Votes Still Coming In**POLL: Agree or Disagree with PCGS? 144 Voters...83.33% say NO; 10.42% No Comm

ajia · August 28, 2009 2:16AM

This may quickly go POOF, but thought it important to poll the membership on their feelings on the new 'All-Time Best Sets' from the collections never graded by PCGS.

No need to respond as there is another thread dealing with that.

joebb21 · August 28, 2009 2:33AM

pcgs may poof if they please- though one of only 4 people so far to respond the echoing of 100% saying no....

I agree that unless it was slabbed by them with their guarantee then no inclusion should be made

if this gets poofed its just because they are mad that we are right

RBinTex · August 28, 2009 2:53AM

Option 2.

WaterSport · August 28, 2009 3:09AM

Actually the last few discussions on the forums have been far more in agreement over recent PCGS actions than in the past. I am impressed with not only the opinions expressed, but the reasons behind those opinions. I think it reflects the non communicative nature of recent decisions by PCGS, and what some have perceived as out right arrogance that has not only been expressed by the average collector, but those dealers and high end collectors we seldom if ever hear opinions from. I think that alone is a good indicator that PCGS is going about its business the wrong way.

WS

robec · August 28, 2009 3:28AM

Disagree with PCGS. As far as I know these coins weren't weren't graded by PCGS and therefore PCGS didn't receive any payment for that that service. If those coins are allowed, then so should coins graded by NGC. At least those are graded in hand and not by hear say from 70 or more years ago.

illini420 · August 28, 2009 3:36AM

Wonder if the person(s) at PCGS who decided on this idea will at least come here and give the poll it's first "yes" vote(s)???

ajia · August 28, 2009 3:59AM

if this gets poofed its just because they are mad that we are right
Just as long as 'they' don't get mad that 'we' are right & 'we' go POOF!

Wonder if the person(s) at PCGS who decided on this idea will at least come here and give the poll it's first "yes" vote(s)???

What perplexes me the most, and we may never find out, is why?

Did he/she/they think that a collector that has spent thousands, if not millions of $$ in coins (and probably many thousands in grading fee's), to be #1 be happy to get bumped out by some set with 'estimated' grades?
Some of these grades are non-existent in PCGS holders (with none higher)!

Maybe, just maybe, an explanation would help us understand.

robec · August 28, 2009 5:28AM

I wonder how many of these coins now reside in NGC holders. I'd be willing to bet more than a few, making them ineligible for the PCGS registry.

OnlyGoldIsMoney · August 28, 2009 6:16AM

<< I wonder how many of these coins now reside in NGC holders. I'd be willing to bet more than a few, making them ineligible for the PCGS registry. >>

At least one. Here is a NGC graded coin my PCGS sets compete against. This 1856-S $2.50 Lib is available in this Sunday's Teletrade sale. In the Eliasberg PCGS registry sets it is was given an estimated grade of AU58.

ambro51 · August 28, 2009 8:47AM

Not at all unusual for a pcgs au58 and an ngc61 or 62 be the same exact coin

3rdtry · August 28, 2009 8:48AM

I'm fine with the old time famous collections being part of the pcgs set registry. Afterall, coins currently in pcgs holders pretty much have "estimated grades"

.

robec · August 28, 2009 9:36AM

<< Not at all unusual for a pcgs au58 and an ngc61 or 62 be the same exact coin >>

True, but how usual is it to have those currently graded NGC coins in the PCGS registry.

ProofCents · August 28, 2009 9:42AM

I voted no but looking at it from different perspective it might be fun to be able to "compete" with legendary collectors and collections. Just a thought

STONE · August 28, 2009 10:45AM

<< I voted no but looking at it from different perspective it might be fun to be able to "compete" with legendary collectors and collections. Just a thought >>

And a separate, designated, section could allow for this

ajia · August 28, 2009 11:40AM

I voted no but looking at it from different perspective it might be fun to be able to "compete" with legendary collectors and collections.

And most, if not all are OK with including them in a separate registry.
But I will say it's hard to compete with individual coins with a ZERO pop & ZERO higher!

garsmith · August 29, 2009 1:08AM

A set with estimated grade coins should not be able to out rank sets with legitimately graded PCGS coins.

Yes the sets should be allowed in the registry for historical reference but the estimated grade coins should be given the same set value as a genuine slab.

rainbowroosie · August 29, 2009 4:52AM

Many coins that appear high grade have problems = genuine holders....

blu62vette · August 30, 2009 3:16AM

<< 

<< I voted no but looking at it from different perspective it might be fun to be able to "compete" with legendary collectors and collections. Just a thought >>

And a separate, designated, section could allow for this >>

I wouldnt mind them having their own section. I dont like where they are now.

Nic · August 30, 2009 7:16AM

It is hard to compete against something that never existed.
K

ajia · August 31, 2009 1:40PM

Are we done?
86 Votes so far.

