Sheeesh! I just finished the 20'th Century set, but am unable to edit my sets! PCGS has been too busy messing up the composition of the type sets to fix the problem. And I wanted to be in the top 5 for at least a day!!!
If the composition hadn't chagned there would still weighting issues with the mixed type set:
1) SBA should be 1
2) SLQ T1 should be same or less than T2 (now T1 is 5 and T2 is 4). Am I right about this? I thought finding a nice FH T1 was easier than T3 which was easier than T2.
3) Why would 1942 P silver Jeffs get a -2 deduction for non-DCAM while Walkers don't ? They should be treated the same.
Now technically (and PCGS grades technically don't they?) a 20'th Century Type set would have types from dates 1901-2000. So PCGS should change the dates or the name of the set. What they are really proposing is a 1900s type set. I don't want them to add 2000 because that would be 10 more quarters!!!!! So just call it a 1900s set.
Agree on the Susie, not on the SLQ. It is easier to find a Type 1 in FH, but they are more expensive than the Type 2. You can get a 1917 FH for about $1,000 in MS-65. Can get a 1930 in 65FH for about $5-600.
The deduction should be the same for the Jefferson and the Walker. E-mail BJ with that one. Could be a typo.
"We are getting a great deal of feedback on the new type sets listed below. As you know, the type sets are a complicated issue and therefore, will require some thoughtful consideration. We appreciate your patience as we review all the feedback. Thank you. "
I have set up 4 polls on the board covering what I believed to be the key issues after reading through the complete threads again. Results will be turned in to David Hall sometime Monday afternoon. Please vote your preference in each of the polls.
DAGUMMIT(sp?) it's good to see you on the board again. Swan and I were just wondering about you. We didn't want to post any coins that would pass you up if you weren't watching.
Wishful thinking for me but maybe not for Swan. Glad you're around.
Who's brilliant idea was it to mess with the composition of PCGS' registry type sets? Somebody at PCGS is not dealing from a full deck! Type 3 SLQs are not considered Type 2? Not in my book! No 1909-1917 no-vdb cents? No difference between a T1 and T2 Ike? No steel shell casing cent? What in the hell are they smoking over at PCGS? Somebody over there is a few screwdrivers short of a full toolbox! Since my idea of a type set and PCGS' idea of a type set are two different things I guess it will soon be time to remove my sets from their Registry and boycott PCGS. I become more thoroughly disgusted with PCGS with every passing day.
Comments
DHRC has to unload for the New 20th Century gold type sets?
09/07/2006
09/07/2006
If the composition hadn't chagned there would still weighting issues with the mixed type set:
1) SBA should be 1
2) SLQ T1 should be same or less than T2 (now T1 is 5 and T2 is 4). Am I right about this? I thought finding a nice FH T1 was easier than T3 which was easier than T2.
3) Why would 1942 P silver Jeffs get a -2 deduction for non-DCAM while Walkers don't ? They should be treated the same.
Now technically (and PCGS grades technically don't they?) a 20'th Century Type set would have types from dates 1901-2000. So PCGS should change the dates or the name of the set. What they are really proposing is a 1900s type set. I don't want them to add 2000 because that would be 10 more quarters!!!!! So just call it a 1900s set.
Agree on the Susie, not on the SLQ. It is easier to find a Type 1 in FH, but they are more expensive than the Type 2. You can get a 1917 FH for about $1,000 in MS-65. Can get a 1930 in 65FH for about $5-600.
The deduction should be the same for the Jefferson and the Walker. E-mail BJ with that one. Could be a typo.
Keith
"We are getting a great deal of feedback on the new type sets listed below. As you know, the type sets are a complicated issue and therefore, will require some thoughtful consideration. We appreciate your patience as we review all the feedback. Thank you. "
Keith
Keith
BTW I have yet gotten a reply regarding the Plat proof from ebay.
DAGUMMIT(sp?) it's good to see you on the board again. Swan and I were just wondering about you. We didn't want to post any coins that would pass you up if you weren't watching.
Wishful thinking for me but maybe not for Swan. Glad you're around.
_____________________
My Other Hobby
In God We Trust.... all others pay in Gold and Silver!
<< <i>BJ and I will get some "news" out to everyone tomorrow or Wednesday...David Hall >>
09/07/2006