DOES IT MATTER TO YOU?
Steve
Posts: 3,312 ✭✭✭
As a Set Registry collector of Lincoln cents with a particular interest in the Proof set registry, I see where the folks at PCGS have broken out TWO versions of the 2012 proof Lincoln cent. Now they are both listed as Deep Cameo (DCAM), they both have populations grading as either PR69DCAM or PR70DCAM but they each have SEPARATE PCGS assigned numbers. The so called "basic" version has 939 coins slabbed so far and the so called "first strike" version has 391 coins slabbed so far. I find this "interesting" because as far as I can understand the determination by PCGS to designate a particular coin as "first strike" has absolutely NO basis in fact with the actual striking of the coin at the US Mint. Effectively, this is just a marketing tool by PCGS. The two PCGS assigned numbers (511252 for the "basic" version and 511886 for the so called "first strike" version) simply tend to confuse the hobby as to how many coins of a particular denomination PCGS has actually slabbed. The labeling on the slab should not affect the coin's value in the mind of ANY knowledgeable collector.
Assuming this practice is now being done with other denominations beside the Lincoln cent, I would suggest those interested do what I did. Check the competition in your set registry and compare whether your 2012 coin's PCGS number is the same as your competition. It really doesn't matter, but somehow I think PCGS feels it does. JMHO. Steve
Assuming this practice is now being done with other denominations beside the Lincoln cent, I would suggest those interested do what I did. Check the competition in your set registry and compare whether your 2012 coin's PCGS number is the same as your competition. It really doesn't matter, but somehow I think PCGS feels it does. JMHO. Steve
0
Comments
But if the set only requires one or the other for the spot, then the numbers should be totaled and the same pop numbers should show in the set regardless of which coin you enter. I know this isn't the case now, but it should be.
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
<< <i>
But if the set only requires one or the other for the spot, then the numbers should be totaled and the same pop numbers should show in the set regardless of which coin you enter. I know this isn't the case now, but it should be. >>
Mike,
That is exactly why I initiated this thread. Part of the Set Registry reporting shows how many coins in the person's set registry have been graded at that level and how many have been graded higher. Unless the Set Registry is EXCLUSIVE to "first strikes" or "autograph labels", etc. the creation of separate PCGS numbers should be limited to a specific (1) denomination, (2) date, (3) color designation for copper. I am not a fan of all these special labels which PCGS (and NGC) have created for marketing purposes, but if they feel it is necessary, then create Set Registries exclusively for these coins to go into.
Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
For example, in my 1909 Mint Set, I chose to include a 1909-S Barber Half w/ the Inverted S Mintmark in my set which has a different PCGS Coin Number. The coin is graded MS64 and shows as a Pop 1 coin with none higher in my set. It is a bit misleading to someone looking at my 1909 set though since there are quite a few 1909-S Barber Halves out there with the standard coin number that are graded MS64 and also quite a few graded higher.
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
WS
<< <i>A similar issue exists when varieties are permitted in standard sets.
For example, in my 1909 Mint Set, I chose to include a 1909-S Barber Half w/ the Inverted S Mintmark in my set which has a different PCGS Coin Number. The coin is graded MS64 and shows as a Pop 1 coin with none higher in my set. It is a bit misleading to someone looking at my 1909 set though since there are quite a few 1909-S Barber Halves out there with the standard coin number that are graded MS64 and also quite a few graded higher. >>
I would think a better similarity for varieties would be with established varieties and their CPG counterparts with in the Complete Variety Sets. For example, the 1972/72 has two versions (and coin numbers) of the same coin. 2950 and 38013 are exactly the same coin but are displaying two totally separate populations which could possibly be misleading to the uninitiated.
Similar situations exist across the Silver Eagle (First Strike vs non-First Strike) and Presidential Dollars (First Day of Issue and regular Issue).
The real question will be: Where will it all end?
Has coin collecting now become "All about the Label?" or (in the case of some US Mint Products) "All about the packaging?"
The name is LEE!
<< <i>
<< <i>
The real question will be: Where will it all end?
Has coin collecting now become "All about the Label?" or (in the case of some US Mint Products) "All about the packaging?" >>
I agree. Personally, I will no longer start or participate in registry sets that are designed for the label, and not the coin. I decided I am a coin collector, not a label collector. I draw the line at first strikes, signiture labels, etc. The only exception is a few presidential first day of issues. I have not deleted them because my sets are pretty much complete. At the time I started them, I thought the strikes would be better since the dies had not worn down yet, so I got caught up in it. The day will come when I either retire them or just delete them.