Were the old, small ANACS holders the nicest ever?

lkeigwin · February 23, 2013 11:31AM

I always liked them.

Why did they fail? Did ANACS feel pressure to conform? Or was there something fundamentally wrong with the old holders?

I guess there's no going back.

If you have good photos of a special coin in an old ANACS holder, with the holder, please share it.

Lance.

MrHalfDime · February 23, 2013 11:36AM

"Were the old, small ANACS holders the nicest ever?"

Yes.

Zoins · February 23, 2013 11:40AM

I like the small ANACS (and ICG) holders quite a bit. It would be nice if more coins came in them and/or if the top TPGs started using similar holders - smaller size, better stackability.

crypto79 · February 23, 2013 11:47AM

They got to get some special coins in them as they were first but the holders were hard to stack and sort while ANACS standards softened over time there rep soon followed. By the time their slab changed it was already too late and it was just a desperate move to try and save the ship. I personally think pcgs green holders are the best followed by the SP prong holders. The NGC holder is very nice too ESP for gold coins but I don't see the point of using a distant number 2 company when the prices are similar to number 1.

DRUNNER · February 23, 2013 11:51AM

Lance .

As you are aware, I am sort of a 'holder guy' . .

Yes, those old alphanumeric holders were just superb. I have loved them ever since, and search them out.

Many advantages. I don't think their failure had anything to do with the mechanics of the holder . . they just got overrun by a business model that was superior . . . . .or better funded.

Great times . .

Drunner
(Doily Slut -- and ex- CBX rider (original 1979 model with sport kit!!! 103 HP and 551# dry weight)

jayPem · February 23, 2013 12:04PM

Courtesy of Moldnut...this coin is really pretty ! I have to tilt the coin to get a bit of color in my shots, so they come out all wrong...but this one really has IT !

stealer · February 23, 2013 12:13PM

I recall an article about a test being done on slabs during that era to see their ability to be penetrated by gasses. PCGS and NGC did okay, but ANACS white slabs fell flat on their face. I can't seem to find it, however

AnkurJ · February 23, 2013 12:15PM

Im not familiar with the history of ANACS, but did their head grader change throughout the years?

I have crossed many coins from the small holders to problem free PCGS slabs in the same grade. That being said, there are still a good number of dogs left in those holders.
Here is an example I made a mistake of buying a few years ago, and was VERY fortunate to sell it for a profit.

And on the flip side, here is a gorgeous example I bought from Sheridan Downey. I have no doubt it will cross at PCGS.

bronzemat · February 23, 2013 12:23PM

I always liked those slabs the best. They were small, compact, seemed sturdy and looked just as nice. I had two but just 1 now, an 1878 s AU58 trade dollar.

astrorat · February 23, 2013 12:41PM

Yes they were. I also like the small ACG holders.

mozin · February 23, 2013 12:52PM

I certainly liked the old small ANACS holders the best of all the holders shown so far by any and all the grading services. My problem in showing any of my coins in their old ANACS holders is that I deleted them when I scanned them in their new holders.

In my opinion, all of the newer ANACS holders are junk. Some of the newer holder styles are fragile, and they all look bad to me. Wouldn't it be nice if ANACS went back to the old small holders? I might even then send some coins in for reholder.

123cents · February 23, 2013 3:38PM

I think they changed the holder when James Taylor took over.

lordmarcovan · February 23, 2013 4:03PM

<< Were the old, small ANACS holders the nicest ever? >>

Not as far as I'm concerned.

I didn't hate 'em- they were fine- but not my favorite by a longshot.

Grading aside, from strictly the plastic point of view, I liked the SEGS holders the best.

howards · February 23, 2013 4:34PM

Without concerning myself with the relative accuracy of the grading of the coin within, then yes, I really liked the old small ANACS holders. They took up a lot less space to store.

GrumpyEd · February 23, 2013 4:34PM

<< In my opinion, all of the newer ANACS holders are junk. Some of the newer holder styles are fragile, and they all look bad to me. >>

Another case of "why fix it if it works!"
The newer ones break too easily.
Also they changed it too often and even changed the shape so boxes were different.

At least PCGS seems to keep the size the same.
I hope they don't decide to change it.

thisnamztaken · February 23, 2013 4:59PM

I like them a lot - compact, uncluttered, clean look to them, and they don't draw your eye away from the coin like most new versions do. That said, I hate their ugly yellow holders...ugh.

I submitted this SLQ to them myself, several years ago and I think it would/should be a 65 in any holder (and probably a Full Head). My photography doesn't do it justice.

