@Catbert said:
I just learned from a thread on the registry forum that if you use the PCGS phone app, one can submit pictures in support of getting the coin switched. I did it and it worked and the coin was switched soon after.
I guess this is PCGS's way of saying use the app or don't use our registry.
@MFeld said:
This is a very sad thread to read. For whatever reason(s) many of the assurances don’t appear to be being backed up by actions.
I'm curious how many employees HA has and how many CU has.
On the rare occasion something needs personal attention with HA, it is fantastic to be able to email Mark and get somebody pointed in the right direction and problems actually get resolved.
I hate to keep using this word but it's befuddling that with all of the people here that we can make contact with from PCGS, absolutely nothing gets accomplished except for the periodic delivery of meaningless platitudes.
Can you imagine what would happen to the coin market if the registry game doesn’t keep up at the largest player on the block? Yes things will evolve but there will be scars.
Deleted my inventory and sets last week due to my own recent personal experiences. Request to close my account, now over a week old, still unfulfilled. It has to be pushed up the chain for some reason. Just not worth the frustration.
I will withhold judgement until I try the submission center myself, but based on this thread I am not optimistic. “More clunky” is not making me feel warm and fuzzy.
I wish they spent that effort restoring the quality of trueviews, as the recent ones are still not great.
When Paulina and her predecessor (I forget her name, but believes it begins with a “C”, and she was great too) were running the Registry, they had some staff helping them, and the Set Registry was GREAT! EVERY issue was resolved in a day! Emilio is real good, has a VERY good attitude, and is a positive asset of PCGS, but apparently the bean counters stripped him of all staff!!! The Registry has more participants now than years ago (or at least they did until these problems started, and are ignored), so he needs even more staff than his predecessors!!! Will that happen?
When Paulina and her predecessor (I forget her name, but believes it begins with a “C”, and she was great too) were running the Registry, they had some staff helping them, and the Set Registry was GREAT! EVERY issue was resolved in a day! Emilio is real good, has a VERY good attitude, and is a positive asset of PCGS, but apparently the bean counters stripped him of all staff!!! The Registry has more participants now than years ago (or at least they did until these problems started, and are ignored), so he needs even more staff than his predecessors!!! Will that happen?
Steve
Jakqjlyne Schaffer-Guinn
Wayne
That’s not who I had in mind. Someone else. Perhaps Cosetta, or something like that.
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
When Paulina and her predecessor (I forget her name, but believes it begins with a “C”, and she was great too) were running the Registry, they had some staff helping them, and the Set Registry was GREAT! EVERY issue was resolved in a day! Emilio is real good, has a VERY good attitude, and is a positive asset of PCGS, but apparently the bean counters stripped him of all staff!!! The Registry has more participants now than years ago (or at least they did until these problems started, and are ignored), so he needs even more staff than his predecessors!!! Will that happen?
Steve
Jakqjlyne Schaffer-Guinn
Wayne
That’s not who I had in mind. Some else. Perhaps Cosetta, or something like that.
Steve
Steve, I'm sure if you watch the entire Mambo #5 video it will come to mind https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiaMTs7dI4E
Edited to add: . It was too easy, you just set your self up. Thanks for being a good sport Steve, it was a good laugh. My wife and I are always doing the "what was his/her" name routine.
When Paulina and her predecessor (I forget her name, but believes it begins with a “C”, and she was great too) were running the Registry, they had some staff helping them, and the Set Registry was GREAT! EVERY issue was resolved in a day! Emilio is real good, has a VERY good attitude, and is a positive asset of PCGS, but apparently the bean counters stripped him of all staff!!! The Registry has more participants now than years ago (or at least they did until these problems started, and are ignored), so he needs even more staff than his predecessors!!! Will that happen?
Steve
Jakqjlyne Schaffer-Guinn
Wayne
That’s not who I had in mind. Some else. Perhaps Cosetta, or something like that.
When Paulina and her predecessor (I forget her name, but believes it begins with a “C”, and she was great too) were running the Registry, they had some staff helping them, and the Set Registry was GREAT! EVERY issue was resolved in a day! Emilio is real good, has a VERY good attitude, and is a positive asset of PCGS, but apparently the bean counters stripped him of all staff!!! The Registry has more participants now than years ago (or at least they did until these problems started, and are ignored), so he needs even more staff than his predecessors!!! Will that happen?
Steve
Jakqjlyne Schaffer-Guinn
Wayne
That’s not who I had in mind. Some else. Perhaps Cosetta, or something like that.
Steve
I remember Cosetta and B J Searls
YES, they were both great too! And they each had a staff!!!!! WHY won’t PCGS pay for that necessity to provide the quality that is expected of PCGS?
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
(2) If its is NOT BROKEN, leave it alone and don't try to improve something that works until #1 has been resolved.
I still have a set that does not acknowlege 2023 coins as required and not active in ratings.
I had 2 of these but Emilio fixed one.
It is 2025 now and all 2024 coins should be automatically required in ALL 2024 sets.
We should not have to ask that 2024 coins be added to a particular set in the following year(2025).
My impression is that when you canceled giving out the plaque awards, then the pin awards and then the paper BOR certificate awards, that you guys are cutting the corners at the registry set owners expense.