Yes votes have hung around 10% or less throughout the poll.

Wonder who voted 'Yes'.

WaterSport · August 31, 2009 9:02PM

Wonder who voted 'Yes'

David Hall, Jaime, BJ, Willis......?????

WS

RBinTex · August 31, 2009 9:51PM

Sorta like marrying a virgin yet having to compete against the guy she wished she xxx that had 12 xxxxxx.

ajia · September 1, 2009 10:00PM

Last push for 100 votes.

ajia · September 2, 2009 12:18PM

OVER 100 VOTES!

BUT has anyone else gotten the
"The Set Registry Rules have been updated. To continue to "My Set Registry," please read the rules and then click the "I Accept" button at the bottom of the page.

Pre-PCGS All-Time Finest Sets

Many of the "All-time finest" sets are comprised of PCGS coins, while others predated PCGS and were made up of uncertified coins. For these pre-PCGS sets, the coins are listed as either "PCGS graded," "PCGS grade," "PCGS estimated grade," "Estimated grade," or "Assumed grade" which are defined as follows:

PCGS graded - This refers to a coin that was graded by PCGS prior to the auction sale of the collection, i.e. the coin was sold at the auction in a PCGS holder.

PCGS grade - This refers to a coin that was graded by PCGS sometime after the auction sale of the collection. The coin may or may not still be in a PCGS holder.

PCGS estimate grade - This refers to a coin that has been examined recently by David Hall, John Dannreuther, Gordon Wrubel, or PCGS graders and the "PCGS estimate grade" is what we feel the coin would most likely grade at PCGS if submitted for grading.

Estimated grade - Estimated grades are used for great collections that were put together and/or sold before PCGS was in existence. The estimated grades are based on auction catalog notes of PCGS founders David Hall, Gordon Wrubel, and John Dannreuther, all of whom attended many of the great auctions held in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s and viewed the actual coins. The estimated grades also are derived from input from the PCGS Advisory Board. For older collections sold at auction prior to 1970, the estimated grade is a guess based on the cataloguers description.

Assumed grade - Collecting proofs and circulation strikes separately has only been common practice for the past 25 years or so. Prior to that, collectors would mix proofs and circulation strikes, often having proofs for their Philadelphia mints and circulation strikes for their other mints. For some of the great collections we list, such as the Louis Eliasberg collection, we will add an "Assumed grade." This will allow you to more easily compare your sets with the great early collections. For the "Assumed grade" we always use the grade that would have been readily available to the collector at that time."

Why do I get the feeling of being force fed?

illini420 · September 2, 2009 12:47PM

<< 

Why do I get the feeling of being force fed?

>>

So I'm guessing you clicked "I accept"

I was too scared to hit the I don't accept button in the fear that all my sets would automatically be delisted and PCGS would meet me at my home and bank to redeem my coins

DIMEMAN · September 24, 2009 3:27AM

When is something going to be done about this!!!!!

IT'S JUST NOT RIGHT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OnlyGoldIsMoney · September 24, 2009 7:02AM

<< When is something going to be done about this!!!!!

IT'S JUST NOT RIGHT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>

Nothing will be done. The only real option is not compete with imaginary sets. Illustrious old sets will continue to be given credit for problem coins, NGC holdered coins will be counted as part of PCGS sets and proof coins with transmute into business strikes when convenient.

BBN · September 24, 2009 7:05AM

I could see maybe a "famous sets" section even on the same page as other registry sets as its own section at the top or bottom, but they do not belong in all time greatest when none were ever graded, some currently live in other slabs and many could have very well been cleaned.

ajia · September 25, 2009 1:07AM

Nothing will be done. The only real option is not compete with imaginary sets. Illustrious old sets will continue to be given credit for problem coins, NGC holdered coins will be counted as part of PCGS sets and proof coins with transmute into business strikes when convenient.

RBinTex · September 25, 2009 12:57PM

From: BJ Searls (bsearls@collectors.com)
Sent: Fri 9/25/09 10:02 PM
To: (Me Tonight)

Hi Everyone,

For years, actually from the very first month the PCGS Set Registry was in existence, February, 2001, we have added All-Time Finest sets of the great collections of Bass, Eliasberg, Garrett, Norweb, and about a dozen others. The All-Time Finest category was established for no other reason than to display the finest sets ever assembled. In recent weeks there has been some activity in this area because we have been going through auction catalogues, updating sets, updating coins that have been graded and pedigreed by PCGS, and adding new sets.
It has come to my attention that there are some of you who feel the addition of these sets is unfair to both the members who are currently participating in the Registry and to those who are no longer active but have retired sets in the Registry. The classic sets of Eliasberg et al. will remain in the Registry because there are those who are interested in seeing how their sets compare to the famous collections of the past. They are an important part of numismatic history. We are proud to say that the PCGS Set Registry is home to the finest sets ever assembled, both those of the past (the classic sets of Eliasberg, et al.) and those which have been built in the last seven years. However, there are a number of ways we could display the classic ATF sets which is different from the way we are currently displaying them. I am reviewing a number of these options now.
If you have an opinion on this subject, either you like the current display method or you would like to see it changed, I would really like to hear from you. Any suggestions on how we might achieve an equitable way to display the classic ATF collections would be welcomed. Please email me directly. I look forward to hearing from you.
Thank you.
BJ Searls
Set Registry Manager

