Perhaps for date/mm/finish they can just have one image for all 70s and another image for all 69s. That would cut down the amount of photographing of ultra moderns.
TDN - for the money they get..............yes I would!!
<< <i>Ok, since this is a "Trueview" thread I'm hoping my question might get answered here: Pcgs slabs a couple of my coins "genuine", "questionable color" to be exact. I requested "Trueview" on the submission form & paid the associated fees. Why do my coins not get photographed? >>
Double check the PCGS certification numbers - you very well may have images; I requested TrueView images on eight raw coins recently submitted and was notified that five of the eight holdered and they sent me the link to these five coins. As I also had paid for eight images, I requested a refund on three images. I was notified that all the images were taken - and sure enough the three that were not sent to me were available when I imput the Certificate Numbers.
On the other hand, I also requested another TrueView image on a raw coin - and this coin is on its way to me now - also in a Genuine holder. No images have been attached [ yet ] but I'm still keeping my fingers crossed.
Good luck !!
Edited to add: The above mentioned submission arrived this afternoon; however, no TrueView images have been attached to the PCGS Certification Number. As its not worth the time and inconvenience of returning the coin back to PCGS for imaging again, I guess I'll ask for a refund on my Debit Card.
I'd still like to hear from PCGS management whether they are considering a Bulk Submission for TrueView Imaging. As I have virtually 99.99% of my Barbers in PCGS holders - would there also be a consideration in the charges for reholdering as well. I understand that my sets qualify for Pedigree Designation - which is at no charge to the collector .
I'd like to see some sort of sliding scale as to these submissions.
Mike Hayes ~~~~~~~~~~~~ Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
Hey, Union guy do I detect some sarcasum here. All I'm saying is that for the fees they charge it wouldn't hurt the to do the photo as part of their service.
Wow the business decisions that come from this place are absurd. Any doofus with a minor in Business can see this will cut their profits (Look at any data from an elastic good.)
The only viable option is that they are trying to cut the program on their own terms...at least for their sake I hope this is the case.
If you submitted coins and requested the Truview service subsequent to the new Genuine program, and your Genuine coin was not photographed, please send me your original submission number.
We had some startup issues combining the two programs. Hopefully those have been addressed but with the thousands of coins we process daily sometimes mistakes happen.
However, we will photograph any coin that should have been done on the original submission, free of charge.
On another note, after reading the many posts on this thread, I can't tell if PCGS is going broke or getting too rich, providing great services or gouging it's customers, brilliant management or a bunch of doofuses . . . . it's hard to figure, but it's all very entertaining.
Seriously, we are reviewing every program we have to ensure consistency, accuracy and the highest level of service. Your thoughts and opinions are always welcome.
<< <i>Seriously, we are reviewing every program we have to ensure consistency, accuracy and the highest level of service. Your thoughts and opinions are always welcome. >>
The thing I don't understand is why Truview images are not available when crossing other TPG coins to PCGS. Why is that? I can understand it if the coin doesn't cross but for coins that do cross it would be really nice to have Truview as an option.
Wow the business decisions that come from this place are absurd. Any doofus with a minor in Business can see this will cut their profits (Look at any data from an elastic good.)
Perhaps you need to change majors.
For example: Assume that Phil is needing 50 hours a week currently to keep up. He gets overtime for the extra 10 hours - meaing he's drawing 60 hour paychecks. PCGS doubles the price, but submissions only fall 40% to the level that Phil is now needing 30 hours per week to keep up - meaning he has time to do other projects that PCGS wants him to do.
So, yes - submissions fall. But revenue increases, overtime is eliminated and other projects get tended to quicker.
<< <i>If you submitted coins and requested the Truview service subsequent to the new Genuine program, and your Genuine coin was not photographed, please send me your original submission number.
We had some startup issues combining the two programs. Hopefully those have been addressed but with the thousands of coins we process daily sometimes mistakes happen.
However, we will photograph any coin that should have been done on the original submission, free of charge.
On another note, after reading the many posts on this thread, I can't tell if PCGS is going broke or getting too rich, providing great services or gouging it's customers, brilliant management or a bunch of doofuses . . . . it's hard to figure, but it's all very entertaining.
Seriously, we are reviewing every program we have to ensure consistency, accuracy and the highest level of service. Your thoughts and opinions are always welcome. >>
Give 'em hell, Don!
I think we have reached the point in the maturation of the TPGs in which grading may not be the huge driver of profit going forward. The major TPGs all appear to be looking for other profit centers. For years, PCGS could offer bad service because the product (grading) was in such high demand. Going forward, as demand for grading slackens, if I were running the show, I would be looking for other ways to deliver more PCGS-related non-grading services and improve the level of service to the customer, even if it means charging more.
I would even consider some concierge level services, along the lines of the Heritage Legacy tier, for folks like TDN, TahoeDale, Sunnywood, SaintGuru and Longacre, serious high-end collectors who are not accustomed to have to wait in line with the hoi polloi for service in other venues. Why not make it easy for people willing to pay a premium for premium service?
Even if we go so far as to presume that submissions fall 60%, it could still very well be to PCGS's benefit to double pricing. Everyone is ignoring the effect that one more step has on the submission process. Perhaps having to take all those coins out of holders and put them back in is stressing their ability to process other submissions without overtime. Perhaps the projects they want Phil to do with part of his time are very important and generate more revenue than taking pictures at $10 a coin. Perhaps Phil is threatening to quit if he has to photograph one more MS69 modern?
Without full information, using basic business classes to predict that they are making a poor decision is, well, being a doofus!
Wow the business decisions that come from this place are absurd. Any doofus with a minor in Business can see this will cut their profits (Look at any data from an elastic good.)