Penny pitching will kill you in the long run.
This was followed by the canceled Long Beach shows.
Emilio (a fantastic hard working guy who does not complain about his work load) is a party of 1 who has NO crossed trained back up(s).
He takes time off ( to get married) and the emails stockpile awaiting his return to be answered.
He needs a staff!
IMO, company re-organization/re-structuring, means that you guys have some financial issues.
When set owners hold coins from being submitted, the bottom line is that your issues are only going to get worse.
YOU NEED TO ADDRESS SET OWNERS ISSUES NOW!
My inventory is 99.9999 Pcgs coins but now I am starting to buy Ngc oins.
I assume billionaires know each other or have staffs to easily get in touch with other.
Maybe @Currin can kindly ask @DLHansen to contact Steve Cohen ( https://x.com/stevenacohen2 ) and kindly ask him to send one of Juan Soto's game checks to PCGS; that should be plenty of budget to fix all of these issues for years to come.
@winesteven Do you know anyone in the PE world? My contacts (and myself) are all small potatoes.
@WAYNEAS said:
IMO, company re-organization/re-structuring, means that you guys have some financial issues.
Typical short-term private equity playbook—slash everything not directly revenue generating to improve the financial metrics, then sell or take public. Just wait until they realize what they’re spending on this forum software.
@lermish said:
I assume billionaires know each other or have staffs to easily get in touch with other.
Maybe @Currin can kindly ask @DLHansen to contact Steve Cohen ( https://x.com/stevenacohen2 ) and kindly ask him to send one of Juan Soto's game checks to PCGS; that should be plenty of budget to fix all of these issues for years to come.
@winesteven Do you know anyone in the PE world? My contacts (and myself) are all small potatoes.
@lermish said:
I assume billionaires know each other or have staffs to easily get in touch with other.
Maybe @Currin can kindly ask @DLHansen to contact Steve Cohen ( https://x.com/stevenacohen2 ) and kindly ask him to send one of Juan Soto's game checks to PCGS; that should be plenty of budget to fix all of these issues for years to come.
@winesteven Do you know anyone in the PE world? My contacts (and myself) are all small potatoes.
No I don’t. Same here.
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
Very disheartening. This entire thread reminds me of Charlie Brown trying to kick Lucy's football. The bitter lesson I have learned in the 21st Century is that people, corporations, basic services can hide behind electronic walls disguised as help windows and customer service tools. Recently won a 10 month long fight with Waste Management to close my account. (switched service in March finally closed account Feb. 4th this year) James
Ok, I am entering a submission now. So far, it is not horrible, but really not better. More menus and popups make the process slightly slower for me. It would be nice if we did not need to print and sign 3 copies - as Peakrarities mentioned, this is antiquated, and other TPGs "sign" online.
Also, @pcgs_social is there a way I can report bugs? I cannot enter a 1908-S Indian Cent, as, apparently, it got left off the coin list. Ugh.
ok, @pcgs_social one final question - although it does not specifically state this, for multiple coins of the same date it looks like one should declared a value per coin instead of the total value. Previously, one would declare the total value.
For example, I had one line with 4 1913 T1 Buffalo Nickels, and intitially declared $500 for the four of them. It then suggested Regular tier for each coin, which is not what I wanted (Economy). So I then edited the declared value to $125 each to get them in the correct tier.
At the end of the day, it took about the same time as before, and should work fine once the bugs are fixed.
@Connecticoin said:
ok, @pcgs_social one final question - although it does not specifically state this, for multiple coins of the same date it looks like one should declared a value per coin instead of the total value. Previously, one would declare the total value.
For example, I had one line with 4 1913 T1 Buffalo Nickels, and intitially declared $500 for the four of them. It then suggested Regular tier for each coin, which is not what I wanted (Economy). So I then edited the declared value to $125 each to get them in the correct tier.
At the end of the day, it took about the same time as before, and should work fine once the bugs are fixed.
+1 Yes please make it clear whether value is total value or value per item.
I see @pcgs_education and @pcgs_social are still not replying to our comments so I will continue to do so until I see a response from them.
Please fix the constant crashes we have to deal with particularly in Coinfacts and the Set Registry.
I as well as many others have been completely unable to add coins to my registry set due to them being in someone else's inventory. I can't even access the upload button on the Set Registry Activity page because it doesn't even show up in the app.
Finally, and most importantly, you guys need to fix the abysmal quality of recent TrueViews. I've noticed the vast majority of ebay listings for PCGS coins don't even bother including the TrueViews for their coins due to the total lack of effort that was put into taking pictures.
"Fixing" the online submission portal is the last priority you guys should have. The fact that you've chosen to do that instead of fixing the issues me and many others have highlighted above shows that your only priority is to make more money off of us. You may think that the online submission portal should be prioritized since it directly aids you in making more money but in reality, nobody will want to submit to PCGS in the first place due to the issues I've provided.
@Connecticoin said:
ok, @pcgs_social one final question - although it does not specifically state this, for multiple coins of the same date it looks like one should declared a value per coin instead of the total value. Previously, one would declare the total value.
For example, I had one line with 4 1913 T1 Buffalo Nickels, and intitially declared $500 for the four of them. It then suggested Regular tier for each coin, which is not what I wanted (Economy). So I then edited the declared value to $125 each to get them in the correct tier.
