I'm waiting for the marketing geniuses to come out with their "Double Die" holder. Of course they will have their new made up criteria for this elite holder. The criteria being that the coin was struck by two dies, one obverse and one reverse. Can't wait to see the fancy blue and gold doubled text on the holder. Heck, add an American Flag and it is a sure winner. The key here is they will charge $500 for any 1955 cent. Yep, plain old 55 cents in a holder with "Double Die" highlighted with fancy text. Oh, there's no problem cause PCGS has the criteria for the holder hidden somewhere and they never claimed it was a double die as the entire numismatic community understands it to be.
Where did Russ go? He seemed to be the only still trying to defend PCGS. (The ethical side side, not the legal or technical one)
Whenever one uses the argumentative philosophy that "if you don't agree with the first strike designation, just dont buy it" is not taking into consideration the many newcomers to this hobby who are being misled as they "trust the number one coin grading service."
<< <i>I'm waiting for the marketing geniuses to come out with their "Double Die" holder. Of course they will have their new made up criteria for this elite holder. The criteria being that the coin was struck by two dies, one obverse and one reverse. Can't wait to see the fancy blue and gold doubled text on the holder. Heck, add an American Flag and it is a sure winner. The key here is they will charge $500 for any 1955 cent. Yep, plain old 55 cents in a holder with "Double Die" highlighted with fancy text. Oh, there's no problem cause PCGS has the criteria for the holder hidden somewhere and they never claimed it was a double die as the entire numismatic community understands it to be. >>
This thread is now twice as long as when PCGS resurrected and pinned it to let us know that it had banned Codder. Way back on page 8, XpipedreamR posted the following:
According to your post, you seem to endorse the idea that the First Strike designation is a marketing ploy. To me, "ploy" carries a negative connotation, especially when it is carried out by PCGS, leaders in coin certification, who hold important position of trust in the coin world. How can PCGS get behind the notion of a First Strike definition that is by all accounts truly novel, at least by traditional numismatic understanding?
<< <i>I'm waiting for the marketing geniuses to come out with their "Double Die" holder. Of course they will have their new made up criteria for this elite holder. The criteria being that the coin was struck by two dies, one obverse and one reverse. Can't wait to see the fancy blue and gold doubled text on the holder. Heck, add an American Flag and it is a sure winner. The key here is they will charge $500 for any 1955 cent. Yep, plain old 55 cents in a holder with "Double Die" highlighted with fancy text. Oh, there's no problem cause PCGS has the criteria for the holder hidden somewhere and they never claimed it was a double die as the entire numismatic community understands it to be. >>
One thing I've found researching tonight is that the definition of "First Strike" is a general term having different meanings to different people/entities.
I would have thought I could have found a definition of "First Strike" at the ANA website but found that site lacking.
In an article concerning the $50 Buffalo here, PCGS indicates the U.S. Mint is only producing 300,000 proof coins while the mintage for MS coins will be unlimited.
Although I'm not exactly sure which coins will achieve the "First Strike" designation, I'm assuming it applies to the proof issue coins as research tells me they require special die and planchet preparation as well as special handling precautions in order to acheive the extremely high grade and detail these coins are intended on reaching.
If the "First Strike" title is reserved for this initial issue of 300,000 proof coins, I personally don't see any misrepresentation or deception at all but good marketing strategy.
If I only had a dollar for every VAM I have...err...nevermind...I do!!
People are still lacking perspective here so I'll just read a few of the ads in the July 31, '06 Coin World for you;
Savvy investors know with prices so low now, these coins are sure to appreciate significantly. -$20 St Gaudens Treasures from the archives. -banknote printing plates ...now a new generation of collectors will have the same opportunity to love these wonderful coins. -$20 libs Spectacular gems! If you love the best...the cream of the crop... -various pre-1965 coins. ...these early coins are works of art that represent the beginning of this great country... -1795 early gold first strike, the stampede has already begun. - gold buffalos.
This is all the coin puffery I spotted in the issue. It's the first hype I've ever noticed for any modern coin though it's always been rampant for the older ones. There were no ads suggesting their coins were junk or not worth the price. Hype works only one way which is to sell coins.
There is nothing wrong with suggesting something is special even if it's mere opinion or has little meaning or predictive value. It would be difficult to show that any of this hype actually raises the price so much as it fascilitates commerce.
Obviously the puffery in question is misleading but should it all be omitted just to be on the safe side? What about newbies who might not know that "prices are so low that they have to increase" could be in error?
Perhaps it should be a separate thread but why aren't modern coins puffed? You never see anything but simple facts like mintage, pops, and grades. You never see anyone suggest that prices are too low or that they are headed higher.
