What was the most important thing to come out of the Ask Me Anything session?

291fifth · January 1, 2019 3:56PM

I think it was in regard to a new holder that effectively eliminates the possibility of counterfeiting the PCGS holder. The issue of counterfeits of anything in the hobby is now a critical matter. If the counterfeiters are allowed to win the hobby will die.

Just how to say ahead of counterfeiters that operate outside of the US is going to be a difficult. I hope PCGS succeeds in this area.

Regulated · January 1, 2019 4:08PM

I think it was top leadership at PCGS showing an interest in feedback from the coin community.

MrEureka · January 1, 2019 4:15PM

Apparently, Pablo is a good dog.

Cameonut · January 1, 2019 4:28PM

I thinkin' Pablo was the star of the show. I am also thinkin' he is a Shih Tzu but could be a Lhasa Apso.

Here is one of my three Shih Tzu's for comparison. After all, we compare coins on this forum, why not our four legged family members?

Colonialcoin · January 1, 2019 4:37PM

Not only do those cute dogs get gold CAC’s but also a box of their favorite dog treats!!

TwoSides2aCoin · January 1, 2019 4:43PM

I didn't get banned.
Okay, so it's the least important thing.

BustDMs · January 1, 2019 4:46PM

I think the most important thing is the willingness of PCGS to participate directly with their clients in a public forum.

Hopefully we earned another session.

1tommy · January 1, 2019 4:47PM

Why would they delete all the questions that members took the time to ask? I just don't get it. Everyone was being nice and the questions we asked were just tossed out. Here I thought this was a great idea but by them deleting all the other questions he did not answer sure makes me feel like I wasted my time...Enjoy Tom

ms70 · January 1, 2019 4:56PM

Addressing counterfeiting... BUT... while I agree counterfeiting is a critical concern I wasn't happy about the mention of new holders possibly not fitting in the current storage boxes. I think keeping the same dimensions needs to be seriously considered for consistent storage and stackability.

Personally I have everything organized in Intercept Track Boxes which are about the same size as PCGS boxes.
Those of us who use these and other storage methods that are custom to slab size (and there are many of us) will not be too happy about having an open slot or two in a slab box that can no longer be filled by date/series/etc due to a new slab size. I'm not going to get my entire collection re-holdered so they can be smartly organized together in one spot. That's not fair. I'm sure there's anti-counterfeiting techniques that can be incorporated into the same size slab.

MrEureka · January 1, 2019 7:11PM

@1tommy said:
Why would they delete all the questions that members took the time to ask? I just don't get it. Everyone was being nice and the questions we asked were just tossed out. Here I thought this was a great idea but by them deleting all the other questions he did not answer sure makes me feel like I wasted my time...Enjoy Tom

Looks like they just wanted to clean up the page for easy reading.

As for the unanswered questions, I suppose they'll have to wait for another time.

jdimmick · January 1, 2019 7:23PM

I truly don't like the new holders, they a seem cheaper feel to me. I can snap them in two, with my bare hands.

coinbuf · January 1, 2019 7:43PM

@jdimmick said:
I truly don't like the new holders, they a seem cheaper feel to me. I can snap them in two, with my bare hands.

You better stop going to the gym

dpoole · January 1, 2019 7:49PM

Good to know they're planning to photograph ALL coins coming in. First step in pedigreeing coins, and establishing an eventual basis for stabilizing grading standards.

amwldcoin · January 1, 2019 8:19PM

I liked a lot of what was said but was really disappointed with the answer to my question.

I think the PCGS price guide does need to be addressed. So many coins are valued way to high...and of course bias here, many in my series are priced way too low!

How many people here think you can buy an AU58 1901-S Barber half for $2600? The POP is 4! While I paid a bit too much for mine...$13,500...the only other sale I know of was around $12,000. The only accurate to over priced coins IMHO for Barber Half's are for the C class (overgraded non CAC able or coins that should not have straight graded) common date coins. The semi key, condition rarity, and better dates are off sometimes by multiples of price guide! I don't follow Mint Sate coins...I am talking about midgrade coins F-AU+).

