<< <i> Truth be told, the "rules changed" (at least IMHO) because I recently sent a letter to PCGS detailing why they should begin designating these coins PL and DPL (and they promptly listened). >>
That is nice but it doesn't change the fact that there are probably many PL's in slabs already that were miss graded. The rules did change, yes, and those unlucky submitters now have to resubmit their coins for MAYBE a PL designation...shipping costs..regrade fees...for a big maybe...That's being jerked around
It's all comes down to cash....coins were going across the street and potential income was being lost....change the rules and now the coins come for grading IN ADDITION to the regrades from across the street. Good business decision.....bad decision for the collectors pocketbook
Kinda like the no 70's being given out for ASE's when the spotting issue came to light a few years back....the rules changed when collectors wanted the 70 grades that they were entitled to...
I will add I cannot for the life of me figure out what lamebrain across the street made the no PL decision....that boggles the mind even more (of course there is no official announcement on that)
<< <i>The mint said they could strike 900-1200 ATB's per hour, per Coin World. If demand is there they could do 500K easy. >>
That will sure make for a lot of these coins making the 2010's worth moon money. I would not even think of selling my 3 sets at this point. >>
I thought the reason for the mintage reduction was the inability to get enough silver blanks that were the correct quality.....how will they get hundreds of thousands more???
"This might be fine from a dealer's perspective, but try to put yourself in the shoes of the little guy who submitted a set to PCGS a month ago and now finds out they're changing the rules. I'm not referring to myself, by the way, but it could easily be myself."
Pinkfloyd - I totally understand that viewpoint. BUT, it took 2 years to address the UHR gold coins (which they did this week as well). In fact, if I am not mistaken (and I could be), PCGS had never used the PL designation on gold coins other than those 19th century shipwrecked coins? I believe this was an important shift for PCGS both for the UHR's and these ATB coins. Yes, it happened a month after grading the first ATB coin and I certainly sold off some PL/DPL coins in the meantime. But, these ATB coins will go on for ten or twelve years (with hopefully the special collector US Mint series as well) and I believe this will prove to be a very beneficial change over time to those collectors building a set, especially the "homemade" sets (as well as to "flippers" I suspect). We'll see.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
Frankly, I felt my Atb set graded by NGC were all PL, but none were given the designation. Whatever, I'm not going to waste more money for a potential change.
All coins kept in bank vaults. PCGS Registries Box of 20 SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>"Doesn't anyone feel jerked around when you pay big bucks to get these things graded and THEN the rules change???"
Truth be told, the "rules changed" (at least IMHO) because I recently sent a letter to PCGS detailing why they should begin designating these coins PL and DPL (and they promptly listened). I have been assisting a few board members with submitting their coins to PCGS (as well as my own coins) and I truly believed PCGS could add value to ALL of our slabbed coins if they adopted these designations. I guess I was right judging by the early results on ebay of one selling group that got the first coins (hey, if you are reading this, I like See's Chocolates! LOL) But, seriously, I think this move will add meaningful value to those high end coins with beautiful prooflike surfaces. Let me say it here first that, IMHO, there will be MANY of these coins that achieve these designations so it is certainly a "buyers' beware" market in the early going . But, for the dedicated collectors of this series, it will be a nice pursuit to build a set of these coins in 69PL or 69DPL grade (perhaps 'homemade"). So, I really do not feel "jerked around", but, rather, pleased that PCGS reacted so swiftly and correctly in adding these designations to these coins.
Wondercoin >>
I agree, however I would like PCGS to take a more broad stance on circulation strike coins in general, that are PL. Many mint set coins from the 60's and 70's are PL, and NGC has a distinct upper hand in recognizing them. PCGS can not possibly know what a new issue will look like hence changing after some have been graded when they see the actual coins is fine with me. I just wish this policy was across the board and standing at all times for all circulation/business strike coins, not just Morgans and now pucks.
I have yet to see the Washington side on any of these 5 oz ATB coins with true frost and real mirrored fields. I am only guessing here, since I have only held a 100 or more in hand, that the standards are less for these ATB coins.
<< <i>"This might be fine from a dealer's perspective, but try to put yourself in the shoes of the little guy who submitted a set to PCGS a month ago and now finds out they're changing the rules. I'm not referring to myself, by the way, but it could easily be myself."