At the end of the day, it took about the same time as before, and should work fine once the bugs are fixed.
Thank you for your question! If you are submitting multiple coins of the same date, type, and general value, you should list the declared value per coin. The declared value is value per item, not total value.
@Connecticoin said:
ok, @pcgs_social one final question - although it does not specifically state this, for multiple coins of the same date it looks like one should declared a value per coin instead of the total value. Previously, one would declare the total value.
For example, I had one line with 4 1913 T1 Buffalo Nickels, and intitially declared $500 for the four of them. It then suggested Regular tier for each coin, which is not what I wanted (Economy). So I then edited the declared value to $125 each to get them in the correct tier.
At the end of the day, it took about the same time as before, and should work fine once the bugs are fixed.
Thank you for your question! If you are submitting multiple coins of the same date, type, and general value, you should list the declared value per coin. The declared value is value per item, not total value.
But can you update the form to say that so it is clear? I know the information bubble explains it, but it could be clearer.
Additionally, why isn't Trueview listed as an Add-onas a choice with the other add-ons? It only shows on the next page after the coin entry page.
Also I couldn't find where to enter notes/comments that apply for the whole order.
Why doesn't the form generator create a submitter copy?
But can you update the form to say that so it is clear? I know the information bubble explains it, but it could be clearer.
Additionally, why isn't Trueview listed as an Add-onas a choice with the other add-ons? It only shows on the next page after the coin entry page.
Also I couldn't find where to enter notes/comments that apply for the whole order.
Why doesn't the form generator create a submitter copy?
Thank you for taking the time to share your concerns. I have shared your list of suggestions with our Tech Team and they are taking them into consideration for future updates.
OSC 2.0 now allows for notes to be added to each individual line item instead of the whole order. This gives you the opportunity to leave more detailed notes.
There should be multiple copies of the PDF submission form generated at the end of the submission process.
@Connecticoin said:
Ok, I am entering a submission now. So far, it is not horrible, but really not better. More menus and popups make the process slightly slower for me. It would be nice if we did not need to print and sign 3 copies - as Peakrarities mentioned, this is antiquated, and other TPGs "sign" online.
Also, @pcgs_social is there a way I can report bugs? I cannot enter a 1908-S Indian Cent, as, apparently, it got left off the coin list. Ugh.
Thank you for bringing this to our attention. or this and any similar issues, please visit https://www.pcgs.com/contactus to submit a support form.
But can you update the form to say that so it is clear? I know the information bubble explains it, but it could be clearer.
Additionally, why isn't Trueview listed as an Add-onas a choice with the other add-ons? It only shows on the next page after the coin entry page.
Also I couldn't find where to enter notes/comments that apply for the whole order.
Why doesn't the form generator create a submitter copy?
Thank you for taking the time to share your concerns. I have shared your list of suggestions with our Tech Team and they are taking them into consideration for future updates.
OSC 2.0 now allows for notes to be added to each individual line item instead of the whole order. This gives you the opportunity to leave more detailed notes.
OK, so if you have a special packaging or shipping request, should we put it on the first coin, or all coins? Sometimes there are notes needed that don't apply to specific coins. I'm not sure why this was taken away.
There should be multiple copies of the PDF submission form generated at the end of the submission process.
Yes, it generated 3 copies and I understand PCGS needs them all. If course you can always print more but then why does it generate 3 copies and not 1? The old system generates all 4. Why change it unless PCGS can figure out how to operate on less paper?
Where can i change the Genuine option. Every submission defaults to "Genuine with details." I want to select Do not Holder but i do not see the place to change it.
Just received the latest edition of PCGS Market Report. They sure are proud of the new submission portal but the Speaking of Coins column in the front is very tone deaf and inaccurate. They tout that the new submission center "delivers a bevy of exciting features that do everything from recommending the best services for your coins to automatically splitting submissions. These and so many other features are exclusive to PCGS..." Sadly they don't know that CACG beat them to this. I hardly call switching the coin entry from a functional and useful "table-type" entry to a pop-up "exciting." If only Joshua McMorrow-Hernandez would comment on plans to fix the things that are actually broken.
We were finally able to tryout OSC 2.0, and have lots of feedback.
@HeatherBoyd comments that OSC 2.0 will "help new and experienced collectors", and @pcgs_education comments that the "update has made the submission process faster and easier".
I think it definitely helps handhold new collectors more, and may be faster (especially if the dropdown menu loads faster and there are less "error" pages compared to the old format), but there are some changes that make the process slower & clunkier for experienced submitters. Luckily, some of the issues should be simple fixes that will truly make it better for new & experienced alike. It's a good start, and I'm hoping some of the feedback here and from other collectors will make its final form top notch.
The good:
• DRAFTS - Adding drafts is a HUUUGGEEE feature that has been missing for a while. Well done.
• Higher coin limit - I don’t know what the new limit is (or if there is one), but it’s definitely more than the prior limit of 50 coins. Again, well done.
• Overall looks slick and modern, and based on the design style I’m guessing it works well on mobile. Seems to be designed for hand holding of newer users, which is nice but has drawbacks (more on that later).