You are assuming that TruView is profitable as a standalone service. Without looking at the books or having inside information, this doofus cannot confirm or deny that it is so. It is quite possible that by raising the price and dropping the volume, it may be profitable or more profitable.
Truth be told, we do not know PCGS' motivation for changing the program, so how can we possibly judge whether it is good or bad for them to change it?
<< <i>Of course the value matters. Would it matter if you were cracking out a $100,000 coin vs. a $100 coin? >>
I didn't know that it was more difficult to photograph coins of different values. Nor did I know that it's more difficult to crack out a $100 coin than a $100,000 coin. I assumed the same procedures were used for both. >>
>Truth be told, we do not know PCGS' motivation for changing the program, so how can we possibly judge whether it is good or bad for them to change it?
It's just another way for them to gouge us for more money. Just like the postage. It's twice what they actually pay.
I'm sure that the people here who are defending this increase are people who are not affected by money like TDN. Lets look at his case. He sends in a Trade Dollar worth $1,000,000 and pays $40 to have it photographed. That's .00004 of it's cost. Now we send in a $100 coin. If we were to pay at the same rate the photo would cost us 4 cents. And yes, I could live with that!
<< <i>Wow the business decisions that come from this place are absurd. Any doofus with a minor in Business can see this will cut their profits (Look at any data from an elastic good.)
Perhaps you need to change majors.
For example: Assume that Phil is needing 50 hours a week currently to keep up. He gets overtime for the extra 10 hours - meaing he's drawing 60 hour paychecks. PCGS doubles the price, but submissions only fall 40% to the level that Phil is now needing 30 hours per week to keep up - meaning he has time to do other projects that PCGS wants him to do.
So, yes - submissions fall. But revenue increases, overtime is eliminated and other projects get tended to quicker.
Let me know when you get that degree! >>
Can I come work for you? I like the idea that you pay double time for all hours worked over forty per week.
PS: Let me know where you got your business degree.
<< <i>Even if we go so far as to presume that submissions fall 60%, it could still very well be to PCGS's benefit to double pricing. Everyone is ignoring the effect that one more step has on the submission process. Perhaps having to take all those coins out of holders and put them back in is stressing their ability to process other submissions without overtime. Perhaps the projects they want Phil to do with part of his time are very important and generate more revenue than taking pictures at $10 a coin. Perhaps Phil is threatening to quit if he has to photograph one more MS69 modern?
Without full information, using basic business classes to predict that they are making a poor decision is, well, being a doofus! >>
All this hypothetical number crunching is well and good, but until the actual drop off due to the price increase is observed, it's just that: hypothetical. The other aspect is customer perception and attitude. This is not going to win PCGS much goodwill with their customer base, and may cut down on submissions overall, not only the TrueView requests. Doubling the price of something is pretty drastic. I remember being pretty annoyed when reholdering went from $5 to $10 overnight. I'd have likely been less annoyed if they would have done it in increments.
It seems like most of the people who are coming to the defense of PCGS are the high end well-heeled collectors, for whom the price is well-nigh a non-issue.
<< <i>Of course the value matters. Would it matter if you were cracking out a $100,000 coin vs. a $100 coin? >>
I didn't know that it was more difficult to photograph coins of different values. Nor did I know that it's more difficult to crack out a $100 coin than a $100,000 coin. I assumed the same procedures were used for both. >>
And the same CARE taking while cracking. >>
Flawed reasoning. It doesn't cost the USPS any less to transport a $1 package across country than it does for them to transport a $10,000 package. As has been pointed out, it's how much it costs them when the package gets lost or damaged. What PCGS has implemented is a very crude two-tiered insurance scheme.
Now let me see...I do have a business degree (well, several, actually). Pricing is always a touchy issue. If PCGS is raising the price of the TrueView service, I can see at least 3 basic reasons for the change:
1) The management of PCGS are dirty, lousing, cheating thieves that take personal delight in defrauding the masses. (Come on, do any of your REALLY think that??) 2) PCGS was losing money on the service, and they needed to raise the price to cover costs; otherwise they would have to CANCEL the service altogether. (Remember, PCGS pays their employees too, and they have to at least cover their costs in order to afford that. I'm sure all of those posting here like getting their steady paychecks -- OR maybe some of you would like to cut your salaries so that your bosses can give better deals to their customers.) 3) PCGS realizes the value of the TrueView service and is working to balance the cost and value -- so that it is a VALUE to PCGS as well, in addition to being a value to their customers.
Frankly, considering the liability involved at PCGS, I'm stunned the price has been so low for so long. I've done quite a bit of photography myself (other than coins), but photographing coins in their holders is inordinately difficult for me. There have been times I've taken a pile of individual digital photos of a coin, just to end up with one really good shot. Now, do I want to purchase specialized equipment, stands, holders, etc. myself to take better pictures ($$$) and still spend a lot of my own time ($$$), and still end up with amateur photos, or do I want a true EXPERT to get me a top quality photo, reliably every time?
Now maybe for some coins, I would just choose to do it myself, but I like having the OPTION of sending them in to PCGS and have an EXPERT do it, and I applaud Don Willis for making the efforts to restructure the program so that it can stay around for awhile.
As to why the higher price for more valuable coins (or the higher shipping price for more valuable shipments, for that matter), I agree there probably is about the same effort that goes into imaging a $100 coin as their is for a $1 million coin. However, the extra step of imagining adds more human handling to the service beyond the grading room. More handling creates more opportunities for accidents. If some handler dropped a submitted coin only once out of 50,000 coins, and that coin was a $100 coin, maybe that's not such a big liability to cover. (I assume submitters would want compensated if their coin was damaged during the imaging process.) What if that one in 50,000 coin was a million dollar coin? Would the owner of that coin be any less interested in compensation? Of course not. So, of course, PCGS' insurance costs will be higher for the more valuable coins, and those costs have to be covered. Or, I suppose, PCGS could just average out the insurance costs over ALL of the coins submitted, and maybe the TrueView fee goes up to $30 for ANY coin submitted, including the $50 and $100 coins. Would that make everyone feel better??