Pinkfloyd - I totally understand that viewpoint. BUT, it took 2 years to address the UHR gold coins (which they did this week as well). In fact, if I am not mistaken (and I could be), PCGS had never used the PL designation on gold coins other than those 19th century shipwrecked coins? I believe this was an important shift for PCGS both for the UHR's and these ATB coins. Yes, it happened a month after grading the first ATB coin and I certainly sold off some PL/DPL coins in the meantime. But, these ATB coins will go on for ten or twelve years (with hopefully the special collector US Mint series as well) and I believe this will prove to be a very beneficial change over time to those collectors building a set, especially the "homemade" sets (as well as to "flippers" I suspect). We'll see. >>
It's great that they made the change, but they need to make it right with all of us who have spent hundreds or thousands in grading fees only to have to pay those fees again for a chance at getting a PL or DM designation. Otherwise, what's to stop this in the future? Every time a new issue comes out they can start with one set of guidelines and then after a while change it so they can get lots of resubs. Should we really have to pay a full $30 for a PL/DM evaluation and reslab? That's just not right.
Clackamas - I totally agree with you. And, not just for the 1960's and 1970's either. Among other coins, I have a number of fully prooflike business strike silver Wash quarters and Roosie dimes that deserve the designation. NGC uses the designation and I believe PCGS should as well. I will bring that to PCGS' attention as well.
Wondercoin
Proofcollection - You get no argument out of me on your comment.
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
<< <i>"Doesn't anyone feel jerked around when you pay big bucks to get these things graded and THEN the rules change???"
Truth be told, the "rules changed" (at least IMHO) because I recently sent a letter to PCGS detailing why they should begin designating these coins PL and DPL (and they promptly listened). I have been assisting a few board members with submitting their coins to PCGS (as well as my own coins) and I truly believed PCGS could add value to ALL of our slabbed coins if they adopted these designations. I guess I was right judging by the early results on ebay of one selling group that got the first coins (hey, if you are reading this, I like See's Chocolates! LOL) But, seriously, I think this move will add meaningful value to those high end coins with beautiful prooflike surfaces. Let me say it here first that, IMHO, there will be MANY of these coins that achieve these designations so it is certainly a "buyers' beware" market in the early going . But, for the dedicated collectors of this series, it will be a nice pursuit to build a set of these coins in 69PL or 69DPL grade (perhaps 'homemade"). So, I really do not feel "jerked around", but, rather, pleased that PCGS reacted so swiftly and correctly in adding these designations to these coins.
Wondercoin >>
Thanks, Wondercoin. I always appreciate the insights that you and MCM provide on this forum.
I would love to put together a "homemade" PL set of these, but am wondering how feasible that will be with the future year issues. 2010 was a rather exceptional situation in that we could obtain these directly from APs, some of whom did not cherrypick. We won't have that option for 2011 and onward. I'm thinking these will be heavily cherrypicked and the end consumer will need to pay full market price for the PLs. There's just too much money involved here for me to think otherwise.
In defense of PCGS, better late then never. In defense of NGC, everyone here seems to be assuming they have tightened up on PL's. My experience after submitting close to 3000 ATB coins to them is they've been ridiculously tight all along. I still have not made anything other than Yellowstone or Yosemite in PL. The two Mt Hood's we have on eBay were bought from a small dealer who got the grades himself.
John
John Maben
Pegasus Coin and Jewelry (Brick and Mortar)
ANA LM, PNG, APMD, FUN, Etc
800-381-2646
Coasterfan - Excellent comment, but that situation was not changing if only NGC graded PL/DPL and not PCGS - right?
I personally hope the premiums shrink enough on the PL/DPL coins where we all may be able to buy fresh sets from the distributors in the years ahead. Maybe that will not happen, but, IMHO, it certainly will not be solely due to PCGS recognizing these designations I suspect.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
A cherry picked set is just that. You get the set and you keep the nicest coins then replace them with other coins that are not as nice. This is easy to do if you acquired multiple sets. A fresh set is as received, no switcharoos. Believe it or not we find that by far people are honest. I really appreciate that.
John
Woops an accidental double post, see below.
John Maben
Pegasus Coin and Jewelry (Brick and Mortar)
ANA LM, PNG, APMD, FUN, Etc
800-381-2646
Since your are still here can I ask how you are classifying your buy prices? What is the difference between cherry picked sets and fresh sets?
Thanks. >>
A cherry picked set is just that. You take out the best coins and replace them with other coins that are not as nice. It's easy to do if you acquired multiple sets. A fresh set is exactly as received; no switcharoos. Believe it or not, by far most people are honest about this and do the right thing in representing them when they sell to us.