I was tempted to offer up my sales records of close to 2000 certified coins in circ grades but was put off by the answer I received.

I will say the same about grey sheet too!

Insider2 · January 1, 2019 8:26PM

@1tommy said:
Why would they delete all the questions that members took the time to ask? I just don't get it. Everyone was being nice and the questions we asked were just tossed out. Here I thought this was a great idea but by them deleting all the other questions he did not answer sure makes me feel like I wasted my time...Enjoy Tom

What did you ask? How was it worded - EXACTLY?

ChrisH821 · January 1, 2019 8:32PM

That there are plans to photograph every coin

ms70 · January 1, 2019 9:42PM

@ChrisH821 said:
That there are plans to photograph every coin

I wonder if each photo will be a TrueView style.

cameonut2011 · January 1, 2019 9:49PM

@Insider2 said:

@1tommy said:
Why would they delete all the questions that members took the time to ask? I just don't get it. Everyone was being nice and the questions we asked were just tossed out. Here I thought this was a great idea but by them deleting all the other questions he did not answer sure makes me feel like I wasted my time...Enjoy Tom

What did you ask? How was it worded - EXACTLY?

I don't really care that most of my questions were ignored as they were really suggestions morphed into question format.

First Post:

Many collectors and dealers perceive a fluctuation in third party grading standards between "loose" and "tight" periods over time. What is PCGS doing or will PCGS do under your administration to ensure that grading remains consistent over time? Has PCGS ever considered allowing graders to specialize and focus on a few series/types to ensure greater intra-series and intra-type consistency?
Will PCGS consider extending its prooflike and deep mirror prooflike designations to all regular issue U.S. coins like other major third party grading services currently do?
Will PCGS consider adding an eye appeal designation much like NGC's "star" designation?
Will you offer a combined shipping feature so that submissions can be sent together in one package at a reduced cost to the submitter?
Would PCGS consider raising the dollar threshold rates for the modern and economy tiers which are capped at $300 declared value per coin?
Does PCGS still use the "sniffer" on secure shield submissions?
(exact wording of first six)

Second Post:

I also asked a separate question about including a tag inside the slab that would change colors when the slab was cracked or exposed to gas including toning agents to combat post encapsulation artificial toning. (paraphrased)

Third Post:

Would PCGS consider bringing back the copper color guarantee with a 5 or 10 year expiration date? (paraphrased)

Someone else also asked about True Views for rattlers without cracking the coins, but that one was unanswered as well.

Dave99B · January 1, 2019 9:49PM

Mug shots of all coins. HUGE!

Dave

messydesk · January 1, 2019 11:22PM

I got some answers I was looking for (outside consultants for varieties -- yes, mug shots of coins in slabs -- yes) along with others I didn't like as much (no combined shipping or reusing tags on reholders yet), but most important was that I got a good vibe from Brett as being someone who wants to listen to the customer.

BryceM · January 2, 2019 12:03AM

I agree that the most important thing is that they’re listening to their base. In my book that’s the sign of a guy who will properly diagnose the issues before moving to correct them. It’s amazing how often that concept slips by the boss.

Second, it sounds like guarantee reviews won’t sit on a shelf for six months before they get any attention. A guarantee doesn’t mean much if you have to give up your property for 6-12 months to make use of it.

MrEureka · January 2, 2019 7:01AM

@BryceM said:

Second, it sounds like guarantee reviews won’t sit on a shelf for six months before they get any attention. A guarantee doesn’t mean much if you have to give up your property for 6-12 months to make use of it.

On the other hand, PCGS has a legitimate interest in discouraging guarantee reviews. After all, there’s a limited amount of money available for “buybacks”. Making customers wait is one solution. Charging more for reviews is another.