<< <i> Of course the value matters. Would it matter if you were cracking out a $100,000 coin vs. a $100 coin? >>
Mr. Willis,
With all due respect. Is PCGS a neutral, unbiased third party grading company or not? What does it matter if the coin is valued at $10, $500 or 500,000 dollars, they should all be treated by your company as if they were worth over $1,000,000. From reading your comment, I get the impression that “care” in handling of the coins only applies if you give it a value over a certain level. What is up with this? To me and several other collectors, a $1,000 coin means as much to us as an $80,000 coin means to Tradedollarnut.
I guess it is nice to know that PCGS considers some coins sub standard and that they will not take “due care” of them or as much care unless they are worth over $100,000. Maybe the word “Professional” should be taken out of the name of your company.
This statement tells me a lot about your “character”
<< <i>What does it matter if the coin is valued at $10, $500 or 500,000 dollars, they should all be treated by your company as if they were worth over $1,000,000. From reading your comment, I get the impression that “care” in handling of the coins only applies if you give it a value over a certain level. What is up with this? To me and several other collectors, a $1,000 coin means as much to us as an $80,000 coin means to Tradedollarnut.
I guess it is nice to know that PCGS considers some coins sub standard and that they will not take “due care” of them or as much care unless they are worth over $100,000. Maybe the word “Professional” should be taken out of the name of your company.
This statement tells me a lot about your “character”
Sincerely,
Timothy A. Clough >>
Did you read any of the comments about insurance liability?
With all due respect, Mr. Willis is NOT saying any coins are substandard or that they intentionally take less care with less valuable coins. It is simply an unavoidable cost of business that more valuable items cost more to insure than less valuable items. Let me ask you this, if you have more than one car, doesn't the newer, more valuable car cost more to insure and the older, less valuable one? Or do you expect the insurance companies to cover the replacement cost of a brand new $100,000 luxury vehicle for the same price as a 30-year old subcompact beater?
Plain and simple, it costs PCGS more in insurance premiums for higher valued coins than lesser valued coins -- REGARDLESS of the care taken during their service -- and that cost must be recovered in order for PCGS (or ANY business) to exist.
Anybody trying to use insurance premiums as a reason is just blowing smoke up our you know what. They don't pay special insurance to photo coins. They ALREADY have the coins there for grading and ARE covered I'm sure. There is no cost in taking pics of coins once you have the equipment and I'm sure it is paid for.
They have graded over 17 million coins at $30....................that's around 600 million dollars. And that's not counting the ones that did not grade and S T I L L got the 30 bucks!!!!
<< <i>Plain and simple, it costs PCGS more in insurance premiums for higher valued coins than lesser valued coins -- REGARDLESS of the care taken during their service -- and that cost must be recovered in order for PCGS (or ANY business) to exist. >>
They've always handled high dollar coins (that's what they do), and probably have always had insurance or have taken responsibility otherwise.
Maybe something has changed recently to warrant the price hikes?
Yes I read the comments from a few members trying to speculate on the justification for the increase. Sorry, smoke and mirrors.
The statement quoted, Mr. Willis made to a few post had nothing to do with “insurance” and “would it matter of you were cracking out a $100,000 coin vs. a $100 coin” implies to the level of care / time needed to perform the task.. My point, it should not matter what the value of the coin is, the same level of care / time allotted to perform the task should be the same with all due care taken to insure the coin is protected and unharmed.
Yes I read the comments from a few members trying to speculate on the justification for the increase. Sorry, smoke and mirrors.
The statement quoted, Mr. Willis made to a few post had nothing to do with “insurance” and “would it matter of you were cracking out a $100,000 coin vs. a $100 coin” implies to the level of care / time needed to perform the task.. My point, it should not matter what the value of the coin is, the same level of care / time allotted to perform the task should be the same with all due care taken to insure the coin is protected and unharmed.
JMHO, >>
I'm quite sure the goal at PCGS is that no coin is ever damaged while on their premises. Nonetheless, no matter how careful you are, once in a blue moon, sh*t happens. Taking a photo of a coin adds more handling and transportation steps to the basic grading/slabbing process and incurs more risk.
And even if you don't agree with the above, that's how their insurance company will view it.
They've always handled high dollar coins (that's what they do), and probably have always had insurance or have taken responsibility otherwise.
True, PCGS has always handled high dollar coins, but they have NOT always provided a photographic service, and they probably do not have a SEPARATE special insurance policy for photographing coins. However, the world of insurance analyzes every risk separately and builds that into the premium charged -- whether that is separately identified or bundled in. For example, for my house, I have homeowners' insurance. That include fire damage to the house, damage or loss of contents, damage or loss of other structures (like sheds), but it does not include flood damage. If I wanted flood insurance, that would be extra. If I wanted earthquake insurance, that would be extra. I don't need those, so I don't pay for them. For my car insurance, my agent asks me how many miles I average driving each year. Maybe it would be SHOCKING to some of the people posting to this thread, but the insurance company actually charges MORE when my average driving goes over certain brackets. I guess for some reason, they figure if I drive more than 20,000 miles per year my car is at greater risk of damage than if I drive less and my car stays parked in my garage. The insurance company even makes a distinction for my second car -- recognizing it gets less use -- and the premiums are much lower.
