@fathom said:
At first glance it seems a tough sell.
But then other tough sells have turned out to be full blown successes in numismatics:
** -Third party grading **
-CAC
-Modern Mint collectibles
-Poor 1 graded coins
Since the advent of PCGS' and, a year later, NGC's third party grading, both ventures have been an unqualified booming success that greatly increased the entry into coins of less-informed or more wary buyers of coins.
Before that, dealers lined up for grading appointments at ANACS.
I read somewhere that SPACs are floundering. Why can't the big bucks guys just own up like we do here in the coin business. I'm metaphorically selling old wine in new bottles. They're packaging risk the same way.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
Can someone explain why PCGS wants/needs to retain the rights to the TrueView when we are charged money for them? I could see the interest in owning the TV of your prized coin. Could this be another revenue stream for our host?
@bolivarshagnasty said:
Can someone explain why PCGS wants/needs to retain the rights to the TrueView when we are charged money for them? I could see the interest in owning the TV of your prized coin. Could this be another revenue stream for our host?
I'm no lawyer but one possible reason is the use of TV's in coinfacts. If you owned the rights to the TV's then it would seem to me that PCGS would have to get your okeydokey or perhaps even pay you a royalty to use those images in coinfacts.
Eldorado, This doesn't create a digital coin, which I think is the big misconception. The best description would be a secure system of recordkeeping that all coin graders and holders use, instead of grading companies using their own individual systems.
You don't have to pay in Cryptocurrency
Thanks again. Not trying to push just trying to get an idea of everyone's thoughts.
@bolivarshagnasty said:
Can someone explain why PCGS wants/needs to retain the rights to the TrueView when we are charged money for them? I could see the interest in owning the TV of your prized coin. Could this be another revenue stream for our host?
I'm no lawyer but one possible reason is the use of TV's in coinfacts. If you owned the rights to the TV's then it would seem to me that PCGS would have to get your okeydokey or perhaps even pay you a royalty to use those images in coinfacts.
Owning the rights to the image also allows them to license it to organizations to Stack's Bowers and Heritage.
Of course, they could also stipulate that everyone requesting a TrueView owns the image and gives them a non-revocable re-distributable license.
I think the biggest reason they own it is that it's probably easier and cleaner for them to do it, and the market accepts it.
If you don't want them to own images to your coin, you can always request them to not photograph it, which some top collector / dealers request and get.
Eldorado, This doesn't create a digital coin, which I think is the big misconception. The best description would be a secure system of recordkeeping that all coin graders and holders use, instead of grading companies using their own individual systems.
You don't have to pay in Cryptocurrency
Thanks again. Not trying to push just trying to get an idea of everyone's thoughts.
Coin folks are generally older folks. Collectors, in general, like physical artifacts. The idea of NFTs and digital blockchains are rather new and will not naturally resonate with coin folk.
The problem with your "provenance-chain" is that 99.9% of all coins aren't worth tracing the provenance. I mean, who cares how many hands my MS-64 1881-S Morgan $ passed through?
Many of the Coin Folks do like True Views, however. So NFTs attached to ownership of digital images might carry some cachet with a subset of the Coin Folks.
Fathom, that problem is in the process of being solved. New blockchains are not energy intensive and old ones (like Bitcoin) will transition.
I'd really like to clarify that what I'm talking about is a physicals object, not the kind of NFTs you hear about in the mainstream. We are just talking about a database that keeps records on coins, just like PCGS and NGC have a database on all the coins they grade. Instead of both of those companies having to run their own network of computers to store and manage all that information, a blockchain would be used instead. It would save them a lot of money, actually.
jmlanzaf, it wouldn't be any different than what is tracked today, just a different system for record keeping.
@Rob12345 said:
Fathom, that problem is in the process of being solved. New blockchains are not energy intensive and old ones (like Bitcoin) will transition.
I'd really like to clarify that what I'm talking about is a physicals object, not the kind of NFTs you hear about in the mainstream. We are just talking about a database that keeps records on coins, just like PCGS and NGC have a database on all the coins they grade. Instead of both of those companies having to run their own network of computers to store and manage all that information, a blockchain would be used instead. It would save them a lot of money, actually.
jmlanzaf, it wouldn't be any different than what is tracked today, just a different system for record keeping.
I'm not so sure it is in the process of being solved. There are different approaches, Proof of Stake etc. but these have issues as well with trusted authority et al.
