Once again World coin collectors are left out by PCGS

ajaan · July 8, 2009 10:43AM

The PCGS quarterly special:

"PCGS will accept any U.S. coin minted from 1909 to 2009 with a maximum value of $1,000"

C'mon PCGS, please have a quarterly special for darksiders.

coinkat · July 8, 2009 10:54AM

I wonder if that includes the Philippines for the period 1909 to 1945

lordmarcovan · July 8, 2009 11:05AM

Hey, good point. That's one way to weasel in some Darkside stuff!

But it says "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" right there on the coins, so they probably couldn't refuse 'em.

coinpictures · July 8, 2009 11:30AM

World coin collectors... the redheaded stepchildren of the numismatic world.

Scavenger · July 8, 2009 11:44AM

The U.S. / Philippines coins are classified as United States coinage.

WWW · July 9, 2009 1:48AM

I don't understand why PCGS continues to forsake us. This quarterly special is especially frustrating
since PCGS could have easily allowed world coins to be submitted under the same parameters.

"PCGS will accept any U.S. or world coin minted from 1909 to 2009 with a maximum value of $1,000"

I'm with Don on this one: Come on PCGS. Give us a break already.

Walmann · July 9, 2009 2:34AM

It's surely a matter of the volume size of US versue world coins that PCGS does.

Of course if they were looking to reduce the number of quarterly special submissions they may want to offer a world coin only special.

coinpictures · July 9, 2009 3:23AM

<< It's surely a matter of the volume size of US versue world coins that PCGS does.

Of course if they were looking to reduce the number of quarterly special submissions they may want to offer a world coin only special. >>

No one is suggesting that PCGS do a quarterly special that excludes U.S. coins. Just don't exclude world coins, as appears to be the case 90% of the time.

Let's face it, world coins are an after-thought with PCGS, in their policies, their designations, and their treatment of the collectors. I guess they've made the conscious decision to just give that market share to NGC.

ajaan · July 9, 2009 3:30AM

<< I guess they've made the conscious decision to just give that market share to NGC. >>

Which is really a shame, especially with the new controversial NGC holders.

Doogy · July 9, 2009 3:42AM

<< 

<< I guess they've made the conscious decision to just give that market share to NGC. >>

Which is really a shame, especially with the new controversial NGC holders. >>

that market share has been NGC's for a long time. That is the reason you don't see too many 5 figure world coins in PCGS holders, and over 90% of the six figure coins are NGC; and a lot of the higher dollar PCGS coins are crossed to NGC anyway (much of the Terner collection, etc.) I think PCGS has made a conscious decision to focus on US coins, and take the world coins as they come.

Lynch · July 9, 2009 4:13AM

<< 

<< 

<< I guess they've made the conscious decision to just give that market share to NGC. >>

Which is really a shame, especially with the new controversial NGC holders. >>

that market share has been NGC's for a long time. That is the reason you don't see too many 5 figure world coins in PCGS holders, and over 90% of the six figure coins are NGC; and a lot of the higher dollar PCGS coins are crossed to NGC anyway (much of the Terner collection, etc.) I think PCGS has made a conscious decision to focus on US coins, and take the world coins as they come. >>

There is also the possibility that many world coins might require further research and/or use of external consultants, while US coins are familiar to in-house staff.

That, in turn, might make world coins less profitable to handle.

coinkat · July 9, 2009 10:47AM

For what it is worth, there are ways to expand the quarterly special that would not be too difficult-

geographical- example- Coins minted in North America- 1909-2009

Western Hemisphere 1750-1950

newsman · July 9, 2009 11:30AM

<< 

<< 

<< I guess they've made the conscious decision to just give that market share to NGC. >>

Which is really a shame, especially with the new controversial NGC holders. >>

that market share has been NGC's for a long time. That is the reason you don't see too many 5 figure world coins in PCGS holders, and over 90% of the six figure coins are NGC; and a lot of the higher dollar PCGS coins are crossed to NGC anyway (much of the Terner collection, etc.) I think PCGS has made a conscious decision to focus on US coins, and take the world coins as they come. >>

Could that be because NGC is more generous with certain grades (which makes coins easier to sell)? I've been very disappointed with NGC grading lately, and it's not just because of the new holder. There are certain types of coins, and certain grades, in NGC holders that I will generally avoid, pedigree or no. I also have seen more serious misattributions by NGC than by PCGS in the series I collect.

Doogy · July 9, 2009 12:59PM

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< I guess they've made the conscious decision to just give that market share to NGC. >>

Which is really a shame, especially with the new controversial NGC holders. >>

that market share has been NGC's for a long time. That is the reason you don't see too many 5 figure world coins in PCGS holders, and over 90% of the six figure coins are NGC; and a lot of the higher dollar PCGS coins are crossed to NGC anyway (much of the Terner collection, etc.) I think PCGS has made a conscious decision to focus on US coins, and take the world coins as they come. >>

Could that be because NGC is more generous with certain grades (which makes coins easier to sell)? I've been very disappointed with NGC grading lately, and it's not just because of the new holder. There are certain types of coins, and certain grades, in NGC holders that I will generally avoid, pedigree or no. I also have seen more serious misattributions by NGC than by PCGS in the series I collect. >>

when you're talking about 5,6 and 7 figure rarities, being generous by a point or so has little bearing on whether or not the coin goes for serious bucks. Unlike US coins where condition rarities can mean a $5k coin in one grade, and $150k coin in the next, you don't see that with world coins. Differences in grading don't explain why 90% of the high dollar rarities are in NGC holders, while PCGS isn't known for coins much above $5k. Bodybagging rare coins they can't identify and thinking they are counterfeits, and keeping the expensive grading fees, doesn't help PCGS either. That is exactly what happened to a few of the lots with the Millennia consignor. I guess it is easier to bag these coins and pocket the revenue, than admit you don't know what you're doing and seek outside assistance.

I know for my five figure coins, the few I still own, they will stay in NGC plastic until PCGS can play in this realm and gain some market acceptance; even then, they are so far behind it doesn't pay to fork out the couple hundred bucks each to have them re-slabbed.

wybrit · July 9, 2009 1:53PM

Ajaan just wants to submit another Churchill crown.

I was writing a whole essay to add to the TPG debate, but decided to skip the whole thing. Everyone who has posted his/her opinion thus far has legitimate reasons for his/her choice. I think that the choice depends on the series that is being collected and the money already invested in it.

coinkat · July 10, 2009 9:37AM

NGC and PCGS are both very good services... let's look at the coin and not the plastic. Sometimes I just don't think collectors get this concept.

coinkat · July 10, 2009 9:39AM

The World... 1910 to 1930

The world during both Roosevelt Administrations 1901-1909, 1933-1945

ajaan · July 10, 2009 12:19PM

How about any coin with Queen Victoria on it?

wybrit · July 10, 2009 1:45PM

I actually agree with ajaan on something.

Once again World coin collectors are left out by PCGS

Comments