It all comes down to the level of risk. If a coin goes from the grading room directly to slabbing and then directly to mailing, that is one level of risk of damage. When the process gets extended to include moving the coin to another department, photographing it, and then taking to get slabbed, the coin sees more "mileage" and so more risk of damage. So, I totally believe PCGS' overall insurance premium get bumped up to cover that extra risk. Do you really think (especially in these days with AIG people lining their pockets with bonuses at taxpayers' expense) that the insurance companies are giving PCGS some freebies and not bumping their rates for that extra risk? I, for one, don't believe the insurance companies are that kindly and generous.
There's alot of complaining in this thread. Nobody is forcing anybody to use this service.
It's there, use it if you want. If you don't like the price, there might be others out there willing to do just as good a job for less. (wink wink nod nod) haha.
“would it matter of you were cracking out a $100,000 coin vs. a $100 coin”
How does that imply "to the level of care / time needed to perform the task"? I have personally witnessed how PCGS "cracks out" coins for grading/regrading. There are risks involved in the process regardless of the value of the coin -- risks to both the coin and the person cracking it out. I can assure you that the risk of physical injury to that person guarantees the person uses sufficient time and care for EVERY coin, regardless of value.
What I believe Don Willis meant was that if you crack out a $100 coin and damage it, you've just cost yourself $100 that you have to pay to the coin's owner. If you crack out a $100,000 coin and damage it, now you have to cough up $100K for that owner. Doesn't that become a greater financial burden than damaging the $100 coin?
Think about it. If you saw a $1 bill laying in the dirt across the street, and it's midnight with no cars visible for miles in either direction, would you cross the street to pick it up? I would -- it would seem there would be no risk involved, so why not get the dollar? Now, what if it was rush hour, with lots of cars speeding along in both directions? Would that $1 bill be a sufficient price for you to accept the risk of crossing the street then? I certainly wouldn't risk that situation for a dollar. The degree of risk MUST be considered!
Tell me, "across the street" where you have your Kennedy set, how much do THEY charge to give you high resolution digital images of the coins, where you get the actual electronic file? I know they now keep low-rez images of all coins for free, but can you even get a full size high rez digital file that you can re-use? Is that even available at any price?
<< <i>Say what you want on the price but they do a HECK of a job
On my IKE set I will gladly pay the $20 plus insurance and shipping to keep my set updated. If you want an example of True-View photos compared to my personal scanning ability just click on the link below to my IKE Set.
PCGS just True-View'ed my S/S and I will send the MS67 FPL (the only coin not True-View'ed) in soon so my set will be 100% True-View'ed.
The photos make the set and I'm sure would significiantly increase the selling price should I ever deceide to sell. (Does the phrase "When H--- freezes over) come to mind.
JMHO, GrandAm >>
Right Gary, except to have your set imaged now, double the price of what you paid..................which will now be $500 plus $250 for reholdering plus $180 shipping both ways.
Looks close to $1,000 which in my mind is just too expensive and although they are nice, they do not make the set, the coins make the set.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
If I was able to do as good of a job as you do with Photoshop I could image my own coins but I can not so I am very glad to use the True-View service.
I know a set is only as good as the coins within but having the images really sets those sets apart from sets without images. That is what I was trying to say.
As I said before I would be happy to have images of the quality of the ones you have taken yourself of your set. They are very nice and IF & WHEN I figure out this $99 Photo Shop package I purchased awhile back I will add my own images to some of my other sets.
Petition your congressman to create a program whereby rich guys like Longacre have to pay even more for TruView so that folks of lesser means pay less (if at all). It's the American way!
<< <i>Petition your congressman to create a program whereby rich guys like Longacre have to pay even more for TruView so that folks of lesser means pay less (if at all). It's the American way! >>
Hey, maybe if my means are meager enough, I can get a partial refund for several TrueViews, even if I have never used the service.
<< <i>Petition your congressman to create a program whereby rich guys like Longacre have to pay even more for TruView so that folks of lesser means pay less (if at all). It's the American way! >>
Hey, maybe if my means are meager enough, I can get a partial refund for several TrueViews, even if I have never used the service. >>
This program is a luxury. TD you would be right with a 30-40% price hike. But if you take a luxury program and double the price, the fall in users will outweigh the profit.
It's like taking a McDonalds burger and making them $4 each. I eat that stuff (occasionally) cause it's convenient and cheap...
<< <i>This program is a luxury. TD you would be right with a 30-40% price hike. But if you take a luxury program and double the price, the fall in users will outweigh the profit.
It's like taking a McDonalds burger and making them $4 each. I eat that stuff (occasionally) cause it's convenient and cheap... >>
There is a salient difference between TrueView and McDonalds: If McDonalds raises prices too much, people just go to Jack in the Box or Burger King. There is nowhere else to get photos of PCGS coins out of the holder.
For all the discussions on the raw vs. slabbed, it really depends on the coin. Many pieces are not difficult to photograph in a slab, however, some, such as toned proofs, can be incredibly hard. The advantage with TrueView is that you the image can come out however you like it; once slabbed, some angles are off-limits because of light glare. Slabbed coins also run the risk of scratches in the plastic showing up in the picture.
I think very highly of Phil's work, and I think they'll continue to do just fine (economically, that is, even if this particular service drops in volume). For those who want less expensive options, you're not going to be hard-pressed to find numerous board members *cough* who take great photographs at a lower price.
>>There is a salient difference between TrueView and McDonalds: If McDonalds raises prices too much, people just go >>to Jack in the Box or Burger King. There is nowhere else to get photos of PCGS coins out of the holder.
I don't know what "salient" means, but a coin does NOT have to be out of the holder to take a good pic!
Wow...I can't believe I looked through all the threads. I think I need a nap now...and adamlaneus, I swear I laugh at every one of your goofy responses to threads.