Right now the energy usage is unsustainable and IMO obscene.
But I will keep an open mind if these issues can really be solved.
@Rob12345 said:
Fathom, that problem is in the process of being solved. New blockchains are not energy intensive and old ones (like Bitcoin) will transition.
I'd really like to clarify that what I'm talking about is a physicals object, not the kind of NFTs you hear about in the mainstream. We are just talking about a database that keeps records on coins, just like PCGS and NGC have a database on all the coins they grade. Instead of both of those companies having to run their own network of computers to store and manage all that information, a blockchain would be used instead. It would save them a lot of money, actually.
jmlanzaf, it wouldn't be any different than what is tracked verytoday, just a different system for record keeping.
"Different" is never good unless "different" is MUCH better.
I think the biggest reason they own it is that it's probably easier and cleaner for them to do it, and the market accepts it.
If you don't want them to own images to your coin, you can always request them to not photograph it, which some top collector / dealers request and get.
If someone can retain the rights to intellectual property with possible future value at no cost, it makes complete sense to do it. This is my assumption for True View, if there was even a conscious decision behind.
I'm not sure True View has any residual value. PCGS doesn't own the coin and it's not like they can keep someone else from taking another equivalent picture.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
@WCC said:
I'm not sure True View has any residual value. PCGS doesn't own the coin and it's not like they can keep someone else from taking another equivalent picture.
@derryb said:
Looking forward to my imaginary box of 20.
This does miss the point he was trying to make. The NFT is more equivalent to a combination of the TV and the registry than the coin itself.
so there is no actual coin to go in an actual box. lol
Yes, there is
and I receive the actual coin if I buy the NFT?
Actually, it would be the reverse. You get the NFT if you buy the coin.
They don't necessarily have to come together. And not all NFTs confer ownership.
Some NFTs that have sold for hundreds of thousands are licenses. For example, the "Disaster Girl" NFT sold for $500,000 without conferring ownership and even requires the NFT purchaser to provide a 10% royalty to the owner.
In the PCGS scenario, I don't think PCGS would provide an exclusive license to anyone. It's more important to be able to license the images to multiple organizations like Heritage, Stack's Bowers, Instagram, Facebook, Pinterest, etc. Imagine if PCGS didn't own the images.
@derryb said:
Looking forward to my imaginary box of 20.
This does miss the point he was trying to make. The NFT is more equivalent to a combination of the TV and the registry than the coin itself.
so there is no actual coin to go in an actual box. lol
Yes, there is
and I receive the actual coin if I buy the NFT?
Actually, it would be the reverse. You get the NFT if you buy the coin.
They don't necessarily have to come together. And not all NFTs confer ownership.
Some NFTs that have sold for hundreds of thousands are licenses. For example, the "Disaster Girl" NFT sold for $500,000 without conferring ownership and even requires the NFT purchaser to provide a 10% royalty to the owner.
In the PCGS scenario, I don't think PCGS would provide an exclusive license to anyone. It's more important to be able to license the images to multiple organizations like Heritage, Stack's Bowers, Instagram, Facebook, Pinterest, etc. Imagine if PCGS didn't own the images.
It doesn't have to, but the way it was recently laid out as essentially a transaction ledger, it would be tied to the coin. I'm fairly certain that no coin collector is going to want to buy a digital asset with no artifact tied to it.
What you know of NFTs is what the main stream media tells you because people thinks its really stupid and that makes people read articles. NFTs are a way to store information about a thing, anything.
It's a Real Coin
You take it to be graded
Grading company issues NFT for the sole single only purpose of documenting the grading
The photos taken with True View (or whatever) can be attached to the NFT
NFT is transferred to you
Real coin given back to you
Real coin taken home with you
The reason:
You control the documentation, not the PCGS
There is zero risk of fraud
You can sell the real physical actual coin to someone as a transaction on a blockchain marketplace instead of going through a marketplace like ebay.
You don't pay ebay, or visa, or paypal anything for that transaction
This isn't going to happen for years, but it will happen. Just curious to hear from the audience. Thanks.
Let's say I own a slabbed top pop seated half. Old holder and no True View or auction history.
Would I alone be able to contract for an NFT and profit from the sale of such? Not sure why anyone would buy it.
"Money for nothing and your chicks for free" @ColonelJessup. Inside joke.