John
John Maben
Pegasus Coin and Jewelry (Brick and Mortar)
ANA LM, PNG, APMD, FUN, Etc
800-381-2646
Since John is here, he can personally confirm that recently a number of collectors decided to not even grade their coins at PCGS (but to sell them off sealed or fresh to his company or others). I, in fact, sent some John's way recently, as I figured he would do much better with them at NGC than what anyone could possibly do at PCGS without the designations (after my early submissions to PCGS on behalf of board members did not prove all that fruitful). This changes things IMHO and why I suggested this will be a good change for collectors submitting to PCGS. Of course, dealers will benefit as well.
Wondercoin
Please visit my website at www.wondercoins.com and my ebay auctions under my user name www.wondercoin.com.
I think the decision to just flip or to grade them is always based on multiple factors. Certainly the designation of PL by PCGS is a factor that could influence this decision. But often it just the economics of it. If you got a set at under $1000 you're already a big winner. The supply side of the market exceeds current demand so the thought process for many is take the money and run, why be greedy? There is no right or wrong, it's whatever floats your boat.
John Maben
Pegasus Coin and Jewelry (Brick and Mortar)
ANA LM, PNG, APMD, FUN, Etc
800-381-2646
I think that the jury is out on the pucks until we see how many collectors surface over time and how many of each variety are issued in 2011 and 2012. The economy is definitely a factor, but hey - it's still silver.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
With the first 2011 Puck due out in a few weeks, and they make the full production run of 100-500K which means normal distrbution channels. Where will you be able to get them other than APMEX, SilverTowne, MCM and possibly TT Direct. Any Ideas?
<< <i>With the first 2011 Puck due out in a few weeks, and they make the full production run of 100-500K which means normal distrbution channels. Where will you be able to get them other than APMEX, SilverTowne, MCM and possibly TT Direct. Any Ideas? >>
...."due out in a few weeks"?????
They haven't even finished with last years yet.....the 2011 beasts are a LONG way off
<< <i>Tell her if she really loved you, she would offer it at $999. >>
I'll ask if the $1400 price includes delivery! I'm about 100 miles away and that's worth something. >>
I think you must be lucky she even offered my brother and my best buddy both decided to keep them (after) they saw them. This is another reason I do not have a set. Well that and prudential is holding out on me.........
Just sold my NGC ER's on ebay except for the Hot springs which has to be relisted.. Net total for the other four before fees came to $2272.65. So after fees and paying for shipping, will probably end up with $2000 (without the Hot Springs). I had these graded by NGC by NGC so my total into it is around $1200.
Not a bad result overall!
All coins kept in bank vaults. PCGS Registries Box of 20 SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
I went ahead and pulled the trigger on my sister's sealed A-Mark box for $1400 delivered. Will send these to PCGS next week after looking them over. I figure even a 67 will bring more than a Choice BU right?
<< <i>I went ahead and pulled the trigger on my sister's sealed A-Mark box for $1400 delivered. Will send these to PCGS next week after looking them over. I figure even a 67 will bring more than a Choice BU right? >>
Pulled the trigger on your sister,, I think you're on the wrong chat board.
<< <i>I was just getting ready to submit my ATBs from FT and saw this:
New PCGS Designations for 2009 UHR $20 and 2010 5 Oz. Silver Coins
Effective immediately, PCGS will recognize Prooflike (PL) designations for 2009 Ultra High Relief (UHR) $20 gold coins. Also, effective immediately, PCGS will recognize Prooflike (PL) and Deep Mirror Prooflike (DMPL) designations for 2010 5 oz. America the Beautiful coins. Many of these business strike coins were minted from highly polished dies and warrant special recognition. All submissions automatically qualify for these new designations without any additional fees. >>
WITHOUT QUESTION, RESUBMISSIONS FOR DM/PL SHOULD BE FREE!
Do I feel jerked around? BIG TIME!
As is often the case Pink Floyd put it very well: What we want from TPGs is consistency. Grading should be totally objective, not clamping down on PLs, no DM PL earlier, now we have it, etc. This really hoses those who sent in DM/PL coins earlier. So what now, we're supposed to pay full price for re-consideration for DM/PL?????
<< <i>"Doesn't anyone feel jerked around when you pay big bucks to get these things graded and THEN the rules change???"