They axed Codder and deleted most if not all of his posts, but the thread lives. Making it poof now without addressing legitimate concerns could be construed as an admission of wrongdoing.
They axed Codder and deleted most if not all of his posts, but the thread lives. Making it poof now without addressing legitimate concerns could be construed as an admission of wrongdoing. >>
That hasn't stopped them before. In their typical fashion, the leaders come here, make threats, pull a few people, and never answer the real questions. The "Is PCGS tightening up" thread that HRh started himself is a perfect example of non-answers. They post to show concern, but leave and not answer to save face.
Cladking -- You're neglecting to consider an important distinction: PCGS is not in the business of selling coins. In fact, it is in the business of providing value added services that supposedly protect collectors from unscrupulous dealers who engage in puffery. Are you suggesting that the TPGs are "puffing" coins themselves with the "First Strike" designation, but there's nothing wrong with that?
1768 Was the "first strike" in America by tailors in New York.
Does anyone find this thread similar to the following thread? OK...Let's see if PCGS has tightened up? Are there answers to these questions that will satisfy collector's concerns? I think there's a fine line that exist that separates the collector's interest with the TGS's and the everyday business decisions made by the TGS's. I've said this before, the window is very narrow for what true coin collector's can collect versus all the garbage that actually gets graded. Once this is understood, life goes on! Let the chips fall where they may, just choose wisely among them!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
It usually takes me awhile to word something close to what might make sense in replying to these threads. Add that to the fact that I'm watching TV, I only post about 1% of what I've written! The rest either goes into my document files or gets trashed because I'll start disagreeing with myself or I've talked myself out of the initial reasoning in which I started to write about in the first place!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
Oh well, I guess Russ decided not to grace us with his presence anymore and instead post to other random threads...
My main question has STILL not been answered as to why (ethically) PCGS has removed any and all definition of "First Strike" from their website. Can anyone post a link to a SINGLE page where they "clearly state the definition" as has been stated in their defense throughout this thread? Been waiting for hours...
So, is it true, that PCGS uses a definition of First Strike so different that it can just mean any coins minted for the first several months of production before the mailing thing in January? Has anyone found PCGS's official definition of First Strike?
24HourForums.com - load images, create albums, place ads, talk coins, enjoy the community.
The point has been that PCGS has removed any pages which define the First Strike designation. Seems strange. What if I have one I wanted to send in? How would I know what the rules are?
That's what I am interested in too - are people clearly put on notice that the term First Strike has been totally redefined and that the designation may even mean an inferior strike or one struck months after the initial production in the first half of the total.
24HourForums.com - load images, create albums, place ads, talk coins, enjoy the community.
I acknowledge that there are others that use First Strike or similar terminology.
My interpretation is that the TPG's have made their own definition where it is right or wrong. It's kind of like them defining 1+1=5. No one with knowledge of it would believe them. It's the people without knowledge that get screwed. For example, the newcomers into the hobby get a rough lesson.
Because PCGS is a reputable place, they have a responsibility. If I saw a coin with a First Strike designation on a PCGS holder, I would automatically assume, and feel I have the right to, that this reputable place would not throw a curve ball that uses a totally unexpected definition of that term and that there is no Strike benefit whatsoever.
24HourForums.com - load images, create albums, place ads, talk coins, enjoy the community.
To just state that profit is the only, and good enough reason is wrong. Anyone with better than a first grade education could see where that could lead, or should be able to see if they stopped with the " It's right because I SAID SO attitude".
I can not see how anyone can defend this ethically....Period .
<< <i>One would tend to believe "First Strike" meant the first few off the dies.........PERIOD >>
I think that's what many less knowledgeable collectors probably assume, yes. Personally I think it's a little bit questionable to market in a manner when it's reasonably evident that (a) many people would assume this is the definition and (b) some of these people would assume some kind of "premium" attached to the designation.
It's just a marketing gimmick, really, in many ways no different than a lot of the "gotta have it" messages sent by Madison Avenue. It's certainly not "fraud," though, as they never claimed it was something that it wasn't. Any belief that a "first strike" is something more than it actually is, is nothing more than incorrect assumptions and inferences made by the consumers of that product.
Fraud is certainly a stong word and in this case very inappropriate in my opinion.
What I am wondering and I remain optomistic about a representative from PCGS answering is the following... Why would PCGS, a company that in my opinion does far more to help collectors (new and old) as a whole, than hurt succomb to this strategic marketing?
Does it bolster sales for PCGS, certainly but in my long experience with PCGS they have rarely stuck their hand into silly marketing schemes such as this one. I have dealt with PCGS some time now and they have seemed to be very passive at marketing programs such as the First Strike program. I have always thought that their non-existance in this sort of program stated volumes to the fact that they were just that...marketing programs designed to put more money into a dealers pocket. I have openly patted PCGS on the back for their watchdog way and am proud to sell PCGS coin primarily, but I must ask...What changed?
morris <><
"Repent, for the kindom of heaven is at hand." ** I would take a shack on the Rock over a castle in the sand !! ** Don't take life so seriously...nobody gets out alive.