<< <i>This program is a luxury. TD you would be right with a 30-40% price hike. But if you take a luxury program and double the price, the fall in users will outweigh the profit.
It's like taking a McDonalds burger and making them $4 each. I eat that stuff (occasionally) cause it's convenient and cheap... >>
There is a salient difference between TrueView and McDonalds: If McDonalds raises prices too much, people just go to Jack in the Box or Burger King. There is nowhere else to get photos of PCGS coins out of the holder. >>
No, but there is a way to get pics of coins IN holders that are just as good, and at a fraction of the cost of what PCGS is now charging.
Some people know a technique to get equally good pictures from coins already in a slab as pics of a raw coin, no matter how scratched up or mangled it is.
I think very highly of Phil's work, and I think they'll continue to do just fine (economically, that is, even if this particular service drops in volume). For those who want less expensive options, you're not going to be hard-pressed to find numerous board members *cough* who take great photographs at a lower price.
<< <i>This program is a luxury. TD you would be right with a 30-40% price hike. But if you take a luxury program and double the price, the fall in users will outweigh the profit. >>
Objection - assumes facts not in evidence. ;-)
ps - I got my business degree in the real world. So far, seem to be passing with flying colors.
<< <i>This program is a luxury. TD you would be right with a 30-40% price hike. But if you take a luxury program and double the price, the fall in users will outweigh the profit.
It's like taking a McDonalds burger and making them $4 each. I eat that stuff (occasionally) cause it's convenient and cheap... >>
I don't know who is teaching you micro, but I'd ask for a refund of my class fees or pay attention better. A lot of luxury items tend to be less price elastic.
I love threads like this as they illustrate why most folks couldn't be successful owning and running a significant business.
<< <i>I love threads like this as they illustrate why most folks couldn't be successful owning and running a significant business. >>
Which I am not.............which is why I tend to whine and groan when prices go up by 100%!
20% would be acceptable. 30% would be palitable. 40-50% might be acceptable.
Heck, even multiple 20% increases in the same year would be acceptable, however, 100% is a statement.
I think PCGS is simply tired of handling all the common True View requests just like they are tired of all the Variety Attribution submissions and the minor error coin submissions. Why else raise Error rates to $50 per coin?
Its actually quite a simple statement. Quit sending minor mint error's and quit sending so dang many True View submissions for common coins.
If you price the service to the point where it is trivial in cost compared to the price of the coin, then you'll keep the value of the service for the coins which warrant the service. Why ever would I pay PCGS $30 ($20 photo + $10 reholder) dollars to photograph my $20 coin?
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
Comments
TDN - for the money they get..............yes I would!!
<< <i>For the price they charge I think the trueview picture should be added at no charge for all coins submitted.
JMHO >>
Why stop there? Perhaps PCGS could pay YOU a small fee for the right to photograph some of your coins.
<< <i>Ok, since this is a "Trueview" thread I'm hoping my question might get answered here: Pcgs slabs a couple of my coins "genuine", "questionable color" to be exact. I requested "Trueview" on the submission form & paid the associated fees. Why do my coins not get photographed? >>
Double check the PCGS certification numbers - you very well may have images; I requested TrueView images on eight raw coins recently submitted and was notified that five of the eight holdered and they sent me the link to these five coins. As I also had paid for eight images, I requested a refund on three images. I was notified that all the images were taken - and sure enough the three that were not sent to me were available when I imput the Certificate Numbers.
On the other hand, I also requested another TrueView image on a raw coin - and this coin is on its way to me now - also in a Genuine holder. No images have been attached [ yet ] but I'm still keeping my fingers crossed.
Good luck !!
Edited to add: The above mentioned submission arrived this afternoon; however, no TrueView
images have been attached to the PCGS Certification Number. As its not worth the time and
inconvenience of returning the coin back to PCGS for imaging again, I guess I'll ask for a refund
on my Debit Card.
I'd still like to hear from PCGS management whether they are considering a Bulk Submission for
TrueView Imaging. As I have virtually 99.99% of my Barbers in PCGS holders - would there also
be a consideration in the charges for reholdering as well. I understand that my sets qualify for
Pedigree Designation - which is at no charge to the collector .
I'd like to see some sort of sliding scale as to these submissions.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
New Barber Purchases
The only viable option is that they are trying to cut the program on their own terms...at least for their sake I hope this is the case.
">"http://www.cashcrate.com/5663377"
We had some startup issues combining the two programs. Hopefully those have been addressed but with the thousands of coins we process daily sometimes mistakes happen.
However, we will photograph any coin that should have been done on the original submission, free of charge.
On another note, after reading the many posts on this thread, I can't tell if PCGS is going broke or getting too rich, providing great services or gouging it's customers, brilliant management or a bunch of doofuses . . . . it's hard to figure, but it's all very entertaining.
Seriously, we are reviewing every program we have to ensure consistency, accuracy and the highest level of service. Your thoughts and opinions are always welcome.
<< <i>Seriously, we are reviewing every program we have to ensure consistency, accuracy and the highest level of service. Your thoughts and opinions are always welcome. >>
Is this April 1st?
<< <i>
<< <i>For the price they charge I think the trueview picture should be added at no charge for all coins submitted.
JMHO >>
Why stop there? Perhaps PCGS could pay YOU a small fee for the right to photograph some of your coins. >>
Sweet!
But only if they bring coffee and muffins over to my house.
"Inspiration exists, but it has to find you working" Pablo Picasso
> Your thoughts and opinions are always welcome
The thing I don't understand is why Truview images are not available when crossing other TPG coins to PCGS. Why is that? I can understand it if the coin doesn't cross but for coins that do cross it would be really nice to have Truview as an option.
