valid thru 12/31/08. I then went to the online submission forms and printed one of them. There is a lot of verbage on the forms, a lot of instructions, etc. BUT I was not able to detect any box to check that said anything about the "Tri-pod gasket". There is a box for "reholder", also a box for "other" (whatever that means).
Can you tell me EXACTLY where I should "check the box" on the PCGS submission form AND exactly what amount PCGS is charging for each MPL resubmitted for reholdering using the Tri-pod gasket. The charge for regular reholdering is shown as $10.
I personnally would be concerned sending my nine MPL's into PCGS without knowing for certain that when they were received by customer service, that customer service knew exactly what I wanted done and had instructions from management how to do it. Maybe what I need to do is wait until others here have "done it sussessfully" and can confirm to us that it works as we expect.
Steve

Duane

Steve-

I would be concerned as well, and obviously would not just send in my entire collection without doing any research. I'm doing that now.

As we all are interested in these holders for our coins MPL and MPB issues, we should be working as a group to find out what the actual PCGS holder policy is. For my part, I have forwarded this string to David Hall - if anyone would know, it is him.

Maybe customer service is just developing the issue, as they now see the demand. Who knows?

Hopefully, David Hall, or one of his associates, will have some communications regarding the issue. Let's see how/if they respond.

Sincerely,

Duane

ambro51

I wrote an actual pen and ink letter to Mr. Hall. I posed this very question, regarding edge view holders for MPLs.

No Response.

I once wrote a letter to Ronald Reagan, and got a handwritten note. Two short sentences penned on a White House Card.


"who" thinks "who" is more important.................................................................................................................................

illini420

That's awesome ambro!! If this PCGS clear tri-view/edge-view gasket is available upon request for a decent reholder fee, I would send ALL of my PCGS coins in for reholdering. Always bothered me not being able to see part of the rim and or any part of the edge...

For example, I bought this coin in a PCGS holder, then cracked it. The nicks on the edge at 3 o'clock were hidden by the gasket when the coin was slabbed, who knows what else is hidden on our coins???

Gobrechts99Grapevine

<< <i>The holder depicted above in the photograpgh in this string is called the Tri-pod gasket, and one's coins can be housed in that holder for no extra charge. All one has to do upon submission is just check the box for that holder. >>



Sorry guys, but for now PCGS only has two sizes of Tri-pod gaskets - one size for Presidential dollars and another size for large cents. They may have other sizes in the future, but probably not any time real soon (like in the next few months).

Unfortunately, that definitely IS the way it presently is ... I would have wanted them for my mattes, too.

Duane

That is a BUMMER!!!!!

scottgardener

A lot of the "dorky" complaints about the NGC holder probably has to do with the aesthetics of the white field, empty space, and then the coin. Since PCGS holders are clear plastic, the tripod should not look too different from the familiar holders. I will admit that I prefer the clear PCGS holder over the white NGC one, and all other factors being equal on two otherwise identical coins (both in official grade and actual appearance), I will tend to go with the PCGS-graded one. (I tend to avoid the other services for reasons unrelated to the appearance of the holders.)

golfer72

The new NGC holder stinks.

Duane

Golfer72-

I've been curious - why? I have a MPL in one and the rims are very cool. What do you not like?

Duane

renomedphys

<< <i>The new NGC holder stinks. >>



Maybe he means, hard to recolor or tone in holder, since the plastic gives off noxious fumes...

Duane

He Jumpin' Jack Flash, he's a gas gas gas.....

lasvegasteddy

personal preference merely i add

i think those edge views may be for some...just not me

i like um how they are

my only wish would lay in bringing back "matte proof" being on the label...it just added something seeing that on the label

Duane

Agreed, Ted. Very personal preference. But when I look at the MPL I have holdered and can see the rim, or third edge as they say, and can see the mirrored edge, which is actually toned in and of itself, it adds a very unique element to the collecting experience of MPLs for me. Matte Buffalos too. the edge is part of the authentication and beauty of the coin, in my just personal thinking. The funny thing about "matte" proofs too, I've learned, is that they are not all matte. So much variation within the series years, it is amazing to me. I'd like to see 'matte' on the holder or 'satin' or 'roman'. Whatever best describes my coin. These coins are so individual in the way they were created and the way nature worked on them, each one has its own very exact look. It's really more like art than anything else I can describe. If you think about a gold roman proof, were the mintage is 58 or there about, and the coin itself has been worke on after the minting process, by sandblasting or whatever, what is the difference between that coin and an actual sculpture, where an artist may have 100 cast from the original? neat to think about, huh?

By the way, I know you like SMSs. Are you interested in any year outside of 1964? I have found a beautiful 1965 Lincoln.