Dolan · February 23, 2013 5:09PM

The nicest? No. I think the ANA holders were better- they looked a lot like the ANACS ones, and if I'm not mistaken, they might have actually been the original ANACS ones to begin with. Anyway, they have "ANA" written in blue instead of "ANACS" in green. Those were something else. I've only seen a handful of them so far.

lordmarcovan · February 23, 2013 5:11PM

<< The nicest? No. I think the ANA holders were better- they looked a lot like the ANACS ones, and if I'm not mistaken, they might have actually been the original ANACS ones to begin with. Anyway, they have "ANA" written in blue instead of "ANACS" in green. Those were something else. I've only seen a handful of them so far. >>

I've only had one of those. It had a VG or Fine 1805 dime in it. Was slightly overgraded, actually- I think it was graded F12 but the coin was more like VG10, and I only got VG10-ish money from it. It was a nice coin, though, and a neat old holder.

Dolan · February 23, 2013 5:21PM

Interesting. I've found them generally undergraded, esp when it made a difference. I used to have an MS64 that got MS67 money. A friend of mine had a CC Morgan in one titled "AU58." Crossed over to PCGS MS64. That's probably the biggest jump I've heard of for those. Pretty impressive, I guess.

But again I can't comment on them too much beside the fact that I really like them. I really haven't seen many of them.

PerryHall · February 23, 2013 6:46PM

<< "Were the old, small ANACS holders the nicest ever?"

Yes. >>

PerryHall · February 23, 2013 6:55PM

<< I recall an article about a test being done on slabs during that era to see their ability to be penetrated by gasses. PCGS and NGC did okay, but ANACS white slabs fell flat on their face. I can't seem to find it, however

>>

The tests were performed by Coin World. I remember that it was the first generation PCGS rattler slabs were the ones that didn't do well in the tests.

morgansforever · February 23, 2013 8:28PM

I'm partial to the old Anacs slab. Although I have no evidence, they seem to produce some nice toning.
The older slab should be revisited as the new ones feel cheap, jmo.

lcoopie · February 23, 2013 8:36PM

i believe your toning pattern could be called
anacs holder toning

amwldcoin · February 23, 2013 9:36PM

The main reason I really liked the old ANACS holders is the size of the slab.

The biggest downside to the old ANACS holders was how easily they would break. I saw quite a few dropped at shows over the years. If it's a concrete floor(which many shows are) you were lucky if it only cracked. Many a times I have seen an old ANACS holder dropped and see the coin flying out of the broken holder. They are by far the easiest slab to break. Usually just a light tap on the edge of the holder and it will separate cleanly in 1/2.

crypto79 · February 23, 2013 9:58PM

The number of blast white (grey) classic vf & xf coins in graded holders shade my opinion of anything having to do with ANACS

JJSingleton · February 23, 2013 11:18PM

For me it is all about the size. The smaller the holder the better in my opinion. I would like to see all TPGs reduce their holder size substantially. It seems my safe deposit box is filled with 90% plastic and 10% coins.

lcoopie · February 23, 2013 11:22PM

to compare toning patterns
in an old anacs holder

DNADave · February 23, 2013 11:28PM

Yes they were.

And I distinctly remember the majority of folks here (at the time) poopooing ANACS for offering the details grade holders.

ctf_error_coins · February 24, 2013 12:29AM

Those little white holders STILL have some big coins in them.

I would never crack an old little white slab, never.

erickso1 · February 24, 2013 12:31AM

I've got 4 or 5. A couple ANA and a couple ANACS. Most are commems, one is a penny and I think I have a peace dollar. The two below are the only two I could find that I had pics of the slabs.

mkman123 · February 24, 2013 12:33AM

there are good coins and bad coins in the small anacs. I have a beautiful franky in a anacs holder that i sent to shane.

lcoopie · February 24, 2013 12:48AM

those 2 commems are beautiful IMO

coinbuf · February 24, 2013 12:51AM

I also liked them quite well and still have many Morgans in those holders, alas no decent pics I could share tho.

Edited to add: I forgot that I do have this one group shot, I have afew more that this but here it is.

smokincoin · February 24, 2013 12:56AM

<< For me it is all about the size. The smaller the holder the better in my opinion. I would like to see all TPGs reduce their holder size substantially. >>

roadrunner · February 24, 2013 1:08AM

ANACS simply was the 3rd wheel once PCGS and NGC shifted into high gear. It was no contest. It didn't matter at that point how conservative their grading was or how cheap it was.
At that time PCGS was still using high profile "guest" dealers to supplement the process. There was no way ANACS could compete.