Bugs:
• COINS WITH VARIETY ATTRIBUTION SELECTED WERE BEING FORCED INTO A SEPARATE TIER
We had a couple submissions that included coins with variety attribution service selected. The OSC 2.0 suggested those coins be on their own submission tier with Gold Shield rather than with the other coins (non-Gold Shield). When we tried to move the coins to the proper tier, it would not let us, and it showed “one or more add-ons not supported for this item” under the proper tiers (US Modern & US Economy).
The US Modern submission was about 15 coins, so we just re-did it in the old online submission center, which went perfectly fine (and variety attribution only cost $18 that way, rather than $20).
However, we also had a submission of ~90 coins, of which 4 of the coins had variety attribution. So our options were to re-do the whole 90 coin submission, or just do them as separate submissions. At $5 extra per coin + $2 extra per coin (more expensive variety attribution) + $10 handling + $27 shipping, the forced submission separation cost an extra $65 for the 4 coins.
• There was no option to select TrueView service during the coin selection process.
• Same problem as @Connecticoin had months ago, we also could not get the 1908-S Indian Head Cent item to appear in the dropdown.
• There was no Customer Copy printed when the submission forms were printed.
• For customer information, the phone number field does not auto-populate with number on file.
• Sometimes clicking “Add Item” for a coin did nothing and we were unable to add the coin at the time (but it did seem like that happened less often than the frequent "oops! error" screen with the old submission center).
“Needs improvement” and other suggestions:
• Adding each coin takes longer - The pop-up window for each coin may be helpful for newer collectors, but as others have mentioned, it is a bit clunky. Also, you have to scroll down or press tab twice to even see the fields that need data entered. The main issue is that it requires more button presses & mouse clicks than the old format. For example, a 4 digit PCGS# coin with a 3 digit value (ex:$300) takes 15 presses/clicks on the new format, but only took 10 on the old format. That 50% increase in presses/clicks really adds up on a large order.
On the old format, you could press enter or tab to select the coin that was at the top of the drop-down list. In the new format, you have to move the mouse to click it. Ideally, you can enter coins using keyboard only. Just being able to select the coin at the top of the drop-down list by pressing tab or enter would be a huge improvement.
On the old format, the default quantity was already 1, which is a preferred time saver. For most entries, all you had to do was press tab to move onto the value box. Currently on the new form, you always have to enter the quantity.
• Auto-collation is misleading! If you have a large submission with a couple coins for a cheaper tier, it will suggest the coins go in their own ‘cheaper’ tier. However, the fact that you will be charged extra fees is not clear. You don’t see the $10 handling fee and $27 return shipping until the next screen, so instead of, say, 2 coins being $10 less per coin, they are $10 MORE per coin. Plus, you have to spend some extra time un-doing all the auto-suggested tier breakup (granted, not much time). If there was an option for a “smart” service level recommendation, where it would only suggest to use the cheaper tier if you have enough coins to make it truly cheaper per coin AFTER fees, that would be a welcome and useful time-saving feature.
• As others have pointed out, whether to use declared value as the total value or per item value is unclear. Yes, there is a question mark hover icon, but it says "The maximum amount per item, or multiple quantities of the same item, that you may claim as compensation in the event of loss or damage", and honestly that doesn't make it less confusing. Changing the text below "Declared Value" to say "Estimated value of your item(s) [per item, not total]" or something similar would be helpful. For example, the PCGS OSC 2.0 How to Guide says "If you are submitting multiple of the same coin, the declared value should be the value of each individual coin, not the total value of all the coins", which is nice clear and simple language. I know you can only put so much text in a tooltip, but elsewhere on that same guide it says "If you submit multiple coins of the same date and type but have drastically different values, please list them as separate items so we can correctly value your order", which is useful info for creating submissions.
• "$0 /Item" for Mint Error Unique Attribute is misleading. Having "must be on mint error tier" or some explanatory tooltip or just leaving that area blank would be less misleading.
• As others have pointed out, printing & signing 3 PCGS copies of the submission form is time consuming. It is also paper consuming, and sometimes the multi-submission-form-document doesn’t format great for printing depending on the submission length.
• Being able to print line items on Avery stickers is a great feature. However, it can only print starting at one end. For example, if you have a 10 coin submission and then another 10 coin submission, you can use 10 labels from each end of the sheet, but then you have 30 stickers stuck in the middle of the page that you cannot use for PCGS submission. Being able to fill out a field of "create 10 blank spots" or "start on position 11" before clicking 'print labels' would be very useful, saving time and reducing waste. Also, now that you can submit multiple submissions at one, an option to 'print labels for all submissions' could be useful.
• Having a way to manually change the order of the coins on the submission would be nice.
• Mint Errors should be able to be done on a per coin basis, not per submission. I know this is a bit off topic from OSC 2.0, and it would probably require changes on the PCGS end that they may not be willing to do, but having mint errors be on a submission level rather than a per coin level is a major inconvenience. Other major TPGs allow error attribution on a single coin in a submission.