Truth be told, the "rules changed" (at least IMHO) because I recently sent a letter to PCGS detailing why they should begin designating these coins PL and DPL (and they promptly listened). I have been assisting a few board members with submitting their coins to PCGS (as well as my own coins) and I truly believed PCGS could add value to ALL of our slabbed coins if they adopted these designations. I guess I was right judging by the early results on ebay of one selling group that got the first coins (hey, if you are reading this, I like See's Chocolates! LOL) But, seriously, I think this move will add meaningful value to those high end coins with beautiful prooflike surfaces. Let me say it here first that, IMHO, there will be MANY of these coins that achieve these designations so it is certainly a "buyers' beware" market in the early going . But, for the dedicated collectors of this series, it will be a nice pursuit to build a set of these coins in 69PL or 69DPL grade (perhaps 'homemade"). So, I really do not feel "jerked around", but, rather, pleased that PCGS reacted so swiftly and correctly in adding these designations to these coins.
Wondercoin >>
Mitch-
Thanks for the post.
As has been the case so many times prior, you've once again proven to be a great asset to the Moderns hobby.
I will feel a LOT less "jerked around" if PCGS allows free or nominal-cost submissions for DM/PL evaluation. This is only fair. We have already paid (a lot) once. The hassle and postage should be all that is required the second time.
I've still got a couple of sealed, FS eligable UHRs. Guess where they're going.
I wonder what the PCGS FS PLs will do to the price of the NGC PL UHRs.
<< <i> Have there been any spotting issues showing up on these yet? Maybe they are just being cautious.
. >>
Is anyone who is holding these long term doing an acetone dip prior to slabbing or putting away? >>
I gave my APMEX set an acetone bath, as I will do with my other sets, it removed a film I could see on the surface. In another strange twist to the "Puck Saga", A Mark sets will be the first to spot if it occurs on these coins because they will have been submitted in their original First Strike holders, so we have to wonder was the 18.00 gift per coin really a gift at all--------------BigE
<< <i>In defense of PCGS, better late then never. In defense of NGC, everyone here seems to be assuming they have tightened up on PL's. My experience after submitting close to 3000 ATB coins to them is they've been ridiculously tight all along. I still have not made anything other than Yellowstone or Yosemite in PL. The two Mt Hood's we have on eBay were bought from a small dealer who got the grades himself.
John >>
I sent NGC two non-cherry picked (wanted a reference set) FTB sets just in time for FS grading and prior to the PCGS change. The grades: HS 69x2, YOS 69 x2, Yel. 69, 67, GC 69, 68 and MH 66 PL and 65.
This is the first MH PL that I've received from NGC. Despite the grade, it might do well as a relatively rare MH PL.
WITHOUT QUESTION, RESUBMISSIONS FOR DM/PL SHOULD BE FREE! >>
It would certainly be a nice gesture to the community and would improve the consistency of the PCGS graded pieces. These things are NOT cheap to get graded!
Though I think the flood of regrades would be enormous between the ATBs and UHRs, so I don't think it will happen. >>
I already sold my pcgs pucks that were prooflike, but if I still had them, I would quietly re-submit the prooflike ones with a copy of my original submission form to show the cert numbers matched and see if good things came of it-----------------BigE
WITHOUT QUESTION, RESUBMISSIONS FOR DM/PL SHOULD BE FREE! >>
Really? Without question? Did anyone force folks to get them graded right away? What about when PCGS was not using FB, or FBL, etc.....should all the ones that had theirs graded before those designations get theirs resubmitted for free as well?
PCGS is a business and makes moving business decisions. While it would certainly be a nice gesture of theirs to not charge, or to allow a smaller charge, for the designation review, I am surprised folks think it should be mandatory.
Not to say I don't understand the disappointment. I do. But I also understand a business and the business decisions behind it.....and take accountability for my own choices/actions.
<< <i>I have yet to see the Washington side on any of these 5 oz ATB coins with true frost and real mirrored fields. I am only guessing here, since I have only held a 100 or more in hand, that the standards are less for these ATB coins. >>
Here you go...only used my cell phone camera...from Fidelitrade.
I'm at a loss to understand the significance of your statement regarding forcing anyone to grade right away? We should have waited? For what? Were we to forecast this change?? Please explain that statement.
The fact is, we've already paid them very well to have them graded. The shipping and hassle should be more than enough to have them re-considered for PL/DM.
My family managed to maintain a successful business for 5 generations - not very common. Part of a business decision is factoring in good will - not being penny wise and dollar foolish. Letting the original submitters re-submit for PL/DM consideration for free or for a nominal ($10) fee would buy far more in good will then it would cost from it's customers. Their costs would be minimal and the good will would go far.
I'd think that the comments from posters here would be a great gage of sentiment for PCGS on this issue.
As a business decision, I think that this would indeed be a no-brainer. I have no doubt that they'll be hearing from a lot of their customers in very short order about this very subject.
In addition, PCGS should want consistency as much as we do in their grading of these pucks. DM/PLs should be correctly labeled as such, not just the ones sent from mid - Feb and later.