Greeniejr · January 2, 2019 7:43AM

@MrEureka said:

@BryceM said:

Second, it sounds like guarantee reviews won’t sit on a shelf for six months before they get any attention. A guarantee doesn’t mean much if you have to give up your property for 6-12 months to make use of it.

On the other hand, PCGS has a legitimate interest in discouraging guarantee reviews. After all, there’s a limited amount of money available for “buybacks”. Making customers wait is one solution. Charging more for reviews is another.

I think it has less to do with discouraging submissions and more to do with the level of humility needed for the leadership at PCGS to eat a coin. This is something that was not present before and is very much present now. On at least one occasion we sent in a PF IHC and said please put this in a RB holder from red since it had turned. Our client did not want money (it was a couple hundred $ at most). He just wanted the coin in the correct holder. It was returned in the same holder telling us we were wrong and should know better. The customer cracked it, sent it in raw and it came back RB instead of red. I believe things like this will no longer be an issue.
Brett is the right person at the right time and I am excited to see what happens moving forward.

Ronyahski · January 2, 2019 11:28AM

That he doesn’t think that grading is inconsistent to the point it is an issue harming the business.

cameonut2011 · January 2, 2019 12:37PM

Added to add> @Greeniejr said:

@MrEureka said:

@BryceM said:

Second, it sounds like guarantee reviews won’t sit on a shelf for six months before they get any attention. A guarantee doesn’t mean much if you have to give up your property for 6-12 months to make use of it.

On the other hand, PCGS has a legitimate interest in discouraging guarantee reviews. After all, there’s a limited amount of money available for “buybacks”. Making customers wait is one solution. Charging more for reviews is another.

I think it has less to do with discouraging submissions and more to do with the level of humility needed for the leadership at PCGS to eat a coin. This is something that was not present before and is very much present now. On at least one occasion we sent in a PF IHC and said please put this in a RB holder from red since it had turned. Our client did not want money (it was a couple hundred $ at most). He just wanted the coin in the correct holder. It was returned in the same holder telling us we were wrong and should know better. The customer cracked it, sent it in raw and it came back RB instead of red. I believe things like this will no longer be an issue.
Brett is the right person at the right time and I am excited to see what happens moving forward.

Since PCGS no longer covers copper color it would be a waste to do so anymore. I no longer buy PCGS red copper. They could include a color expiration date, but no guarantee is an interest killer when buying online anyway.

ShadyDave · January 2, 2019 12:42PM

@ms70 said:

@ChrisH821 said:
That there are plans to photograph every coin

I wonder if each photo will be a TrueView style.

Probably more like what the PCGS Europe branches do. Full slab shot (or hi-res scan) of coin, similar to what ATS does.

originalisbest · January 2, 2019 4:33PM

@cameonut2011 said:
Added to add> @Greeniejr said:

@MrEureka said:

@BryceM said:

Second, it sounds like guarantee reviews won’t sit on a shelf for six months before they get any attention. A guarantee doesn’t mean much if you have to give up your property for 6-12 months to make use of it.

On the other hand, PCGS has a legitimate interest in discouraging guarantee reviews. After all, there’s a limited amount of money available for “buybacks”. Making customers wait is one solution. Charging more for reviews is another.

I think it has less to do with discouraging submissions and more to do with the level of humility needed for the leadership at PCGS to eat a coin. This is something that was not present before and is very much present now. On at least one occasion we sent in a PF IHC and said please put this in a RB holder from red since it had turned. Our client did not want money (it was a couple hundred $ at most). He just wanted the coin in the correct holder. It was returned in the same holder telling us we were wrong and should know better. The customer cracked it, sent it in raw and it came back RB instead of red. I believe things like this will no longer be an issue.
Brett is the right person at the right time and I am excited to see what happens moving forward.

Since PCGS no longer covers copper color it would be a waste to do so anymore. I no longer buy PCGS red copper. They could include a color expiration date, but no guarantee is an interest killer when buying online anyway.