Perhaps you need to change majors.
For example: Assume that Phil is needing 50 hours a week currently to keep up. He gets overtime for the extra 10 hours - meaing he's drawing 60 hour paychecks. PCGS doubles the price, but submissions only fall 40% to the level that Phil is now needing 30 hours per week to keep up - meaning he has time to do other projects that PCGS wants him to do.
So, yes - submissions fall. But revenue increases, overtime is eliminated and other projects get tended to quicker.
Let me know when you get that degree!
<< <i>If you submitted coins and requested the Truview service subsequent to the new Genuine program, and your Genuine coin was not photographed, please send me your original submission number.
We had some startup issues combining the two programs. Hopefully those have been addressed but with the thousands of coins we process daily sometimes mistakes happen.
However, we will photograph any coin that should have been done on the original submission, free of charge.
On another note, after reading the many posts on this thread, I can't tell if PCGS is going broke or getting too rich, providing great services or gouging it's customers, brilliant management or a bunch of doofuses . . . . it's hard to figure, but it's all very entertaining.
Seriously, we are reviewing every program we have to ensure consistency, accuracy and the highest level of service. Your thoughts and opinions are always welcome. >>
Give 'em hell, Don!
I think we have reached the point in the maturation of the TPGs in which grading may not be the huge driver of profit going forward. The major TPGs all appear to be looking for other profit centers. For years, PCGS could offer bad service because the product (grading) was in such high demand. Going forward, as demand for grading slackens, if I were running the show, I would be looking for other ways to deliver more PCGS-related non-grading services and improve the level of service to the customer, even if it means charging more.
I would even consider some concierge level services, along the lines of the Heritage Legacy tier, for folks like TDN, TahoeDale, Sunnywood, SaintGuru and Longacre, serious high-end collectors who are not accustomed to have to wait in line with the hoi polloi for service in other venues. Why not make it easy for people willing to pay a premium for premium service?
Without full information, using basic business classes to predict that they are making a poor decision is, well, being a doofus!
You are assuming that TruView is profitable as a standalone service. Without looking at the books or having inside information, this doofus cannot confirm or deny that it is so. It is quite possible that by raising the price and dropping the volume, it may be profitable or more profitable.
Truth be told, we do not know PCGS' motivation for changing the program, so how can we possibly judge whether it is good or bad for them to change it?
<< <i>
<< <i>Of course the value matters. Would it matter if you were cracking out a $100,000 coin vs. a $100 coin? >>
I didn't know that it was more difficult to photograph coins of different values. Nor did I know that it's more difficult to crack out a $100 coin than a $100,000 coin. I assumed the same procedures were used for both. >>
It's just another way for them to gouge us for more money. Just like the postage. It's twice what they actually pay.
I'm sure that the people here who are defending this increase are people who are not affected by money like TDN. Lets look at his case. He sends in a Trade Dollar worth $1,000,000 and pays $40 to have it photographed. That's .00004 of it's cost. Now we send in a $100 coin. If we were to pay at the same rate the photo would cost us 4 cents. And yes, I could live with that!
<< <i>Wow the business decisions that come from this place are absurd. Any doofus with a minor in Business can see this will cut their profits (Look at any data from an elastic good.)
Perhaps you need to change majors.
For example: Assume that Phil is needing 50 hours a week currently to keep up. He gets overtime for the extra 10 hours - meaing he's drawing 60 hour paychecks. PCGS doubles the price, but submissions only fall 40% to the level that Phil is now needing 30 hours per week to keep up - meaning he has time to do other projects that PCGS wants him to do.
So, yes - submissions fall. But revenue increases, overtime is eliminated and other projects get tended to quicker.
Let me know when you get that degree!
Can I come work for you? I like the idea that you pay double time for all hours worked over forty per week.
PS: Let me know where you got your business degree.
Who says PCGS doesn't give little guys like me a break.
<< <i>Even if we go so far as to presume that submissions fall 60%, it could still very well be to PCGS's benefit to double pricing. Everyone is ignoring the effect that one more step has on the submission process. Perhaps having to take all those coins out of holders and put them back in is stressing their ability to process other submissions without overtime. Perhaps the projects they want Phil to do with part of his time are very important and generate more revenue than taking pictures at $10 a coin. Perhaps Phil is threatening to quit if he has to photograph one more MS69 modern?
Without full information, using basic business classes to predict that they are making a poor decision is, well, being a doofus!
All this hypothetical number crunching is well and good, but until the actual drop off due to the
price increase is observed, it's just that: hypothetical. The other aspect is customer perception
and attitude. This is not going to win PCGS much goodwill with their customer base, and may
cut down on submissions overall, not only the TrueView requests. Doubling the price of something
is pretty drastic. I remember being pretty annoyed when reholdering went from $5 to $10 overnight.
I'd have likely been less annoyed if they would have done it in increments.
It seems like most of the people who are coming to the defense of PCGS are the high end well-heeled
collectors, for whom the price is well-nigh a non-issue.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Of course the value matters. Would it matter if you were cracking out a $100,000 coin vs. a $100 coin? >>
I didn't know that it was more difficult to photograph coins of different values. Nor did I know that it's more difficult to crack out a $100 coin than a $100,000 coin. I assumed the same procedures were used for both. >>
Flawed reasoning. It doesn't cost the USPS any less to transport a $1 package across country
than it does for them to transport a $10,000 package. As has been pointed out, it's how much
it costs them when the package gets lost or damaged. What PCGS has implemented is a very
crude two-tiered insurance scheme.