• And finally, this feature would be the greatest help for efficient submissions for some collectors/dealers, along with being a feature that no other TPG is currently doing. For most submissions, our customer copy gets filled with various notes, whether it has to do with who it belongs to in the case of grouping coins from various collectors/customers (“John G’s coin”), coin history (“bought at Long Beach Expo”, “from Mint Set”, “was NGC MS65”, etc), pricing (“paid $180”, “Greysheet bid $210”), grading (“my guess MS67”), or other notes. Having the option to have a 'customer copy only notes' field automatically printed on the customer copy only would be a big time saver. I currently don't think PCGS would do this, but I would love them to prove me wrong
@slimbert Thank you so much for taking the time to share this very thoughtful feedback with us. This is helpful information that we will share with our Product and Tech team.
@slimbert regarding the stickers, i can use the “middle 30” on my printer if I make sure there is approx the same amount of selvage at the top, then just manually feed into the printer.
@connecticoin , good idea, thanks for the tip. Unfortunately, there is no way to manually feed the paper for the printer we use.
Currently, we use a spreadsheet to create the labels and then print onto stickers (1.75" x 0.875") using a Rollo thermal printer. It works well enough, but we would return to using the sticker form PCGS provides if they provided a way to start the print from a specified spot on the Avery label sheet.
Used the new portal earlier this month, very happy with the turnaround time, already in QA in 3 weeks. Did not have issues with the portal when I used it in March. I also mislabeled a coin as a crossover when I just wanted it graded by PCGS any grade, The order was promptly flagged once received by PCGS, and resolved in a day, which was much appreciated.
Only critique is there did not seem to be an option on the portal for coins to not be encapsulated if they did not straight grade. I had to specify that request when I spoke with the Problem Order Desk despite noting it on the paperwork when I mailed in my coins.
@JRGeyer said:
Used the new portal earlier this month, very happy with the turnaround time, already in QA in 3 weeks. Did not have issues with the portal when I used it in March. I also mislabeled a coin as a crossover when I just wanted it graded by PCGS any grade, The order was promptly flagged once received by PCGS, and resolved in a day, which was much appreciated.
Only critique is there did not seem to be an option on the portal for coins to not be encapsulated if they did not straight grade. I had to specify that request when I spoke with the Problem Order Desk despite noting it on the paperwork when I mailed in my coins.
Question, I submitted my coin and PCGS received it confirmed by tracking on PCGS's site a week ago. How long did it take before they notified you that it was opened and received? Also used the new beta for raw grading of coins
@JRGeyer said:
Used the new portal earlier this month, very happy with the turnaround time, already in QA in 3 weeks. Did not have issues with the portal when I used it in March. I also mislabeled a coin as a crossover when I just wanted it graded by PCGS any grade, The order was promptly flagged once received by PCGS, and resolved in a day, which was much appreciated.
Only critique is there did not seem to be an option on the portal for coins to not be encapsulated if they did not straight grade. I had to specify that request when I spoke with the Problem Order Desk despite noting it on the paperwork when I mailed in my coins.
Question, I submitted my coin and PCGS received it confirmed by tracking on PCGS's site a week ago. How long did it take before they notified you that it was opened and received? Also used the new beta for raw grading of coins
They've been pretty slow lately. 3-5 days lately in my experience.
@JRGeyer said:
Used the new portal earlier this month, very happy with the turnaround time, already in QA in 3 weeks. Did not have issues with the portal when I used it in March. I also mislabeled a coin as a crossover when I just wanted it graded by PCGS any grade, The order was promptly flagged once received by PCGS, and resolved in a day, which was much appreciated.
Only critique is there did not seem to be an option on the portal for coins to not be encapsulated if they did not straight grade. I had to specify that request when I spoke with the Problem Order Desk despite noting it on the paperwork when I mailed in my coins.
Question, I submitted my coin and PCGS received it confirmed by tracking on PCGS's site a week ago. How long did it take before they notified you that it was opened and received? Also used the new beta for raw grading of coins
They've been pretty slow lately. 3-5 days lately in my experience.
Gotcha, its been 7 days since they received it and put the tracking into their system. Hopefully tomorrow I will get notified. At least it has been confirmed received so that's always good !
Comments
I guess this is PCGS's way of saying use the app or don't use our registry.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
This is a very sad thread to read. For whatever reason(s) many of the assurances don’t appear to be being backed up by actions.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I'm curious how many employees HA has and how many CU has.
On the rare occasion something needs personal attention with HA, it is fantastic to be able to email Mark and get somebody pointed in the right direction and problems actually get resolved.
I hate to keep using this word but it's befuddling that with all of the people here that we can make contact with from PCGS, absolutely nothing gets accomplished except for the periodic delivery of meaningless platitudes.
chopmarkedtradedollars.com
Can you imagine what would happen to the coin market if the registry game doesn’t keep up at the largest player on the block? Yes things will evolve but there will be scars.
Deleted my inventory and sets last week due to my own recent personal experiences. Request to close my account, now over a week old, still unfulfilled. It has to be pushed up the chain for some reason. Just not worth the frustration.
USAF veteran 1984-2005
I will withhold judgement until I try the submission center myself, but based on this thread I am not optimistic. “More clunky” is not making me feel warm and fuzzy.
I wish they spent that effort restoring the quality of trueviews, as the recent ones are still not great.
>
Jakqjlyne Schaffer-Guinn
Wayne
Kennedys are my quest...
That’s not who I had in mind. Someone else. Perhaps Cosetta, or something like that.