This sounds as if you wouldn't then ever buy red copper, period? I don't have a lot of red copper, but the few Indian and early Lincoln reds I have have maintained their appearance nicely ever since I slabbed them now 15+ years ago. It's not their fault they're red. I still enjoy having them in my collection.

TurboSnail · January 2, 2019 5:19PM

I personally wish PCGS will go with the implementation of RFID tags within holders. With a smart phone, any collector can easily identify counterfeit by scanning the holder showing data and images. And if one choose to upgrade the tag, it can also be track down with satellite in case of thief prevention. It will also be very convenient for both dealer and seller to go through the entire inventory at the tables during shows.

Bochiman · January 2, 2019 5:27PM

@messydesk said:
I got some answers I was looking for (outside consultants for varieties -- yes, mug shots of coins in slabs -- yes) along with others I didn't like as much (no combined shipping or reusing tags on reholders yet), but most important was that I got a good vibe from Brett as being someone who wants to listen to the customer.

On the combined shipping...I am with you on that. I do understand Brett's/PCGS' point of view on why they don't offer it, but I keep trying to think if there were some middle ground....

For instance....if someone were to check a box, asking for combined shipping (on up to 2, maybe 3, orders, max, that can't be so different as to likely span months (ie...variety and moderns at the same time...variety attribution COULD take a long time, depending, but moderns are usually pretty quick), and knowing that all bets were off on any turnaround time by doing so.

Also, for the "hassle" of tracking multiple submissions under that type of plan, maybe add in an "administration fee" of, say, $5 combined order.

Personally, I would prefer that over having to pay 2, or more, separate shipping charges and having submissions coming back on separate days or just a week or 2 apart.

messydesk · January 2, 2019 7:56PM

@ms70 said:

@ChrisH821 said:
That there are plans to photograph every coin

I wonder if each photo will be a TrueView style.

It would have to be something that wouldn't increase the cost of service much, if at all, so I'm guessing it would be a contraption that sat next to the enslabulator with a "put slab here" jig on it and a button to take the picture.

messydesk · January 2, 2019 7:56PM

@ms70 said:

@ChrisH821 said:
That there are plans to photograph every coin

I wonder if each photo will be a TrueView style.

It would have to be something that wouldn't increase the cost of service much, if at all, so I'm guessing it would be a contraption that sat next to the enslabulator with a "put slab here" jig on it and a button to take the picture.

messydesk · January 2, 2019 8:07PM

@Bochiman said:

@messydesk said:
I got some answers I was looking for (outside consultants for varieties -- yes, mug shots of coins in slabs -- yes) along with others I didn't like as much (no combined shipping or reusing tags on reholders yet), but most important was that I got a good vibe from Brett as being someone who wants to listen to the customer.

On the combined shipping...I am with you on that. I do understand Brett's/PCGS' point of view on why they don't offer it, but I keep trying to think if there were some middle ground....

For instance....if someone were to check a box, asking for combined shipping (on up to 2, maybe 3, orders, max, that can't be so different as to likely span months (ie...variety and moderns at the same time...variety attribution COULD take a long time, depending, but moderns are usually pretty quick), and knowing that all bets were off on any turnaround time by doing so.

Also, for the "hassle" of tracking multiple submissions under that type of plan, maybe add in an "administration fee" of, say, $5 combined order.

Personally, I would prefer that over having to pay 2, or more, separate shipping charges and having submissions coming back on separate days or just a week or 2 apart.

Yeah, he cites logistical issues, but I think those can be overcome. Since partial orders are going to have to be stored, limit it to groups of small orders such that they would use no more than one specially labeled blue box showing all invoice numbers bound for that box, and no more than 4 invoices. A spot on the submission form would be used to indicate which invoice was going to be used to pay combined shipping. There's already a $10 handling fee, so I don't know that another fee would be necessary, but if it were, it would be a small percentage of an entire return shipping fee.

logger7 · January 2, 2019 8:30PM

@Greeniejr said:

@MrEureka said:

@BryceM said:

Second, it sounds like guarantee reviews won’t sit on a shelf for six months before they get any attention. A guarantee doesn’t mean much if you have to give up your property for 6-12 months to make use of it.