Now let me see...I do have a business degree (well, several, actually). Pricing is always a touchy issue. If PCGS is raising the price of the TrueView service, I can see at least 3 basic reasons for the change:
1) The management of PCGS are dirty, lousing, cheating thieves that take personal delight in defrauding the masses. (Come on, do any of your REALLY think that??)
2) PCGS was losing money on the service, and they needed to raise the price to cover costs; otherwise they would have to CANCEL the service altogether. (Remember, PCGS pays their employees too, and they have to at least cover their costs in order to afford that. I'm sure all of those posting here like getting their steady paychecks -- OR maybe some of you would like to cut your salaries so that your bosses can give better deals to their customers.)
3) PCGS realizes the value of the TrueView service and is working to balance the cost and value -- so that it is a VALUE to PCGS as well, in addition to being a value to their customers.
Frankly, considering the liability involved at PCGS, I'm stunned the price has been so low for so long. I've done quite a bit of photography myself (other than coins), but photographing coins in their holders is inordinately difficult for me. There have been times I've taken a pile of individual digital photos of a coin, just to end up with one really good shot. Now, do I want to purchase specialized equipment, stands, holders, etc. myself to take better pictures ($$$) and still spend a lot of my own time ($$$), and still end up with amateur photos, or do I want a true EXPERT to get me a top quality photo, reliably every time?
Now maybe for some coins, I would just choose to do it myself, but I like having the OPTION of sending them in to PCGS and have an EXPERT do it, and I applaud Don Willis for making the efforts to restructure the program so that it can stay around for awhile.
As to why the higher price for more valuable coins (or the higher shipping price for more valuable shipments, for that matter), I agree there probably is about the same effort that goes into imaging a $100 coin as their is for a $1 million coin. However, the extra step of imagining adds more human handling to the service beyond the grading room. More handling creates more opportunities for accidents. If some handler dropped a submitted coin only once out of 50,000 coins, and that coin was a $100 coin, maybe that's not such a big liability to cover. (I assume submitters would want compensated if their coin was damaged during the imaging process.) What if that one in 50,000 coin was a million dollar coin? Would the owner of that coin be any less interested in compensation? Of course not. So, of course, PCGS' insurance costs will be higher for the more valuable coins, and those costs have to be covered. Or, I suppose, PCGS could just average out the insurance costs over ALL of the coins submitted, and maybe the TrueView fee goes up to $30 for ANY coin submitted, including the $50 and $100 coins. Would that make everyone feel better??
<< <i> Of course the value matters. Would it matter if you were cracking out a $100,000 coin vs. a $100 coin? >>
Mr. Willis,
With all due respect. Is PCGS a neutral, unbiased third party grading company or not? What does it matter if the coin is valued at $10, $500 or 500,000 dollars, they should all be treated by your company as if they were worth over $1,000,000. From reading your comment, I get the impression that “care” in handling of the coins only applies if you give it a value over a certain level. What is up with this? To me and several other collectors, a $1,000 coin means as much to us as an $80,000 coin means to Tradedollarnut.
I guess it is nice to know that PCGS considers some coins sub standard and that they will not take “due care” of them or as much care unless they are worth over $100,000. Maybe the word “Professional” should be taken out of the name of your company.
This statement tells me a lot about your “character”
Sincerely,
Timothy A. Clough
<< <i>What does it matter if the coin is valued at $10, $500 or 500,000 dollars, they should all be treated by your company as if they were worth over $1,000,000. From reading your comment, I get the impression that “care” in handling of the coins only applies if you give it a value over a certain level. What is up with this? To me and several other collectors, a $1,000 coin means as much to us as an $80,000 coin means to Tradedollarnut.
I guess it is nice to know that PCGS considers some coins sub standard and that they will not take “due care” of them or as much care unless they are worth over $100,000. Maybe the word “Professional” should be taken out of the name of your company.
This statement tells me a lot about your “character”
Sincerely,
Timothy A. Clough >>
Did you read any of the comments about insurance liability?
With all due respect, Mr. Willis is NOT saying any coins are substandard or that they intentionally take less care with less valuable coins. It is simply an unavoidable cost of business that more valuable items cost more to insure than less valuable items. Let me ask you this, if you have more than one car, doesn't the newer, more valuable car cost more to insure and the older, less valuable one? Or do you expect the insurance companies to cover the replacement cost of a brand new $100,000 luxury vehicle for the same price as a 30-year old subcompact beater?
Plain and simple, it costs PCGS more in insurance premiums for higher valued coins than lesser valued coins -- REGARDLESS of the care taken during their service -- and that cost must be recovered in order for PCGS (or ANY business) to exist.
They have graded over 17 million coins at $30....................that's around 600 million dollars. And that's not counting the ones that did not grade and S T I L L got the 30 bucks!!!!
They ain't gettin no pity here on money problems!
<< <i>Plain and simple, it costs PCGS more in insurance premiums for higher valued coins than lesser valued coins -- REGARDLESS of the care taken during their service -- and that cost must be recovered in order for PCGS (or ANY business) to exist. >>
They've always handled high dollar coins (that's what they do), and probably have always had insurance or have taken responsibility otherwise.
Maybe something has changed recently to warrant the price hikes?
Yes I read the comments from a few members trying to speculate on the justification for the increase. Sorry, smoke and mirrors.
The statement quoted, Mr. Willis made to a few post had nothing to do with “insurance” and “would it matter of you were cracking out a $100,000 coin vs. a $100 coin” implies to the level of care / time needed to perform the task.. My point, it should not matter what the value of the coin is, the same level of care / time allotted to perform the task should be the same with all due care taken to insure the coin is protected and unharmed.
JMHO,
<< <i>ColonialCoinUnion & Supergem,
Yes I read the comments from a few members trying to speculate on the justification for the increase. Sorry, smoke and mirrors.