In 1973, Col. Sanders' company prez said that if Kentucky Fried Chicken could get its name changed to Kentucky Fried Computer the stock price would double over-night .
Anyone here want to buy THE authorized image of my pre-schoolers finger-painting of an 1933 $20. His rendering of the CAC sticker totally nails the Grandma Moses zeitgeist of the cartoon character.
Blockchain Rarities - formerly DBA as Virtually Numismatic.
I said it earlier - "Old risk in new bottles"
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." - Geo. Orwell
Comments
NO.
NFTs?? NFW
Check out some of my 1794 Large Cents on www.coingallery.org
I understand it enough to know I have no interest. It's also tied to the broader asset bubble.
At first glance it seems a tough sell.
But then other tough sells have turned out to be full blown successes in numismatics:
-Third party grading
-CAC
-Modern Mint collectibles
-Poor 1 graded coins
Only if I can pay in crypto-currency.
I didn't get old and rich without learning from a few stupid mistakes. 
Since the advent of PCGS' and, a year later, NGC's third party grading, both ventures have been an unqualified booming success that greatly increased the entry into coins of less-informed or more wary buyers of coins.
Before that, dealers lined up for grading appointments at ANACS.
I read somewhere that SPACs are floundering. Why can't the big bucks guys just own up like we do here in the coin business. I'm metaphorically selling old wine in new bottles. They're packaging risk the same way.
Can someone explain why PCGS wants/needs to retain the rights to the TrueView when we are charged money for them? I could see the interest in owning the TV of your prized coin. Could this be another revenue stream for our host?
Not of the slightest interest.
Coinlearner, Ahrensdad, Nolawyer, RG, coinlieutenant, Yorkshireman, lordmarcovan, Soldi, masscrew, JimTyler, Relaxn, jclovescoins
Now listen boy, I'm tryin' to teach you sumthin' . . . . that ain't no optical illusion, it only looks like an optical illusion.
My mind reader refuses to charge me....
Why would someone need one picture so badthey pay for it when theres millions of pictures in books on line in real life. Redbook is pretty good 😊
🎶 shout shout, let it all out 🎶
I'm no lawyer but one possible reason is the use of TV's in coinfacts. If you owned the rights to the TV's then it would seem to me that PCGS would have to get your okeydokey or perhaps even pay you a royalty to use those images in coinfacts.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
If the old fogeys in philately can embrace it...
https://decrypt.co/61963/now-postage-stamps-are-getting-the-nft-treatment?amp=1
https://thedigitalphilatelist.com/crypto/non-fungible-token-nft/
https://medium.com/@NFTrade/how-nfts-will-affect-stamps-and-the-postage-industry-dc3e65801185
No
My I ask why it's a hard no?
Eldorado, This doesn't create a digital coin, which I think is the big misconception. The best description would be a secure system of recordkeeping that all coin graders and holders use, instead of grading companies using their own individual systems.
You don't have to pay in Cryptocurrency
Thanks again. Not trying to push just trying to get an idea of everyone's thoughts.
Another less publicized hurdle with the NFT/Blockchain is power consumption.... its shocking.
Owning the rights to the image also allows them to license it to organizations to Stack's Bowers and Heritage.
Of course, they could also stipulate that everyone requesting a TrueView owns the image and gives them a non-revocable re-distributable license.
I think the biggest reason they own it is that it's probably easier and cleaner for them to do it, and the market accepts it.
If you don't want them to own images to your coin, you can always request them to not photograph it, which some top collector / dealers request and get.
I would not even consider collecting anything on that basis.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Coin folks are generally older folks. Collectors, in general, like physical artifacts. The idea of NFTs and digital blockchains are rather new and will not naturally resonate with coin folk.
The problem with your "provenance-chain" is that 99.9% of all coins aren't worth tracing the provenance. I mean, who cares how many hands my MS-64 1881-S Morgan $ passed through?
Many of the Coin Folks do like True Views, however. So NFTs attached to ownership of digital images might carry some cachet with a subset of the Coin Folks.
No interest here.
Fathom, that problem is in the process of being solved. New blockchains are not energy intensive and old ones (like Bitcoin) will transition.