Comments
<< <i> Truth be told, the "rules changed" (at least IMHO) because I recently sent a letter to PCGS detailing why they should begin designating these coins PL and DPL (and they promptly listened). >>
That is nice but it doesn't change the fact that there are probably many PL's in slabs already that were miss graded. The rules did change, yes, and those unlucky submitters now have to resubmit their coins for MAYBE a PL designation...shipping costs..regrade fees...for a big maybe...That's being jerked around
It's all comes down to cash....coins were going across the street and potential income was being lost....change the rules and now the coins come for grading IN ADDITION to the regrades from across the street. Good business decision.....bad decision for the collectors pocketbook
Kinda like the no 70's being given out for ASE's when the spotting issue came to light a few years back....the rules changed when collectors wanted the 70 grades that they were entitled to...
I will add I cannot for the life of me figure out what lamebrain across the street made the no PL decision....that boggles the mind even more (of course there is no official announcement on that)
edited to add quote
<< <i>
<< <i>The mint said they could strike 900-1200 ATB's per hour, per Coin World. If demand is there they could do 500K easy. >>
That will sure make for a lot of these coins making the 2010's worth moon money. I would not even think of selling my 3 sets at this point. >>
I thought the reason for the mintage reduction was the inability to get enough silver blanks that were the correct quality.....how will they get hundreds of thousands more???
Pinkfloyd - I totally understand that viewpoint. BUT, it took 2 years to address the UHR gold coins (which they did this week as well). In fact, if I am not mistaken (and I could be), PCGS had never used the PL designation on gold coins other than those 19th century shipwrecked coins? I believe this was an important shift for PCGS both for the UHR's and these ATB coins. Yes, it happened a month after grading the first ATB coin and I certainly sold off some PL/DPL coins in the meantime. But, these ATB coins will go on for ten or twelve years (with hopefully the special collector US Mint series as well) and I believe this will prove to be a very beneficial change over time to those collectors building a set, especially the "homemade" sets (as well as to "flippers" I suspect). We'll see.
Wondercoin
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>Dillon cashed my check! Yay! Third time should be a charm right? Hoping for a nice set this time... >>
Yup, funds transferred out of my account on the 24th!!
The DG is one clean mark free set. Shipped it off to PCGS this AM.
<< <i>"Doesn't anyone feel jerked around when you pay big bucks to get these things graded and THEN the rules change???"
Truth be told, the "rules changed" (at least IMHO) because I recently sent a letter to PCGS detailing why they should begin designating these coins PL and DPL (and they promptly listened). I have been assisting a few board members with submitting their coins to PCGS (as well as my own coins) and I truly believed PCGS could add value to ALL of our slabbed coins if they adopted these designations. I guess I was right judging by the early results on ebay of one selling group that got the first coins (hey, if you are reading this, I like See's Chocolates! LOL) But, seriously, I think this move will add meaningful value to those high end coins with beautiful prooflike surfaces. Let me say it here first that, IMHO, there will be MANY of these coins that achieve these designations so it is certainly a "buyers' beware" market in the early going . But, for the dedicated collectors of this series, it will be a nice pursuit to build a set of these coins in 69PL or 69DPL grade (perhaps 'homemade"). So, I really do not feel "jerked around", but, rather, pleased that PCGS reacted so swiftly and correctly in adding these designations to these coins.
Wondercoin >>
I agree, however I would like PCGS to take a more broad stance on circulation strike coins in general, that are PL. Many mint set coins from the 60's and 70's are PL, and NGC has a distinct upper hand in recognizing them. PCGS can not possibly know what a new issue will look like hence changing after some have been graded when they see the actual coins is fine with me. I just wish this policy was across the board and standing at all times for all circulation/business strike coins, not just Morgans and now pucks.
I have yet to see the Washington side on any of these 5 oz ATB coins with true frost and real mirrored fields. I am only guessing here, since I have only held a 100 or more in hand, that the standards are less for these ATB coins.
<< <i>"This might be fine from a dealer's perspective, but try to put yourself in the shoes of the little guy who submitted a set to PCGS a month ago and now finds out they're changing the rules. I'm not referring to myself, by the way, but it could easily be myself."