ALL VALLEY COIN AND JEWELRY 28480 B OLD TOWN FRONT ST TEMECULA, CA 92590 (951) 757-0334
Comments
Where did Russ go? He seemed to be the only still trying to defend PCGS. (The ethical side side, not the legal or technical one)
Whenever one uses the argumentative philosophy that "if you don't agree with the first strike designation, just dont buy it" is not taking into consideration the many newcomers to this hobby who are being misled as they "trust the number one coin grading service."
<< <i>I'm waiting for the marketing geniuses to come out with their "Double Die" holder. Of course they will have their new made up criteria for this elite holder. The criteria being that the coin was struck by two dies, one obverse and one reverse. Can't wait to see the fancy blue and gold doubled text on the holder. Heck, add an American Flag and it is a sure winner. The key here is they will charge $500 for any 1955 cent. Yep, plain old 55 cents in a holder with "Double Die" highlighted with fancy text. Oh, there's no problem cause PCGS has the criteria for the holder hidden somewhere and they never claimed it was a double die as the entire numismatic community understands it to be.
--------------------------------------------------
"Mr. Guth and Mr. Hall,
According to your post, you seem to endorse the idea that the First Strike designation is a marketing ploy. To me, "ploy" carries a negative connotation, especially when it is carried out by PCGS, leaders in coin certification, who hold important position of trust in the coin world. How can PCGS get behind the notion of a First Strike definition that is by all accounts truly novel, at least by traditional numismatic understanding?
Thank you."
--------------------------------------------------
That request was nicely put and deserves a reply.
<< <i> This thread is now twice as long as when PCGS resurrected and pinned it to let us know that it had banned Codder. >>
Im just waiting for it to get
I hear they had thought about this, but couldn't get it to fit on the holder.
<< <i>I'm waiting for the marketing geniuses to come out with their "Double Die" holder. Of course they will have their new made up criteria for this elite holder. The criteria being that the coin was struck by two dies, one obverse and one reverse. Can't wait to see the fancy blue and gold doubled text on the holder. Heck, add an American Flag and it is a sure winner. The key here is they will charge $500 for any 1955 cent. Yep, plain old 55 cents in a holder with "Double Die" highlighted with fancy text. Oh, there's no problem cause PCGS has the criteria for the holder hidden somewhere and they never claimed it was a double die as the entire numismatic community understands it to be.
Were you thinking of something like this?
<< <i>
<< <i> This thread is now twice as long as when PCGS resurrected and pinned it to let us know that it had banned Codder. >>
Im just waiting for it to get
Didn't they axe it yesterday?
I would have thought I could have found a definition of "First Strike" at the ANA website but found that site lacking.
In an article concerning the $50 Buffalo here, PCGS indicates the U.S. Mint is only producing 300,000 proof coins while the mintage for MS coins will be unlimited.
Although I'm not exactly sure which coins will achieve the "First Strike" designation, I'm assuming it applies to the proof issue coins as research tells me they require special die and planchet preparation as well as special handling precautions in order to acheive the extremely high grade and detail these coins are intended on reaching.
If the "First Strike" title is reserved for this initial issue of 300,000 proof coins, I personally don't see any misrepresentation or deception at all but good marketing strategy.
If I only had a dollar for every VAM I have...err...nevermind...I do!!
My "Fun With 21D" Die State Collection - QX5 Pics Attached
-----
Proud Owner of
2 –DAMMIT BOY!!! ® Awards
Savvy investors know with prices so low now, these coins are sure to appreciate significantly. -$20 St Gaudens
Treasures from the archives. -banknote printing plates
...now a new generation of collectors will have the same opportunity to love these wonderful coins. -$20 libs
Spectacular gems! If you love the best...the cream of the crop... -various pre-1965 coins.
...these early coins are works of art that represent the beginning of this great country... -1795 early gold
first strike, the stampede has already begun. - gold buffalos.
This is all the coin puffery I spotted in the issue. It's the first hype I've ever noticed for
any modern coin though it's always been rampant for the older ones. There were no ads
suggesting their coins were junk or not worth the price. Hype works only one way which
is to sell coins.
There is nothing wrong with suggesting something is special even if it's mere opinion or
has little meaning or predictive value. It would be difficult to show that any of this hype
actually raises the price so much as it fascilitates commerce.
Obviously the puffery in question is misleading but should it all be omitted just to be on
the safe side? What about newbies who might not know that "prices are so low that they
have to increase" could be in error?