Steve
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
Steve, I'm sure if you watch the entire Mambo #5 video it will come to mind
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiaMTs7dI4E
Edited to add: . It was too easy, you just set your self up. Thanks for being a good sport Steve, it was a good laugh. My wife and I are always doing the "what was his/her" name routine.
I remember Cosetta and B J Searls
Mike
My Indians
Danco Set
YES, they were both great too! And they each had a staff!!!!! WHY won’t PCGS pay for that necessity to provide the quality that is expected of PCGS?
Steve
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
Note the priorties.
(1) If it is BROKEN, fix it.
(2) If its is NOT BROKEN, leave it alone and don't try to improve something that works until #1 has been resolved.
I still have a set that does not acknowlege 2023 coins as required and not active in ratings.
I had 2 of these but Emilio fixed one.
It is 2025 now and all 2024 coins should be automatically required in ALL 2024 sets.
We should not have to ask that 2024 coins be added to a particular set in the following year(2025).
My impression is that when you canceled giving out the plaque awards, then the pin awards and then the paper BOR certificate awards, that you guys are cutting the corners at the registry set owners expense.
Penny pitching will kill you in the long run.
This was followed by the canceled Long Beach shows.
Emilio (a fantastic hard working guy who does not complain about his work load) is a party of 1 who has NO crossed trained back up(s).
He takes time off ( to get married) and the emails stockpile awaiting his return to be answered.
He needs a staff!
IMO, company re-organization/re-structuring, means that you guys have some financial issues.
When set owners hold coins from being submitted, the bottom line is that your issues are only going to get worse.
YOU NEED TO ADDRESS SET OWNERS ISSUES NOW!
My inventory is 99.9999 Pcgs coins but now I am starting to buy Ngc oins.
Wayne
Kennedys are my quest...
I assume billionaires know each other or have staffs to easily get in touch with other.
Maybe @Currin can kindly ask @DLHansen to contact Steve Cohen ( https://x.com/stevenacohen2 ) and kindly ask him to send one of Juan Soto's game checks to PCGS; that should be plenty of budget to fix all of these issues for years to come.
@winesteven Do you know anyone in the PE world? My contacts (and myself) are all small potatoes.
chopmarkedtradedollars.com
Typical short-term private equity playbook—slash everything not directly revenue generating to improve the financial metrics, then sell or take public. Just wait until they realize what they’re spending on this forum software.
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
I liked the new submission process. The one thing is that everyone needs to understand it is a "BETA".
@lermesh
I posted this back in Sept 2024 and NOBODY DID ANYTHING
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1107011/we-could-really-use-some-help-from-the-influences-on-this-forum#latest
I just posted it again
Mike
My Indians
Danco Set
No I don’t. Same here.
Steve
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
Yup, the submission center was not broken. Trueviews are broken, and have NOT been fixed yet.
Very disheartening. This entire thread reminds me of Charlie Brown trying to kick Lucy's football. The bitter lesson I have learned in the 21st Century is that people, corporations, basic services can hide behind electronic walls disguised as help windows and customer service tools. Recently won a 10 month long fight with Waste Management to close my account. (switched service in March finally closed account Feb. 4th this year) James
Ok, I am entering a submission now. So far, it is not horrible, but really not better. More menus and popups make the process slightly slower for me. It would be nice if we did not need to print and sign 3 copies - as Peakrarities mentioned, this is antiquated, and other TPGs "sign" online.
Also, @pcgs_social is there a way I can report bugs? I cannot enter a 1908-S Indian Cent, as, apparently, it got left off the coin list. Ugh.
ok, @pcgs_social one final question - although it does not specifically state this, for multiple coins of the same date it looks like one should declared a value per coin instead of the total value. Previously, one would declare the total value.
For example, I had one line with 4 1913 T1 Buffalo Nickels, and intitially declared $500 for the four of them. It then suggested Regular tier for each coin, which is not what I wanted (Economy). So I then edited the declared value to $125 each to get them in the correct tier.
At the end of the day, it took about the same time as before, and should work fine once the bugs are fixed.
+1 Yes please make it clear whether value is total value or value per item.
http://ProofCollection.Net
I see @pcgs_education and @pcgs_social are still not replying to our comments so I will continue to do so until I see a response from them.
Please fix the constant crashes we have to deal with particularly in Coinfacts and the Set Registry.
I as well as many others have been completely unable to add coins to my registry set due to them being in someone else's inventory. I can't even access the upload button on the Set Registry Activity page because it doesn't even show up in the app.
Finally, and most importantly, you guys need to fix the abysmal quality of recent TrueViews. I've noticed the vast majority of ebay listings for PCGS coins don't even bother including the TrueViews for their coins due to the total lack of effort that was put into taking pictures.
"Fixing" the online submission portal is the last priority you guys should have. The fact that you've chosen to do that instead of fixing the issues me and many others have highlighted above shows that your only priority is to make more money off of us. You may think that the online submission portal should be prioritized since it directly aids you in making more money but in reality, nobody will want to submit to PCGS in the first place due to the issues I've provided.
Thank you for your question! If you are submitting multiple coins of the same date, type, and general value, you should list the declared value per coin. The declared value is value per item, not total value.