Pinkfloyd - I totally understand that viewpoint. BUT, it took 2 years to address the UHR gold coins (which they did this week as well). In fact, if I am not mistaken (and I could be), PCGS had never used the PL designation on gold coins other than those 19th century shipwrecked coins? I believe this was an important shift for PCGS both for the UHR's and these ATB coins. Yes, it happened a month after grading the first ATB coin and I certainly sold off some PL/DPL coins in the meantime. But, these ATB coins will go on for ten or twelve years (with hopefully the special collector US Mint series as well) and I believe this will prove to be a very beneficial change over time to those collectors building a set, especially the "homemade" sets (as well as to "flippers" I suspect). We'll see. >>
It's great that they made the change, but they need to make it right with all of us who have spent hundreds or thousands in grading fees only to have to pay those fees again for a chance at getting a PL or DM designation. Otherwise, what's to stop this in the future? Every time a new issue comes out they can start with one set of guidelines and then after a while change it so they can get lots of resubs. Should we really have to pay a full $30 for a PL/DM evaluation and reslab? That's just not right.
Wondercoin
Proofcollection - You get no argument out of me on your comment.
<< <i>We picked up my girl friends dillon gage puck set from UPS last night. The DG is one clean mark free set. Shipped it off to PCGS this AM. >>
How much time between DG cashing your check and shipping the coins?
mbogoman
https://pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/classic-issues-colonials-through-1964/zambezi-collection-trade-dollars/7345Asesabi Lutho
<< <i>"Doesn't anyone feel jerked around when you pay big bucks to get these things graded and THEN the rules change???"
Truth be told, the "rules changed" (at least IMHO) because I recently sent a letter to PCGS detailing why they should begin designating these coins PL and DPL (and they promptly listened). I have been assisting a few board members with submitting their coins to PCGS (as well as my own coins) and I truly believed PCGS could add value to ALL of our slabbed coins if they adopted these designations. I guess I was right judging by the early results on ebay of one selling group that got the first coins (hey, if you are reading this, I like See's Chocolates! LOL) But, seriously, I think this move will add meaningful value to those high end coins with beautiful prooflike surfaces. Let me say it here first that, IMHO, there will be MANY of these coins that achieve these designations so it is certainly a "buyers' beware" market in the early going . But, for the dedicated collectors of this series, it will be a nice pursuit to build a set of these coins in 69PL or 69DPL grade (perhaps 'homemade"). So, I really do not feel "jerked around", but, rather, pleased that PCGS reacted so swiftly and correctly in adding these designations to these coins.
Wondercoin >>
Thanks, Wondercoin. I always appreciate the insights that you and MCM provide on this forum.
I would love to put together a "homemade" PL set of these, but am wondering how feasible that will be with the future year issues. 2010 was a rather exceptional situation in that we could obtain these directly from APs, some of whom did not cherrypick. We won't have that option for 2011 and onward. I'm thinking these will be heavily cherrypicked and the end consumer will need to pay full market price for the PLs. There's just too much money involved here for me to think otherwise.
John
John Maben
Pegasus Coin and Jewelry (Brick and Mortar)
ANA LM, PNG, APMD, FUN, Etc
800-381-2646
Since your are still here can I ask how you are classifying your buy prices? What is the difference between cherry picked sets and fresh sets?
Thanks.
I personally hope the premiums shrink enough on the PL/DPL coins where we all may be able to buy fresh sets from the distributors in the years ahead. Maybe that will not happen, but, IMHO, it certainly will not be solely due to PCGS recognizing these designations I suspect.
Wondercoin
John
Woops an accidental double post, see below.
John Maben
Pegasus Coin and Jewelry (Brick and Mortar)
ANA LM, PNG, APMD, FUN, Etc
800-381-2646
Thought it was maybe based on how long the seller had had them.
<< <i>Hi John,
Since your are still here can I ask how you are classifying your buy prices? What is the difference between cherry picked sets and fresh sets?
Thanks. >>
A cherry picked set is just that. You take out the best coins and replace them with other coins that are not as nice. It's easy to do if you acquired multiple sets. A fresh set is exactly as received; no switcharoos. Believe it or not, by far most people are honest about this and do the right thing in representing them when they sell to us.
John
John Maben
Pegasus Coin and Jewelry (Brick and Mortar)
ANA LM, PNG, APMD, FUN, Etc
800-381-2646
Wondercoin
John Maben
Pegasus Coin and Jewelry (Brick and Mortar)
ANA LM, PNG, APMD, FUN, Etc
800-381-2646
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>Well, this morning my sister offered me her sealed box from A-Mark for $1400. Should I buy it? >>
What would she do with it if you didn't buy it???
<< <i>Well, this morning my sister offered me her sealed box from A-Mark for $1400. Should I buy it? >>
Tell her if she really loved you, she would offer it at $999.