ajia · September 25, 2009 2:00PM

For years, actually from the very first month the PCGS Set Registry was in existence, February, 2001, we have added All-Time Finest sets of the great collections of Bass, Eliasberg, Garrett, Norweb, and about a dozen others.
Funny, until recently I hadn't noticed the Bass, Eliasberg, Garrett, Norweb, and about a dozen other sets until recently.

The All-Time Finest category was established for no other reason than to display the finest sets ever assembled.
Technically, I think that needs to read, "...the finest PCGS sets ever assembled.

Just wondering, if a GREAT raw set goes to auction, will PCGS look these over, give them an 'Estimated' grade & put them in the ATF list?
I think not.

Although this got me to thinking.....what if (I know, another hypothetical) there was a collector with a GREAT raw collection.
He wasn't interested in 'competing' with us regular folk.
He wanted to see where he compared with the TOP GUNS of yesteryear.
PCGS creates a registry set for all those TOP GUNS & posts them.
The collector now submits his collection ( and appropriate fees $$$$) & to find out where he stand compared to the classic collections.
This collection is never published, & the public is never made aware of it.
Afterward, there is really no need to keep these classic collections.
But the membership has complained so much about it, and to keep the rouse up, they will now poll the membership & then make a new 'Classic' category for these sets.

Hey, this would make a pretty cool mystery novel!
Who is this 'mystery' collector?

ajia · September 27, 2009 1:20AM

Votes still coming in.

PQpeace · September 27, 2009 1:35AM

no

jsf · September 27, 2009 1:38AM

no

oxy8890 · September 27, 2009 4:08AM

<< 

<< I voted no but looking at it from different perspective it might be fun to be able to "compete" with legendary collectors and collections. Just a thought >>

And a separate, designated, section could allow for this >>

BigRick · September 29, 2009 9:35AM

"Is Adding 'Estimated Grade' Registery Sets Fair?"

No & glad BJ is on it.

BBN · September 29, 2009 9:39PM

I'm wondering if This coin is the same one that's in This collection. If so just another example of these phantom sets being blown out of the water.

ajia · September 29, 2009 10:29PM

Oddly enough, the YES votes are catching up!

ajia · October 25, 2009 2:40AM

Now that the dust has settled, has anything changed?
I still see 'The Norweb Family', 'Garrett Collection', 'William Dunham', 'J.J. Pittman.
I haven't run across the 'Eliasberg' collection yet!?

ajia · October 25, 2009 2:50AM

Just to add more fuel to the fire, as I was trying to find out how to spell Eliasberg correctly (

), I went to the Redbook because I know they list 'Great Collectors'.
Now I'm wondering when PCGS will add others* like Appleton, Bass, Boyd, Brand, Carter, Farouk(!), Parmelee, etc.
Then the top 5 'All Time' collections would all probably be taken by 'Estimated Grades' collections (except for Moderns

)

*- These collections may already be listed & I just have not run across them.

fcloud · October 25, 2009 3:36AM

Bass is already there. You just need to look around. Some of the others could be there too.

Bass Sets

illini420 · October 25, 2009 6:05AM

<< 
Then the top 5 'All Time' collections would all probably be taken by 'Estimated Grades' collections (except for Moderns

)

>>

Under the PCGS rules, why not give them top spots in the moderns as well?? If PCGS guesses at the P-Mint business strike coins the old time collectors could have purchased, but were not in their collections, why not let PCGS guess at which moderns the old-time collectors could have purchased had they still been alive??? Makes about as much sense to me.

ajia · October 25, 2009 10:08AM

If PCGS guesses at the P-Mint business strike coins the old time collectors could have purchased, but were not in their collections, why not let PCGS guess at which moderns the old-time collectors could have purchased had they still been alive???

Reading about how....frugal...Eliasberg was, I wonder if he would even play the Registry game?
Would he really pay the premium for graded coins when he could get them at face value?

I'm sure he would be very discriminating, but buy graded coins way above face value, that I'm not so sure.

Makes you wonder if there are other GREAT collections NOT in slabs.......rumors abound that there are.

Votes Still Coming In**POLL: Agree or Disagree with PCGS? 144 Voters...83.33% say NO; 10.42% No Comm

Comments