I'd really like to clarify that what I'm talking about is a physicals object, not the kind of NFTs you hear about in the mainstream. We are just talking about a database that keeps records on coins, just like PCGS and NGC have a database on all the coins they grade. Instead of both of those companies having to run their own network of computers to store and manage all that information, a blockchain would be used instead. It would save them a lot of money, actually.
jmlanzaf, it wouldn't be any different than what is tracked today, just a different system for record keeping.
Those may be worth ONE MILLION DOLLARS (in cryptocurrency)!
Call me whatever you want, but none of this stuff is for me.
Pete
I'm not so sure it is in the process of being solved. There are different approaches, Proof of Stake etc. but these have issues as well with trusted authority et al.
Right now the energy usage is unsustainable and IMO obscene.
But I will keep an open mind if these issues can really be solved.
"Different" is never good unless "different" is MUCH better.
If someone can retain the rights to intellectual property with possible future value at no cost, it makes complete sense to do it. This is my assumption for True View, if there was even a conscious decision behind.
I'm not sure True View has any residual value. PCGS doesn't own the coin and it's not like they can keep someone else from taking another equivalent picture.
When you have nothing in-hand, you have nothing.
That means the entire Registry is nothing.
Looking forward to my imaginary box of 20.
Repetition of ignorance is ignorance raised to the power two.
This does miss the point he was trying to make. The NFT is more equivalent to a combination of the TV and the registry than the coin itself.
so there is no actual coin to go in an actual box. lol
Repetition of ignorance is ignorance raised to the power two.
If I print out the images, does that make them less imaginary?
Not a chance
Mr Eureka ..would you ?
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
Too early for me to say NO.
My coin boxes are for coins, not images of coins. I've got a poster of a Porcshe 911 on my wall. Doesn't put one in my garage.
Repetition of ignorance is ignorance raised to the power two.
Yes, there is
and I receive the actual coin if I buy the NFT?
Repetition of ignorance is ignorance raised to the power two.
But they can sell the NFT. Surely that has value
Actually, it would be the reverse. You get the NFT if you buy the coin.
tell me again why I would want to pay extra for the NFT?
Repetition of ignorance is ignorance raised to the power two.
They don't necessarily have to come together. And not all NFTs confer ownership.
Some NFTs that have sold for hundreds of thousands are licenses. For example, the "Disaster Girl" NFT sold for $500,000 without conferring ownership and even requires the NFT purchaser to provide a 10% royalty to the owner.
In the PCGS scenario, I don't think PCGS would provide an exclusive license to anyone. It's more important to be able to license the images to multiple organizations like Heritage, Stack's Bowers, Instagram, Facebook, Pinterest, etc. Imagine if PCGS didn't own the images.
No. For a hands-on collector, it would be like buying the air in a balloon.
It doesn't have to, but the way it was recently laid out as essentially a transaction ledger, it would be tied to the coin. I'm fairly certain that no coin collector is going to want to buy a digital asset with no artifact tied to it.
What you know of NFTs is what the main stream media tells you because people thinks its really stupid and that makes people read articles. NFTs are a way to store information about a thing, anything.
It's a Real Coin
You take it to be graded
Grading company issues NFT for the sole single only purpose of documenting the grading
The photos taken with True View (or whatever) can be attached to the NFT
NFT is transferred to you
Real coin given back to you
Real coin taken home with you
The reason:
You control the documentation, not the PCGS
There is zero risk of fraud
You can sell the real physical actual coin to someone as a transaction on a blockchain marketplace instead of going through a marketplace like ebay.
You don't pay ebay, or visa, or paypal anything for that transaction
This isn't going to happen for years, but it will happen. Just curious to hear from the audience. Thanks.
Let's say I own a slabbed top pop seated half. Old holder and no True View or auction history.
Would I alone be able to contract for an NFT and profit from the sale of such? Not sure why anyone would buy it.
"Money for nothing and your chicks for free" @ColonelJessup. Inside joke.
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
Another piece of plastic a coin needs cracking out of, IMO.
In 1973, Col. Sanders' company prez said that if Kentucky Fried Chicken could get its name changed to Kentucky Fried Computer the stock price would double over-night
.
Anyone here want to buy THE authorized image of my pre-schoolers finger-painting of an 1933 $20. His rendering of the CAC sticker totally nails the Grandma Moses zeitgeist of the cartoon character.
Blockchain Rarities - formerly DBA as Virtually Numismatic.
I said it earlier - "Old risk in new bottles"