Home PCGS Set Registry Forum

Poll: Would you like to see RB/BN proof copper in its OWN registry?

renomedphysrenomedphys Posts: 3,489 ✭✭✭✭✭
I know it's not a new idea. This has already been proposed to Don Willis, and hopefully it has gained a little traction. I'll tell you what, this is just the kind of thing a lot of collectors would appreciate, as there are so many out there that firmly believe RB and BN proof copper represents good value, and tend to buy top examples in those colorations preferentially. And I'm not just talking about MPLs.

Comments

  • SteveSteve Posts: 3,313 ✭✭✭
    Matt,
    In my opinion this is an issue that collectors who are partial to beautifully toned coins would favor and those collectors who think RED is best would oppose. Currently, IMHO, the RED is best crowd in the hobby is ahead. I think it is all VERY subjective. Obviously people like Stewart and Doug truly believe an original RED coin is superior. They would NOT want to see the beautiful toned coins (ie) RB/BN in a separate Set Registry because it might tend to elevate
    the toned coins to an equal level with the RED coins while now the RED coins have a superior position in the points within the Set Registry. Conversely, the collectors who favor beautifully toned coins would want such a separate Set Registry so that their favorites could rise to the top. I can see the beauty and eye appeal in a naturally toned coin. I will someimes question whether or not the coin is NT or AT because I am not an expert. I can sometimes do the same subjective evaluation with RED coins. I DO have a prejudice for RED, like Doug and Stewart, but probably in a different way because I have actually seen only a small fraction of the high quality coins they have seen. But I do believe that each of us Lincoln cent or Indian cent collectors have a prejudice one way or the other. What do you all think about this?
    Steveimage
  • BWRCBWRC Posts: 1,447 ✭✭✭
    would this solution be a good compromise?

    I think RB/BN collector's might like to see small cents, both Indian and Lincoln cents RB/BN, MS/PR coins, be allowed to compete amoungst themselves in their own new category. This would give them a better chance to get a "top spot" in their "own Set Registry category" points given for RED coins will never allow them to reach this goal.

    What might work best would be to make it mandatory that the RB/BN have to remain in the old category with the RED sets but REDS would not be allowed to enter the 2nd and new RB/BN category. So in theory, the RB/BN sets could be in both categories such as the "all color" category and the "RB/BN" category. Mixed sets which include some Red along with RB or BN coins would also be excluded from the new RB/BN set category because they would have a partial RED point advantage. Example below is how it could work.

    Let us assume that you have 30 sets listed in the "existing category" and 21 of the sets just have RB/BN coins in them. If you forced them to move this would reduce the number of sets in the old category down to only 9 competitors who had just RD sets. I think it's best to have the same larger number in the old category so it is not drastically reduced but in turn let the RB/BN have the choice if they want to enter the new and exclusive category for RB/BN coins where the REDS are not allowed to participate? This solution takes nothing from the RED coins but gives the RB/BN coins a chance to reach more top spots in their own exclusive category.

    So in theory, lets say the highest rated existing RB/BN set is currently ranking #6 in the "all color" category. If this person chooses to enter the new RB/BN Set Registry category, they would instantly take the #1 spot in the new category but would still remain in the old category at #6.

    Does this make any "cents"?
    Brian Wagner Rare Coins, Specializing in PCGS graded, Shield, Liberty and Buffalo Nickels varieties.
  • WaterSportWaterSport Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭✭✭
    It’s interesting that we seem to be stuck on old collecting ways/traditions. But any way people want to collect is fine with me. It’s just that I have not seen what I would call an overwhelming or in some series a great interest in collecting varieties, everyman, AU sets, etc. Thus the addition of a RB/BN set for copper will fill some interest, but not a lot.
    WS
    Proud recipient of the coveted PCGS Forum "You Suck" Award Thursday July 19, 2007 11:33 PM and December 30th, 2011 at 8:50 PM.
  • illini420illini420 Posts: 11,466 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I picked no, since us folks with RB and BN coins can already display our sets along with a regular set in the registry. There are already too many variations on most of the sets and I'm sure I already miss out on seeing some sets altogether because they maybe are listed in set w/ varieties but not the set w/ varieties. Or maybe they listed an "everyman" set, but not listed in the regular set.... and so on... adding new separate registries for different colors seems more like the "everyman" concept to me which would just further add to some sets getting "lost" in the mix and it really seems like the one of the main purposes of such sets would be to allow folks to claim they have a higher ranked set than they in fact may really have.