On the other hand, PCGS has a legitimate interest in discouraging guarantee reviews. After all, there’s a limited amount of money available for “buybacks”. Making customers wait is one solution. Charging more for reviews is another.

I think it has less to do with discouraging submissions and more to do with the level of humility needed for the leadership at PCGS to eat a coin. This is something that was not present before and is very much present now. On at least one occasion we sent in a PF IHC and said please put this in a RB holder from red since it had turned. Our client did not want money (it was a couple hundred $ at most). He just wanted the coin in the correct holder. It was returned in the same holder telling us we were wrong and should know better. The customer cracked it, sent it in raw and it came back RB instead of red. I believe things like this will no longer be an issue.
Brett is the right person at the right time and I am excited to see what happens moving forward.

Previously some posters said they had good experiences with the guarantee submissions, but the ones I remember were major dealers. From what I have seen both this service and NGC (and likely Anacs and ICG) will usually just send the coin back saying the coin in properly graded. I found it a long and drawn out process that would certainly discourage that submission option.

Bochiman · January 3, 2019 12:29AM

@logger7 said:

@Greeniejr said:

@MrEureka said:

@BryceM said:

Second, it sounds like guarantee reviews won’t sit on a shelf for six months before they get any attention. A guarantee doesn’t mean much if you have to give up your property for 6-12 months to make use of it.

On the other hand, PCGS has a legitimate interest in discouraging guarantee reviews. After all, there’s a limited amount of money available for “buybacks”. Making customers wait is one solution. Charging more for reviews is another.

I think it has less to do with discouraging submissions and more to do with the level of humility needed for the leadership at PCGS to eat a coin. This is something that was not present before and is very much present now. On at least one occasion we sent in a PF IHC and said please put this in a RB holder from red since it had turned. Our client did not want money (it was a couple hundred $ at most). He just wanted the coin in the correct holder. It was returned in the same holder telling us we were wrong and should know better. The customer cracked it, sent it in raw and it came back RB instead of red. I believe things like this will no longer be an issue.
Brett is the right person at the right time and I am excited to see what happens moving forward.

Previously some posters said they had good experiences with the guarantee submissions, but the ones I remember were major dealers. From what I have seen both this service and NGC (and likely Anacs and ICG) will usually just send the coin back saying the coin in properly graded. I found it a long and drawn out process that would certainly discourage that submission option.

I've done 3 "guarantees".

No. 1: Proof Kennedy 1968 purchased on ebay. Had a spot on it, but was graded PR69DCAM. Took MANY months, PCGS (HRH) agreed it wasn't right. I was contacted and quoted a price. It recouped my cost and I could purchase a replacement (all I was after) so I agreed. I was sent a check and the raw coin back (it would NEVER be straight graded again, imho, with that "milk spot"...or, even if it was, it wouldn't be worth more than melt.

No. 2: 2006 Annv Set SAEs. A couple of them. I thought they were higher grades than what were given. I got them back, MONTHS later, and no change except for my charge of asking for the guaranty (~$25/coin or something...I forget). They had "grown" milkspots during that time....none were there when submitted/returned to me. Easily seen when they FINALLY came back.

No. 3: 1968 MS66FB Roosevelt. In the records as a MS66. I sent it in for label correction as it was really a no doubt FB. I got it back as a MS65FB. No check, no discussion. I think I got rid of it and just bought a replacement after that as I was pretty unhappy. I disagreed but it was costing MORE in shipping than it was worth at that level.