Perhaps it should be a separate thread but why aren't modern coins puffed? You never
see anything but simple facts like mintage, pops, and grades. You never see anyone
suggest that prices are too low or that they are headed higher.
Is this even relevant?
They axed Codder and deleted most if not all of his posts, but the thread lives. Making it poof now without addressing legitimate concerns could be construed as an admission of wrongdoing.
<< <i>-- "Didn't they axe it yesterday?" --
They axed Codder and deleted most if not all of his posts, but the thread lives. Making it poof now without addressing legitimate concerns could be construed as an admission of wrongdoing. >>
That hasn't stopped them before. In their typical fashion, the leaders come here, make threats, pull a few people, and never answer the real questions. The "Is PCGS tightening up" thread that HRh started himself is a perfect example of non-answers. They post to show concern, but leave and not answer to save face.
Does anyone find this thread similar to the following thread? OK...Let's see if PCGS has tightened up? Are there answers to these questions that will satisfy collector's concerns? I think there's a fine line that exist that separates the collector's interest with the TGS's and the everyday business decisions made by the TGS's. I've said this before, the window is very narrow for what true coin collector's can collect versus all the garbage that actually gets graded. Once this is understood, life goes on!
Let the chips fall where they may, just choose wisely among them!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>Does anyone find this thread similar to the following thread? OK...Let's see if PCGS has tightened up? >>
Yes, I've said it 2 or 3 times.
<< <i>
<< <i>Does anyone find this thread similar to the following thread? OK...Let's see if PCGS has tightened up? >>
Yes, I've said it 2 or 3 times. >>
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
My main question has STILL not been answered as to why (ethically) PCGS has removed any and all definition of "First Strike" from their website. Can anyone post a link to a SINGLE page where they "clearly state the definition" as has been stated in their defense throughout this thread? Been waiting for hours...
My interpretation is that the TPG's have made their own definition where it is right or wrong. It's kind of like them defining 1+1=5. No one with knowledge of it would believe them. It's the people without knowledge that get screwed. For example, the newcomers into the hobby get a rough lesson.
I can not see how anyone can defend this ethically....Period .
<< <i>One would tend to believe "First Strike" meant the first few off the dies.........PERIOD >>
I think that's what many less knowledgeable collectors probably assume, yes. Personally I think it's a little bit questionable to market in a manner when it's reasonably evident that (a) many people would assume this is the definition and (b) some of these people would assume some kind of "premium" attached to the designation.
It's just a marketing gimmick, really, in many ways no different than a lot of the "gotta have it" messages sent by Madison Avenue. It's certainly not "fraud," though, as they never claimed it was something that it wasn't. Any belief that a "first strike" is something more than it actually is, is nothing more than incorrect assumptions and inferences made by the consumers of that product.
PCGS (or anyone) has a right to do it.
Consumers have a right buy or not buy this particular "product".
What I am wondering and I remain optomistic about a representative from PCGS answering is the following...
Why would PCGS, a company that in my opinion does far more to help collectors (new and old) as a whole, than hurt succomb to this strategic marketing?
Does it bolster sales for PCGS, certainly but in my long experience with PCGS they have rarely stuck their hand into silly marketing schemes such as this one. I have dealt with PCGS some time now and they have seemed to be very passive at marketing programs such as the First Strike program. I have always thought that their non-existance in this sort of program stated volumes to the fact that they were just that...marketing programs designed to put more money into a dealers pocket. I have openly patted PCGS on the back for their watchdog way and am proud to sell PCGS coin primarily, but I must ask...What changed?
morris <><
** I would take a shack on the Rock over a castle in the sand !! **
Don't take life so seriously...nobody gets out alive.
ALL VALLEY COIN AND JEWELRY
28480 B OLD TOWN FRONT ST
TEMECULA, CA 92590
(951) 757-0334
www.allvalleycoinandjewelry.com
..........What a tangled web we weave when we practice to deceive..........!!!!!!!!!
<< <i>Would Codder's posts have been acceptable if he had accused PCGS of Fraud™ instead of fraud?
<< <i>Would Codder's posts have been acceptable if he had accused PCGS of Fraud™ instead of fraud?
Probably the best post in this thread.
PCGS, ANACS, & NGC Certified Coins on My Website.
Jeezus, that was great.
<< <i>Hey, look . . . Coinguy1's lightbulb is on. Is this a case where, as they say, the light's on but nobody's home?
Yeah, he's at auction.
<< <i>
<< <i>Would Codder's posts have been acceptable if he had accused PCGS of Fraud™ instead of fraud?
Probably the best post in this thread. >>
Sure makes you wonder...
Do as I say--NOT as I do...