The early 1990 gold foil hologram reverse holders with no bar codes are typically the most conservative grading you will ever see in an ANACS holder. These coins are typically on
par with PCGS and NGC of that same era. I don't ever recall running into a dog in one of these holders in the past 10-12 years. The coins holdered without the gold foil hologram just
aren't of the same quality imo. The holders were too small and hard to stack. But the coins are great. I find more potential upgrades in these holders today than I do rattlers.

410a · February 24, 2013 1:27AM

I liked those holders. I thought they were the best, size wise, for rare coins. ANACS was IMHO the only grading service that could accurately grade copper and I mean over the past 25 years of "slabbing" and prior too. The new ANACS with all those clunking holders yellow etc annoy me to no end. I liked both of the small white ANACS holders narrow and wide, wides were better, as an opinion.

Constantine · February 24, 2013 1:44AM

<< i believe your toning pattern could be called
anacs holder toning >>

I agree. Very consistent toning patterns and often quite attractive.

CoinJunkie · February 24, 2013 2:00AM

Nope, anything with opaque white plastic is not under consideration for "nicest" in my book. It draws
too much attention to itself. The only time I think it wins is with wildly toned Morgans.

ambro51 · February 24, 2013 3:12AM

At least they font feel like a phone in your pocket

Twobitcollector · February 24, 2013 3:50AM

I like them...if the coin is right

johnny9434 · February 24, 2013 5:43AM

yeah, i kinda liked the small anacs holders as well. that and the photo certs.

crazyhounddog · February 24, 2013 6:34AM

I have to agree 100% on that note!! Here's my 26-D MS-64 a very attractive piece in an old anacs little white holder. Not sure why they failed, I always like them and there was a time when I would seek them out. I have a few......CHD

thisnamztaken · February 24, 2013 8:39AM

Beautiful Commems there, Nicholas!

Meltdown · February 24, 2013 12:10PM

Well, I have to add my Barber Dime... This came from an old blue label ANA holder
Photo's courtesy of Todd -

JRocco · February 24, 2013 12:37PM

I also love the old ANACS holders

IrishMikey · February 25, 2013 5:21AM

Some quick history:

The first small white ANACS holder appeared in 1989. The gold foil hologram was only used for a few years.
A chemical used in tiny amounts during manufacturing to allow the inserts to release more easily from the
molding apparatus is apparently what caused the rim toning that made these holders "famous."

After Amos Press purchased ANACS and moved it to Dublin, Ohio the label and the hologram were both
"tweaked" a bit, but the holder stayed the same. A few years later the size of the outer shells was made
a bit bigger for a better seal, but the white insert did not change.

After ANACS was sold to Anderson Press in 2005, the new owners began work on changing the holder so
it more closely resembled other services' holders. Their first attempt, after they moved the company to
Austin, Texas, did not seal very well, and popped apart fairly easily. Subsequent versions sealed better,
but still had problems.

The most recent version entered the market after the sale of ANACS in late 2007. While many members of
this board do not like them, they appear to be the most stable, best sealed, and most conservatively graded
ANACS holders in years, IMHO.

IrishMikey · February 25, 2013 5:28AM

Forgot to add -- the earliest holders are quick to identify. Their ID number is two letters, followed
by four numbers (i.e. XA 3827). I think the ID numbers changed to all digits in the early 1990's.

coinbuf · February 25, 2013 5:28AM

<< The most recent version entered the market after the sale of ANACS in late 2007. While many members of
this board do not like them, they appear to be the most stable, best sealed, and most conservatively graded
ANACS holders in years, IMHO. >>

Too bad none of this has helped as thay are still considered at the bottom of the pool.

Constantine · February 25, 2013 5:34AM

<< Some quick history:

The first small white ANACS holder appeared in 1989. The gold foil hologram was only used for a few years.
A chemical used in tiny amounts during manufacturing to allow the inserts to release more easily from the
molding apparatus is apparently what caused the rim toning that made these holders "famous."

After Amos Press purchased ANACS and moved it to Dublin, Ohio the label and the hologram were both
"tweaked" a bit, but the holder stayed the same. A few years later the size of the outer shells was made
a bit bigger for a better seal, but the white insert did not change.

After ANACS was sold to Anderson Press in 2005, the new owners began work on changing the holder so
it more closely resembled other services' holders. Their first attempt, after they moved the company to
Austin, Texas, did not seal very well, and popped apart fairly easily. Subsequent versions sealed better,
but still had problems.

The most recent version entered the market after the sale of ANACS in late 2007. While many members of
this board do not like them, they appear to be the most stable, best sealed, and most conservatively graded
ANACS holders in years, IMHO. >>

This is some great info, thanks for sharing and I actually copied and saved this for reference.

Timbuk3 · February 25, 2013 5:35AM

I liked them !!!

Were the old, small ANACS holders the nicest ever?

Comments

Leave a Comment