So, I have seen a few sides of the PCGS guaranty. Two were with HRH and 1 was when DW was in charge.
I was happy with the results 33 1/3% of the time and on 20% of the coins I sent in. Not sure if that is a good thing or not....

Bochiman · January 3, 2019 12:34AM

@messydesk said:

@Bochiman said:

@messydesk said:
I got some answers I was looking for (outside consultants for varieties -- yes, mug shots of coins in slabs -- yes) along with others I didn't like as much (no combined shipping or reusing tags on reholders yet), but most important was that I got a good vibe from Brett as being someone who wants to listen to the customer.

On the combined shipping...I am with you on that. I do understand Brett's/PCGS' point of view on why they don't offer it, but I keep trying to think if there were some middle ground....

For instance....if someone were to check a box, asking for combined shipping (on up to 2, maybe 3, orders, max, that can't be so different as to likely span months (ie...variety and moderns at the same time...variety attribution COULD take a long time, depending, but moderns are usually pretty quick), and knowing that all bets were off on any turnaround time by doing so.

Also, for the "hassle" of tracking multiple submissions under that type of plan, maybe add in an "administration fee" of, say, $5 combined order.

Personally, I would prefer that over having to pay 2, or more, separate shipping charges and having submissions coming back on separate days or just a week or 2 apart.

Yeah, he cites logistical issues, but I think those can be overcome. Since partial orders are going to have to be stored, limit it to groups of small orders such that they would use no more than one specially labeled blue box showing all invoice numbers bound for that box, and no more than 4 invoices. A spot on the submission form would be used to indicate which invoice was going to be used to pay combined shipping. There's already a $10 handling fee, so I don't know that another fee would be necessary, but if it were, it would be a small percentage of an entire return shipping fee.

John - I agree "logistics" can be overcome. Usually just resources (in this case, money and a headcount...or partial one). I may be a shareholder (small one) but I don't run PCGS nor know their daily numbers...but, I would be hardpressed to think that this couldn't be cost recovery. Would just require someone who was on top of things, had a small place for storage, and could be hired/spared for this.

I agree there is already a "handling" fee, but, this would be work required in addition, which is why I mentioned a small, additional, fee. For most of us, what it would save in the extra shipping costs, it would really be worth it (if it were just $5 or so), imho.

Would also require people who did it to have to really agree to be patient and not whine nor clog up the CS line asking "where are my submissions????"

keets · January 3, 2019 5:51AM

What was the most important thing to come out of the Ask Me Anything session

if I judge only from the "33 replies" it would be that there wasn't much interest and that claychaser and messydesk seem to have the new leaders ear. they represent almost 50% of the questions chosen to be answered.

that isn't encouraging to me.

291fifth · January 3, 2019 5:55AM

@keets said:
What was the most important thing to come out of the Ask Me Anything session

if I judge only from the "33 replies" it would be that there wasn't much interest and that claychaser and messydesk seem to have the new leaders ear. they represent almost 50% of the questions chosen to be answered.

that isn't encouraging to me.

I'm surprised that it took so long for someone to mention this.

keets · January 3, 2019 6:07AM

not to be critical(well, maybe it is my intention) but the decision to hold this "Forum" was a good idea that was poorly scheduled. holding it on New Year's Day at 10AM, 1PM EDT, meant that a lot of people might be getting ready for a Pork Dinner with their family or relaxing to enjoy an afternoon of NCAA Football. some members may have been nursing a hangover and had no interest in getting online.

does Mr. Charville want an effective Forum to answer questions and get some realistic good PR to start his tenure?? open that thread with the same guidelines and allow HeatherBoyd to edit what comes in --- coupled with some time at the F.U.N. Show PCGS table, perhaps live streaming and posted here.