Abby Zechman
PCGS Education Coordinator
But can you update the form to say that so it is clear? I know the information bubble explains it, but it could be clearer.
Additionally, why isn't Trueview listed as an Add-onas a choice with the other add-ons? It only shows on the next page after the coin entry page.
Also I couldn't find where to enter notes/comments that apply for the whole order.
Why doesn't the form generator create a submitter copy?
http://ProofCollection.Net
Thank you for taking the time to share your concerns. I have shared your list of suggestions with our Tech Team and they are taking them into consideration for future updates.
OSC 2.0 now allows for notes to be added to each individual line item instead of the whole order. This gives you the opportunity to leave more detailed notes.
There should be multiple copies of the PDF submission form generated at the end of the submission process.
Abby Zechman
PCGS Education Coordinator
Thank you for bringing this to our attention. or this and any similar issues, please visit https://www.pcgs.com/contactus to submit a support form.
Abby Zechman
PCGS Education Coordinator
OK, so if you have a special packaging or shipping request, should we put it on the first coin, or all coins? Sometimes there are notes needed that don't apply to specific coins. I'm not sure why this was taken away.
Yes, it generated 3 copies and I understand PCGS needs them all. If course you can always print more but then why does it generate 3 copies and not 1? The old system generates all 4. Why change it unless PCGS can figure out how to operate on less paper?
http://ProofCollection.Net
Where can i change the Genuine option. Every submission defaults to "Genuine with details." I want to select Do not Holder but i do not see the place to change it.
Just received the latest edition of PCGS Market Report. They sure are proud of the new submission portal but the Speaking of Coins column in the front is very tone deaf and inaccurate. They tout that the new submission center "delivers a bevy of exciting features that do everything from recommending the best services for your coins to automatically splitting submissions. These and so many other features are exclusive to PCGS..." Sadly they don't know that CACG beat them to this. I hardly call switching the coin entry from a functional and useful "table-type" entry to a pop-up "exciting." If only Joshua McMorrow-Hernandez would comment on plans to fix the things that are actually broken.
http://ProofCollection.Net
We were finally able to tryout OSC 2.0, and have lots of feedback.
@HeatherBoyd comments that OSC 2.0 will "help new and experienced collectors", and @pcgs_education comments that the "update has made the submission process faster and easier".
I think it definitely helps handhold new collectors more, and may be faster (especially if the dropdown menu loads faster and there are less "error" pages compared to the old format), but there are some changes that make the process slower & clunkier for experienced submitters. Luckily, some of the issues should be simple fixes that will truly make it better for new & experienced alike. It's a good start, and I'm hoping some of the feedback here and from other collectors will make its final form top notch.
The good:
• DRAFTS - Adding drafts is a HUUUGGEEE feature that has been missing for a while. Well done.
• Higher coin limit - I don’t know what the new limit is (or if there is one), but it’s definitely more than the prior limit of 50 coins. Again, well done.
• Overall looks slick and modern, and based on the design style I’m guessing it works well on mobile. Seems to be designed for hand holding of newer users, which is nice but has drawbacks (more on that later).
Bugs:
• COINS WITH VARIETY ATTRIBUTION SELECTED WERE BEING FORCED INTO A SEPARATE TIER
We had a couple submissions that included coins with variety attribution service selected. The OSC 2.0 suggested those coins be on their own submission tier with Gold Shield rather than with the other coins (non-Gold Shield). When we tried to move the coins to the proper tier, it would not let us, and it showed “one or more add-ons not supported for this item” under the proper tiers (US Modern & US Economy).
The US Modern submission was about 15 coins, so we just re-did it in the old online submission center, which went perfectly fine (and variety attribution only cost $18 that way, rather than $20).
However, we also had a submission of ~90 coins, of which 4 of the coins had variety attribution. So our options were to re-do the whole 90 coin submission, or just do them as separate submissions. At $5 extra per coin + $2 extra per coin (more expensive variety attribution) + $10 handling + $27 shipping, the forced submission separation cost an extra $65 for the 4 coins.
• There was no option to select TrueView service during the coin selection process.
• Same problem as @Connecticoin had months ago, we also could not get the 1908-S Indian Head Cent item to appear in the dropdown.
• There was no Customer Copy printed when the submission forms were printed.
• For customer information, the phone number field does not auto-populate with number on file.
• Sometimes clicking “Add Item” for a coin did nothing and we were unable to add the coin at the time (but it did seem like that happened less often than the frequent "oops! error" screen with the old submission center).
“Needs improvement” and other suggestions:
• Adding each coin takes longer - The pop-up window for each coin may be helpful for newer collectors, but as others have mentioned, it is a bit clunky. Also, you have to scroll down or press tab twice to even see the fields that need data entered. The main issue is that it requires more button presses & mouse clicks than the old format. For example, a 4 digit PCGS# coin with a 3 digit value (ex:$300) takes 15 presses/clicks on the new format, but only took 10 on the old format. That 50% increase in presses/clicks really adds up on a large order.
On the old format, you could press enter or tab to select the coin that was at the top of the drop-down list. In the new format, you have to move the mouse to click it. Ideally, you can enter coins using keyboard only. Just being able to select the coin at the top of the drop-down list by pressing tab or enter would be a huge improvement.