    Before they would consider this, I'd rather see them not allow proof coins in the various type sets (which will never happen) or instead have a separate business strike only categories for the various type sets. For example, in the Barber type set (only 3 coins), most of top sets are dominated with proofs (some of them pretty easy to find coins) while other sets are pretty much punished for putting in a business strike coin in their sets. When looking at working on the monster 1792-date type set, which I'd like to do someday, I would like to collect business strike coins, but know that such a set would suffer if I didn't include proofs which provide many more points at sometimes far less expense.
  • SteveSteve Posts: 3,313 ✭✭✭


    << <i>I picked no, since us folks with RB and BN coins can already display our sets along with a regular set in the registry. There are already too many variations on most of the sets and I'm sure I already miss out on seeing some sets altogether because they maybe are listed in set w/ varieties but not the set w/ varieties. Or maybe they listed an "everyman" set, but not listed in the regular set.... and so on... adding new separate registries for different colors seems more like the "everyman" concept to me which would just further add to some sets getting "lost" in the mix and it really seems like the one of the main purposes of such sets would be to allow folks to claim they have a higher ranked set than they in fact may really have.

    Before they would consider this, I'd rather see them not allow proof coins in the various type sets (which will never happen) or instead have a separate business strike only categories for the various type sets. For example, in the Barber type set (only 3 coins), most of top sets are dominated with proofs (some of them pretty easy to find coins) while other sets are pretty much punished for putting in a business strike coin in their sets. When looking at working on the monster 1792-date type set, which I'd like to do someday, I would like to collect business strike coins, but know that such a set would suffer if I didn't include proofs which provide many more points at sometimes far less expense. >>



    I guess what makes this hobby so great is that each of us has his or her own ideas and sometimes we agree and sometimes we disagree.

    I agree with your first paragraph because I too think we have too many subsets of a particular series. I personally collect the Lincoln cents in Basic + Major Varieties from 1909 to present in both business strike and proof. With the PCGS automated entry system I could easily add many of my coins to more of the various subsets but I did NOT do this for my business strikes because I only have a small percentage of them holdered. I DID do this for my proofs because I have 100% of them holdered. Each of us do things the way that pleases us.

    Since I do not collect type sets it is hard for me to come to an opinion on whether or not proof coins should be allowed to replace business strike coins in such sets. I know that in the early 20th century when collectors started collecting series by date and mintmark, many chose proof examples of a particular date to fill the "Philadelphia" hole. In my Lincoln cent collecting I have always felt in was necessary to own BOTH the business strike and the proof strike of the Philadelphia or San Francisco minted coin. Again, each person choses to collect the way they want and that helps to make the hobby what it is. JMHO. Steveimage
  • CoppercolorCoppercolor Posts: 1,475 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Maybe some of the mintstate copper owners might like to have their own RB/BN category also? >>



    Yes Brian, this is the right idea.
    Jeff
    I'd like my copper well done please!
  • DMWJRDMWJR Posts: 5,974 ✭✭✭✭✭
    How are the "colorless Indian Cent" sets doing? Matt, that seems like it would be a good barometer for Lincolns.
    Doug
  • renomedphysrenomedphys Posts: 3,489 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Responding to Steve, I agree with what you said about RD collectors picking "NO" and RB/BN collectors picking "YES". And sure, we all want the coins we like to be "elevated" with respect to those that are on top. Really, without asking, it's hard to know what the pool of collectors really want.

    And illini420, sure the analog to the everyman set is valid. The issue here is that a lot of collectors actually find RB/BN coins to be actually superior to most RD examples. I for one don't buy these coins to be thrifty. I buy them because I actually like them better than most reds. With regard to color bonuses in the registry, I do find it discouraging that my coins are judged less worthy than clearly inferior RD examples.

    The colorless Indian registry was a step in the right direction, but IMHO breaking out copper into color subsets where RD coins can't be registered into the RB category would both be an exciting new way to play, and be ultimately most fair to all collectors.

    There is one caveat. RD collectors do buy RB and BN coins occasionally. Figure that. It would certainly have to be set up so that RD sets could include RB and BN coins. Only the RB/BN sets would have an exclusionary rule for RD coins.
  • illini420illini420 Posts: 11,466 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    And illini420, sure the analog to the everyman set is valid. The issue here is that a lot of collectors actually find RB/BN coins to be actually superior to most RD examples. I for one don't buy these coins to be thrifty. I buy them because I actually like them better than most reds. With regard to color bonuses in the registry, I do find it discouraging that my coins are judged less worthy than clearly inferior RD examples.

    >>



    I definitely understand where you're coming from. I know first hand that I like my PR65RB 1909 Lincoln a heck of a lot more than many of the 65RD and 66RB examples I've seen available. However, if there were an RB only registry that I could place my coin in, my "good looking" PR65RB would get no special consideration vs. the many "less good looking" PR65RBs that are out there and I would get beat out be the "less good looking" PR66RBs. I'm sure most of us agree that there are some killer RB and BN coins out there in all of the copper series. But I'm sure most of us would also agree that there are some ugly coins out there in the same grades which would carry the same registry weight as the good looking coins.