MrEureka · January 3, 2019 11:31AM

@keets said:
not to be critical(well, maybe it is my intention) but the decision to hold this "Forum" was a good idea that was poorly scheduled. holding it on New Year's Day at 10AM, 1PM EDT, meant that a lot of people might be getting ready for a Pork Dinner with their family or relaxing to enjoy an afternoon of NCAA Football. some members may have been nursing a hangover and had no interest in getting online.

does Mr. Charville want an effective Forum to answer questions and get some realistic good PR to start his tenure?? open that thread with the same guidelines and allow HeatherBoyd to edit what comes in --- coupled with some time at the F.U.N. Show PCGS table, perhaps live streaming and posted here.

Even with limited participation , there were certainly more than enough good questions to keep BC busy for the allowed time. And it wasn’t a work day, so you can’t blame him for not wanting to do a longer session.

Insider2 · January 3, 2019 12:08PM

@keets said:
What was the most important thing to come out of the Ask Me Anything session

if I judge only from the "33 replies" it would be that there wasn't much interest and that claychaser and messydesk seem to have the new leaders ear. they represent almost 50% of the questions chosen to be answered.

that isn't encouraging to me.

@keets said:
not to be critical(well, maybe it is my intention) but the decision to hold this "Forum" was a good idea that was poorly scheduled. holding it on New Year's Day at 10AM, 1PM EDT, meant that a lot of people might be getting ready for a Pork Dinner with their family or relaxing to enjoy an afternoon of NCAA Football. some members may have been nursing a hangover and had no interest in getting online.

does Mr. Charville want an effective Forum to answer questions and get some realistic good PR to start his tenure?? open that thread with the same guidelines and allow HeatherBoyd to edit what comes in --- coupled with some time at the F.U.N. Show PCGS table, perhaps live streaming and posted here.

Criticism is good. I guess you were either uninterested or too busy to ask a question. If you did ask a question it was not considered.

My excuse for not participating was I forgot. I got on at 10AM and realized I was too early due to EST. Then I started posting on another site and did not return to CU until an hour after the discussion was closed. Since I did not participate, I have nothing to bitch about!

messydesk · January 3, 2019 12:26PM

@keets said:
What was the most important thing to come out of the Ask Me Anything session

if I judge only from the "33 replies" it would be that there wasn't much interest and that claychaser and messydesk seem to have the new leaders ear. they represent almost 50% of the questions chosen to be answered.

that isn't encouraging to me.

What percentage of questions asked does that represent? I had a pile of carefully worded questions sitting in a text editor ready to be copied and pasted one at a time as soon as the forum opened up, and I imagine others that got many questions answered were similarly prepared. If you have other questions, send them to him, and my impression is that you'll get a straight answer. If you think I "have his ear" more than anyone else, then send me the questions and I'll ask him at FUN.

I imagine there'll be other such Q&A sessions in the future, none of which will be convenient for everyone. Sort of like the quarterly specials. The alternative is no Q&A.

ShadyDave · January 3, 2019 12:56PM

The answer I'm happiest about is that PCGS is going to start taking slab pics. That will help ID gassed and otherwise counterfeited coins/slabs going forward.

I wish my question about the proliferation of PCGS and other third party graded coins being "gassed" in their holder was answered. My question was deleted so I can't recite it word for word, but I asked A ) Are they aware this practice is going on? B ) What steps are they taking to stymie this from happening going forward?

Hopefully this Q&A turns into an annual thing. Maybe the community can brainstorm a set of "popular" questions to help seed the Q&A going forward. Having a list like that could help Heather and Brett answer some questions the community is interested in while others are coming up with their own specific questions during the allotted Q&A session.

keets · January 3, 2019 1:28PM

anything, I guess, is better than nothing. this has been tried before via HRH and it fell on its face. a forum thread or something like that sounds like a good idea but I suspect that the time/money needed by PCGS to make it effective are too much to make it succeed.

I think that PCGS is aware of most of what we would suggest, probably is already asking themselves the questions we have and pretty much have "the pulse" of the Hobby.

What was the most important thing to come out of the Ask Me Anything session?

Comments

Leave a Comment