On the old format, the default quantity was already 1, which is a preferred time saver. For most entries, all you had to do was press tab to move onto the value box. Currently on the new form, you always have to enter the quantity.
• Auto-collation is misleading! If you have a large submission with a couple coins for a cheaper tier, it will suggest the coins go in their own ‘cheaper’ tier. However, the fact that you will be charged extra fees is not clear. You don’t see the $10 handling fee and $27 return shipping until the next screen, so instead of, say, 2 coins being $10 less per coin, they are $10 MORE per coin. Plus, you have to spend some extra time un-doing all the auto-suggested tier breakup (granted, not much time). If there was an option for a “smart” service level recommendation, where it would only suggest to use the cheaper tier if you have enough coins to make it truly cheaper per coin AFTER fees, that would be a welcome and useful time-saving feature.
• As others have pointed out, whether to use declared value as the total value or per item value is unclear. Yes, there is a question mark hover icon, but it says "The maximum amount per item, or multiple quantities of the same item, that you may claim as compensation in the event of loss or damage", and honestly that doesn't make it less confusing. Changing the text below "Declared Value" to say "Estimated value of your item(s) [per item, not total]" or something similar would be helpful. For example, the PCGS OSC 2.0 How to Guide says "If you are submitting multiple of the same coin, the declared value should be the value of each individual coin, not the total value of all the coins", which is nice clear and simple language. I know you can only put so much text in a tooltip, but elsewhere on that same guide it says "If you submit multiple coins of the same date and type but have drastically different values, please list them as separate items so we can correctly value your order", which is useful info for creating submissions.
• "$0 /Item" for Mint Error Unique Attribute is misleading. Having "must be on mint error tier" or some explanatory tooltip or just leaving that area blank would be less misleading.
• As others have pointed out, printing & signing 3 PCGS copies of the submission form is time consuming. It is also paper consuming, and sometimes the multi-submission-form-document doesn’t format great for printing depending on the submission length.
• Being able to print line items on Avery stickers is a great feature. However, it can only print starting at one end. For example, if you have a 10 coin submission and then another 10 coin submission, you can use 10 labels from each end of the sheet, but then you have 30 stickers stuck in the middle of the page that you cannot use for PCGS submission. Being able to fill out a field of "create 10 blank spots" or "start on position 11" before clicking 'print labels' would be very useful, saving time and reducing waste. Also, now that you can submit multiple submissions at one, an option to 'print labels for all submissions' could be useful.
• Having a way to manually change the order of the coins on the submission would be nice.
• Mint Errors should be able to be done on a per coin basis, not per submission. I know this is a bit off topic from OSC 2.0, and it would probably require changes on the PCGS end that they may not be willing to do, but having mint errors be on a submission level rather than a per coin level is a major inconvenience. Other major TPGs allow error attribution on a single coin in a submission.
• And finally, this feature would be the greatest help for efficient submissions for some collectors/dealers, along with being a feature that no other TPG is currently doing. For most submissions, our customer copy gets filled with various notes, whether it has to do with who it belongs to in the case of grouping coins from various collectors/customers (“John G’s coin”), coin history (“bought at Long Beach Expo”, “from Mint Set”, “was NGC MS65”, etc), pricing (“paid $180”, “Greysheet bid $210”), grading (“my guess MS67”), or other notes. Having the option to have a 'customer copy only notes' field automatically printed on the customer copy only would be a big time saver. I currently don't think PCGS would do this, but I would love them to prove me wrong
@slimbert Thank you so much for taking the time to share this very thoughtful feedback with us. This is helpful information that we will share with our Product and Tech team.
Abby Zechman
PCGS Education Coordinator
@slimbert regarding the stickers, i can use the “middle 30” on my printer if I make sure there is approx the same amount of selvage at the top, then just manually feed into the printer.
@connecticoin , good idea, thanks for the tip. Unfortunately, there is no way to manually feed the paper for the printer we use.
Currently, we use a spreadsheet to create the labels and then print onto stickers (1.75" x 0.875") using a Rollo thermal printer. It works well enough, but we would return to using the sticker form PCGS provides if they provided a way to start the print from a specified spot on the Avery label sheet.
Used the new portal earlier this month, very happy with the turnaround time, already in QA in 3 weeks. Did not have issues with the portal when I used it in March. I also mislabeled a coin as a crossover when I just wanted it graded by PCGS any grade, The order was promptly flagged once received by PCGS, and resolved in a day, which was much appreciated.
Only critique is there did not seem to be an option on the portal for coins to not be encapsulated if they did not straight grade. I had to specify that request when I spoke with the Problem Order Desk despite noting it on the paperwork when I mailed in my coins.
Hi @JRGeyer, thanks so much for this feedback. We've passed this along to our Product and Tech team.
Isa Zavala
Social Media Coordinator
Question, I submitted my coin and PCGS received it confirmed by tracking on PCGS's site a week ago. How long did it take before they notified you that it was opened and received? Also used the new beta for raw grading of coins
They've been pretty slow lately. 3-5 days lately in my experience.
http://ProofCollection.Net
Gotcha, its been 7 days since they received it and put the tracking into their system. Hopefully tomorrow I will get notified. At least it has been confirmed received so that's always good !