    It seems like the real answer is for PCGS to use a "PQ" or a star designation on the good coins and provide a bonus for those good looking coins. Then my nice 65RB would beat out the ugly ones and your amazing 67RB coins could compete with the 67RDs... Maybe it's already in the works and we'll find out on 3/25??? image
  • blu62vetteblu62vette Posts: 11,900 ✭✭✭✭✭
    So should there be separate PL and DMPL Morgan dollar registry sets also?
    http://www.bluccphotos.com" target="new">BluCC Photos Shows for onsite imaging: Nov Baltimore, FUN, Long Beach http://www.facebook.com/bluccphotos" target="new">BluCC on Facebook
  • No for me, Matt. I personally enjoy the wide variety of bronze being compared as one group, whether so-called RD, RB, BN or other. If it were up to me, the coins would have a numerical and eye appeal grade. Nothing more. Let the coin stand on it's merit for the technical grade, originality and eye appeal. I think that would even the copper cent playing field.

    The label would read "PR67 AURA67" image
  • DIMEMANDIMEMAN Posts: 22,403 ✭✭✭✭✭

    How about a set where there is no bonus. Just based on grade. What a novel idea. A 65 BN just as good as a 65 RD. image I like it!
  • ThePennyLadyThePennyLady Posts: 4,439 ✭✭✭✭✭
    If you take a look at Matt's beautiful and stunning signature photos of his toned MPL's, how can anyone compare them to red - it's completely an apples/oranges thing, so why should they "compete" with each other in the registry competition. I agree that those who like red/orange copper will not want to see a separate registry for RB/BN copper because historically "red" copper has been "judged" as being graded and valued "higher" than any copper that is not full red. But that is the perfect argument FOR having a separate registry. Copper lovers have pretty much always been divided into those who love RED and those who love TONED (though there certainly is some crossover both ways), so why not just separate them into two different registries and let apples be compared to and compete with other apples and oranges the same thing?
    Charmy HarkerThe Penny Lady®
  • DIMEMANDIMEMAN Posts: 22,403 ✭✭✭✭✭

    What Charmy said!

    There's not a Red out there that looks as good as any of the three in her (Charmy's) sig line.......NONE!
  • sinin1sinin1 Posts: 7,500
    and there should be sets without the strike designators

    like Jeffersons w/o Full Step bonus points (oh, I guess there already is)
  • TortugaTortuga Posts: 220

    I have been collecting mintstate BN Lincolns for a long time. I did so because I like the look of toned copper, and because I knew it would be challenging. I also knew that if I ever registered my set that I had no chance of making even probably the top thirty because of the weights assigned to red counterparts. But I listed my set anyways because I wanted to share what I had accomplished so far, and I was curious to see where I would land amidst the 200 or so registered already. Without a single red cent (excuse the pun), I find myself around 74 or so. Anyway, now and then, I enjoy viewing the set.

    It would be nice to have a separate registry for bn/rb or one that would weight coins solely on the grade given. I won't hold my breath though. In the meantime, I will enjoy collecting bn/rbs as long as I have years left on this earth. For what it's worth, I vote yes.


  • messydeskmessydesk Posts: 19,642 ✭✭✭✭✭
    What might be more useful is to have one registry ranked two different ways. My daughter's high school report card has a weighted and unweighted class ranking on it, no reason this couldn't be treated the same way. Show ranking with and without consideration for color, but let all sets stand together for convenience of collectors appreciating and judging them for what they are.
  • ambro51ambro51 Posts: 13,580 ✭✭✭✭✭
    RD RB and BN have got to be three of the most "useless" terms in appreciating early Lincoln proofs. Its *ALL* about eye appeal, not even technical grade has much play in my opinion. The fact that MANY matte proofs have 'two sides' and the reverse can be bleh and unappealing.....but the obverse can be stunning. Maybe just because some early collector laid it on top of a surface (maybe the original tissue) that caused a difference in the way the coin toned.

    RD collectors say "HEY the coins were not issued all tarnished (toned) so the peak of collector value and desireability SHOULD be for Original Red Coins...after all they are the epitome of rare valueable and desireable.

    The RB and BN collectors say "HEY its all about the stunning colors and artistic look the coins can present. dosent matter about grade, just want to s beautiful assortment of classic matte proof colors. (ps who cares about red any way....)"

    So both groups of collectors are right in their own way, and the registry as it exists now, COULD be divided into two seperate groups that would present a more consistant comparison with similar coins in the collection and also when that collection as a whole is viewed in the context of other collections formed with the same theme.

  • LeeGLeeG Posts: 12,162
    Sure, why not. image
  • lkeigwinlkeigwin Posts: 16,885 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>What Charmy said!