<< <i>With the first 2011 Puck due out in a few weeks, and they make the full production run of 100-500K which means normal distrbution channels. Where will you be able to get them other than APMEX, SilverTowne, MCM and possibly TT Direct. Any Ideas? >>
...."due out in a few weeks"?????
They haven't even finished with last years yet.....the 2011 beasts are a LONG way off
<< <i>Tell her if she really loved you, she would offer it at $999. >>
I'll ask if the $1400 price includes delivery! I'm about 100 miles away and that's worth something.
<< <i>
<< <i>Tell her if she really loved you, she would offer it at $999. >>
I'll ask if the $1400 price includes delivery! I'm about 100 miles away and that's worth something.
Brotherly love doesn't go far between you and her I take it.
<< <i>
<< <i>Tell her if she really loved you, she would offer it at $999. >>
I'll ask if the $1400 price includes delivery! I'm about 100 miles away and that's worth something.
I think you must be lucky she even offered my brother and my best buddy both decided to keep them (after) they saw them. This is another reason I do not have a set. Well that and prudential is holding out on me.........
I used to be famous now I just collect coins.
Link to My Registry Set.
https://pcgs.com/setregistry/quarters/washington-quarters-specialty-sets/washington-quarters-complete-variety-set-circulation-strikes-1932-1964/publishedset/78469
Varieties Are The Spice Of LIFE and Thanks to Those who teach us what to search For.
<< <i>the 2011 beasts are a LONG way off >>
I'd bet the Gettysburg is out before CNT or Jack Hunt sell their 2010's, and most likely before the First P version
Not a bad result overall!
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>I went ahead and pulled the trigger on my sister's sealed A-Mark box for $1400 delivered. Will send these to PCGS next week after looking them over. I figure even a 67 will bring more than a Choice BU right?
Pulled the trigger on your sister,, I think you're on the wrong chat board.
<< <i>I was just getting ready to submit my ATBs from FT and saw this:
New PCGS Designations for 2009 UHR $20 and 2010 5 Oz. Silver Coins
Effective immediately, PCGS will recognize Prooflike (PL) designations for 2009 Ultra High Relief (UHR) $20 gold coins. Also, effective immediately, PCGS will recognize Prooflike (PL) and Deep Mirror Prooflike (DMPL) designations for 2010 5 oz. America the Beautiful coins. Many of these business strike coins were minted from highly polished dies and warrant special recognition. All submissions automatically qualify for these new designations without any additional fees. >>
WITHOUT QUESTION, RESUBMISSIONS FOR DM/PL SHOULD BE FREE!
Do I feel jerked around? BIG TIME!
As is often the case Pink Floyd put it very well: What we want from TPGs is consistency. Grading should be totally objective, not clamping down on PLs, no DM PL earlier, now we have it, etc. This really hoses those who sent in DM/PL coins earlier. So what now, we're supposed to pay full price for re-consideration for DM/PL?????
The NGC 69ER sets have dropped about $700 in two weeks. Remarkable. Now that ER has passed, will they go up a bit?
<< <i>
<< <i>However, now we think there will be re-newed interest as a result of the PCGS PL/DMPL decision, so we're loading up the boat again.
John >>
I agree, the PCGS PL designations will extend the current market for a while. >>
I think that the fact that there are no more APs selling, as well as ever higher silver prices may lead to a price rebound.
<< <i>
WITHOUT QUESTION, RESUBMISSIONS FOR DM/PL SHOULD BE FREE!
>>
It would certainly be a nice gesture to the community and would improve the consistency of the PCGS graded pieces.
Though I think the flood of regrades would be enormous between the ATBs and UHRs, so I don't think it will happen.
<< <i>Interestingly, a sealed A Mark set went for $1700. The PCGS GEM BU and CH BUs are going up. >>
That makes sense with PL and DMPL designations now available from PCGS.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I still think SOMEBODY will pull a 70 grade SOMETIME. Care to guess what that one might bring?
<< <i>"Doesn't anyone feel jerked around when you pay big bucks to get these things graded and THEN the rules change???"
Truth be told, the "rules changed" (at least IMHO) because I recently sent a letter to PCGS detailing why they should begin designating these coins PL and DPL (and they promptly listened). I have been assisting a few board members with submitting their coins to PCGS (as well as my own coins) and I truly believed PCGS could add value to ALL of our slabbed coins if they adopted these designations. I guess I was right judging by the early results on ebay of one selling group that got the first coins (hey, if you are reading this, I like See's Chocolates! LOL) But, seriously, I think this move will add meaningful value to those high end coins with beautiful prooflike surfaces. Let me say it here first that, IMHO, there will be MANY of these coins that achieve these designations so it is certainly a "buyers' beware" market in the early going . But, for the dedicated collectors of this series, it will be a nice pursuit to build a set of these coins in 69PL or 69DPL grade (perhaps 'homemade"). So, I really do not feel "jerked around", but, rather, pleased that PCGS reacted so swiftly and correctly in adding these designations to these coins.