    There's not a Red out there that looks as good as any of the three in her (Charmy's) sig line.......NONE! >>

    With all due respect to Charmy and her fine coins, I can't agree with this. Or maybe it was tongue-in-cheek.
    Lance.
  • BWRCBWRC Posts: 1,447 ✭✭✭
    prior post here: was moved inplace of another post I made near the top to better explain what might work in this scenario.
    Brian Wagner Rare Coins, Specializing in PCGS graded, Shield, Liberty and Buffalo Nickels varieties.
  • That makes sense to me - a good compromise. So I'm a 'maybe' now : )
  • cohodkcohodk Posts: 18,554 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I believe there should be no distinction between RD, RB, BN. PCGS has admitted that many RD coins are dipped, so why reward them. Let each coin stand on its own and let the market determine price. It is not PCGS's job or responsibility to determine pricing. Their job is grading. Let the highest graded coin win.image
    Excuses are tools of the ignorant

    Knowledge is the enemy of fear

  • speetyspeety Posts: 5,424
    I voted no.

    If I were a dealer, I probably would have voted yes. It makes many coins much more marketable for those who really care about the Registry.

    As a collector, the registry is nice to have but I couldn't care less if I was the "Number_" set or not. I just work on forming the nicest set that I can put together.
    Want to buy an auction catalog for the William Hesslein Sale (December 2, 1926). Thanks to all those who have helped us obtain the others!!!

  • SteveSteve Posts: 3,313 ✭✭✭
    Obviously this suggestion would increase the number of registry sets in the various categories. Looking specifically at the current MPL Set Registry, I see 42 collections registered, 9 are all RED, 12 are mixed and 21 are all RB/BN including one collection with no coins registered. I assume the 12 of us, including me, who have mixed sets would not be involved in this. I don't know if I speak for all the people with mixed sets, but I thought the objective of collecting MPL's was to get all nine dates so as to have a complete set. Now I know a number of you like to collect and then trade these special coins as opposed to just completing a set. The point here again is that there are many different viewpoints and the airing of each of them via these boards is a good thing IMHO.
    Steve image
  • BWRCBWRC Posts: 1,447 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Obviously this suggestion would increase the number of registry sets in the various categories. Looking specifically at the current MPL Set Registry, I see 42 collections registered, 9 are all RED, 12 are mixed and 21 are all RB/BN including one collection with no coins registered. I assume the 12 of us, including me, who have mixed sets would not be involved in this. I don't know if I speak for all the people with mixed sets, but I thought the objective of collecting MPL's was to get all nine dates so as to have a complete set. Now I know a number of you like to collect and then trade these special coins as opposed to just completing a set. The point here again is that there are many different viewpoints and the airing of each of them via these boards is a good thing IMHO.
    Steve image >>



    That is good Steve, I didn't think of mixed sets, imo, they would have to remain with the REDS and not be allowed in the new RB/BN category as they to would have a partial RED point advantage. Once again and I am not the final say but if I were it would be no mixed sets or all RD sets allowed in the exclusive RB/BN category.image
    Brian Wagner Rare Coins, Specializing in PCGS graded, Shield, Liberty and Buffalo Nickels varieties.
  • renomedphysrenomedphys Posts: 3,489 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Definitely glad to see that I'm not the only one. The steady 60/40 split so far is heartening, although a super-majority would be nice. (ie. 2:1)

    I am of a similar mind with many collectors that see color designations for copper as something of a double standard in numismatics. It reads like this: Toning is OK for silver, nickel, even gold when it comes to perceived value. In fact, most TPGs factor in the eye appeal of toning alongside technical merit when determining a grade. Almost never do you see PR/MS 68 silver/nickel/gold with unattractive toning. Unfortunately for copper, the most base metal of classic coinage, once the natural process of toning takes hold, so must follow the RB/BN color designator. It is unfortunate because the perception of a copper coin's value on the market is negatively affected 99 percent of the time, regardless of whether (or not) the toning is perceived as "pretty".

    Look, the copper color designations are likely here to stay. A few forward thinking folks like Duane with his "AURA" concept have challenged convention, but the ugly truth is that we are firmly under the weight of 25+ years of slabbed, color-graded copper, and that will never change. And sure, natural, original, attractive RED will likely always command a premium over RB/BN examples with all other things being equal. But in those instances where equivalently graded RB and BN examples do win the eye-appeal and originality game, the gap is narrowing. And in the case of the truly incredible, monster, pick your adjective rarities, all bets are off.

    Look I'm not necessarily asking for the playing field to be leveled across the color barriers. It would merely appear that a majority of of voters in this poll would enjoy having their own field to play in.
  • BWRCBWRC Posts: 1,447 ✭✭✭

    36 YES

    22 NO


    Looks like the RB/BN folks would like to participant in a 2nd and exclusive category for their RB/BN copper.
    Brian Wagner Rare Coins, Specializing in PCGS graded, Shield, Liberty and Buffalo Nickels varieties.
Sign In or Register to comment.