Wondercoin >>
Mitch-
Thanks for the post.
As has been the case so many times prior, you've once again proven to be a great asset to the Moderns hobby.
I will feel a LOT less "jerked around" if PCGS allows free or nominal-cost submissions for DM/PL evaluation. This is only fair. We have already paid (a lot) once. The hassle and postage should be all that is required the second time.
I've still got a couple of sealed, FS eligable UHRs. Guess where they're going.
I wonder what the PCGS FS PLs will do to the price of the NGC PL UHRs.
Thanks,
R-
<< <i>
<< <i>
Have there been any spotting issues showing up on these yet? Maybe they are just being cautious.
. >>
Is anyone who is holding these long term doing an acetone dip prior to slabbing or putting away? >>
I gave my APMEX set an acetone bath, as I will do with my other sets, it removed a film I could see on the surface. In another strange twist to the "Puck Saga", A Mark sets will be the first to spot if it occurs on these coins because they will have been submitted in their original First Strike holders, so we have to wonder was the 18.00 gift per coin really a gift at all
<< <i>In defense of PCGS, better late then never. In defense of NGC, everyone here seems to be assuming they have tightened up on PL's. My experience after submitting close to 3000 ATB coins to them is they've been ridiculously tight all along. I still have not made anything other than Yellowstone or Yosemite in PL. The two Mt Hood's we have on eBay were bought from a small dealer who got the grades himself.
John >>
I sent NGC two non-cherry picked (wanted a reference set) FTB sets just in time for FS grading and prior to the PCGS change. The grades: HS 69x2, YOS 69 x2, Yel. 69, 67, GC 69, 68 and MH 66 PL and 65.
This is the first MH PL that I've received from NGC. Despite the grade, it might do well as a relatively rare MH PL.
<< <i>
<< <i>
WITHOUT QUESTION, RESUBMISSIONS FOR DM/PL SHOULD BE FREE!
>>
It would certainly be a nice gesture to the community and would improve the consistency of the PCGS graded pieces. These things are NOT cheap to get graded!
Though I think the flood of regrades would be enormous between the ATBs and UHRs, so I don't think it will happen. >>
I already sold my pcgs pucks that were prooflike, but if I still had them, I would quietly re-submit the prooflike ones with a copy of my original submission form to show the cert numbers matched and see if good things came of it-----------------BigE
<< <i>
WITHOUT QUESTION, RESUBMISSIONS FOR DM/PL SHOULD BE FREE!
>>
Really? Without question? Did anyone force folks to get them graded right away?
What about when PCGS was not using FB, or FBL, etc.....should all the ones that had theirs graded before those designations get theirs resubmitted for free as well?
PCGS is a business and makes moving business decisions. While it would certainly be a nice gesture of theirs to not charge, or to allow a smaller charge, for the designation review, I am surprised folks think it should be mandatory.
Not to say I don't understand the disappointment. I do. But I also understand a business and the business decisions behind it.....and take accountability for my own choices/actions.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
<< <i>I have yet to see the Washington side on any of these 5 oz ATB coins with true frost and real mirrored fields. I am only guessing here, since I have only held a 100 or more in hand, that the standards are less for these ATB coins. >>
Here you go...only used my cell phone camera...from Fidelitrade.
I'm at a loss to understand the significance of your statement regarding forcing anyone to grade right away? We should have waited? For what? Were we to forecast this change?? Please explain that statement.
The fact is, we've already paid them very well to have them graded. The shipping and hassle should be more than enough to have them re-considered for PL/DM.
My family managed to maintain a successful business for 5 generations - not very common. Part of a business decision is factoring in good will - not being penny wise and dollar foolish. Letting the original submitters re-submit for PL/DM consideration for free or for a nominal ($10) fee would buy far more in good will then it would cost from it's customers. Their costs would be minimal and the good will would go far.
I'd think that the comments from posters here would be a great gage of sentiment for PCGS on this issue.
As a business decision, I think that this would indeed be a no-brainer. I have no doubt that they'll be hearing from a lot of their customers in very short order about this very subject.
In addition, PCGS should want consistency as much as we do in their grading of these pucks. DM/PLs should be correctly labeled as such, not just the ones sent from mid - Feb and later.