The statement quoted, Mr. Willis made to a few post had nothing to do with “insurance” and “would it matter of you were cracking out a $100,000 coin vs. a $100 coin” implies to the level of care / time needed to perform the task.. My point, it should not matter what the value of the coin is, the same level of care / time allotted to perform the task should be the same with all due care taken to insure the coin is protected and unharmed.
JMHO, >>
I'm quite sure the goal at PCGS is that no coin is ever damaged while on their premises.
Nonetheless, no matter how careful you are, once in a blue moon, sh*t happens. Taking
a photo of a coin adds more handling and transportation steps to the basic grading/slabbing
process and incurs more risk.
And even if you don't agree with the above, that's how their insurance company will view it.
They've always handled high dollar coins (that's what they do), and probably have always had insurance or have taken responsibility otherwise.
True, PCGS has always handled high dollar coins, but they have NOT always provided a photographic service, and they probably do not have a SEPARATE special insurance policy for photographing coins. However, the world of insurance analyzes every risk separately and builds that into the premium charged -- whether that is separately identified or bundled in. For example, for my house, I have homeowners' insurance. That include fire damage to the house, damage or loss of contents, damage or loss of other structures (like sheds), but it does not include flood damage. If I wanted flood insurance, that would be extra. If I wanted earthquake insurance, that would be extra. I don't need those, so I don't pay for them. For my car insurance, my agent asks me how many miles I average driving each year. Maybe it would be SHOCKING to some of the people posting to this thread, but the insurance company actually charges MORE when my average driving goes over certain brackets. I guess for some reason, they figure if I drive more than 20,000 miles per year my car is at greater risk of damage than if I drive less and my car stays parked in my garage. The insurance company even makes a distinction for my second car -- recognizing it gets less use -- and the premiums are much lower.
It all comes down to the level of risk. If a coin goes from the grading room directly to slabbing and then directly to mailing, that is one level of risk of damage. When the process gets extended to include moving the coin to another department, photographing it, and then taking to get slabbed, the coin sees more "mileage" and so more risk of damage. So, I totally believe PCGS' overall insurance premium get bumped up to cover that extra risk. Do you really think (especially in these days with AIG people lining their pockets with bonuses at taxpayers' expense) that the insurance companies are giving PCGS some freebies and not bumping their rates for that extra risk? I, for one, don't believe the insurance companies are that kindly and generous.
It's there, use it if you want. If you don't like the price, there might be others out there willing to do just as good a job for less.
How does that imply "to the level of care / time needed to perform the task"? I have personally witnessed how PCGS "cracks out" coins for grading/regrading. There are risks involved in the process regardless of the value of the coin -- risks to both the coin and the person cracking it out. I can assure you that the risk of physical injury to that person guarantees the person uses sufficient time and care for EVERY coin, regardless of value.
What I believe Don Willis meant was that if you crack out a $100 coin and damage it, you've just cost yourself $100 that you have to pay to the coin's owner. If you crack out a $100,000 coin and damage it, now you have to cough up $100K for that owner. Doesn't that become a greater financial burden than damaging the $100 coin?
Think about it. If you saw a $1 bill laying in the dirt across the street, and it's midnight with no cars visible for miles in either direction, would you cross the street to pick it up? I would -- it would seem there would be no risk involved, so why not get the dollar? Now, what if it was rush hour, with lots of cars speeding along in both directions? Would that $1 bill be a sufficient price for you to accept the risk of crossing the street then? I certainly wouldn't risk that situation for a dollar. The degree of risk MUST be considered!
Tell me, "across the street" where you have your Kennedy set, how much do THEY charge to give you high resolution digital images of the coins, where you get the actual electronic file? I know they now keep low-rez images of all coins for free, but can you even get a full size high rez digital file that you can re-use? Is that even available at any price?
<< <i>Say what you want on the price but they do a HECK of a job
On my IKE set I will gladly pay the $20 plus insurance and shipping to keep my set updated. If you want an example of True-View photos compared to my personal scanning ability just click on the link below to my IKE Set.
PCGS just True-View'ed my S/S and I will send the MS67 FPL (the only coin not True-View'ed) in soon so my set will be 100% True-View'ed.
The photos make the set and I'm sure would significiantly increase the selling price should I ever deceide to sell. (Does the phrase "When H--- freezes over) come to mind.
JMHO, GrandAm
Right Gary, except to have your set imaged now, double the price of what you paid..................which will now be $500 plus $250 for reholdering plus $180 shipping both ways.
Looks close to $1,000 which in my mind is just too expensive and although they are nice, they do not make the set, the coins make the set.
The name is LEE!
If I was able to do as good of a job as you do with Photoshop I could image my own coins but I can not so I am very glad to use the True-View service.
I know a set is only as good as the coins within but having the images really sets those sets apart from sets without images. That is what I was trying to say.
As I said before I would be happy to have images of the quality of the ones you have taken yourself of your set. They are very nice and IF & WHEN I figure out this $99 Photo Shop package I purchased awhile back I will add my own images to some of my other sets.
GrandAm
<< <i>Petition your congressman to create a program whereby rich guys like Longacre have to pay even more for TruView so that folks of lesser means pay less (if at all). It's the American way! >>
Hey, maybe if my means are meager enough, I can get a partial refund for several TrueViews, even if I have never used the service.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
<< <i>
<< <i>Petition your congressman to create a program whereby rich guys like Longacre have to pay even more for TruView so that folks of lesser means pay less (if at all). It's the American way! >>
Hey, maybe if my means are meager enough, I can get a partial refund for several TrueViews, even if I have never used the service.
Absolutely! Is this a great country, or what?
It's there, use it if you want. If you don't like the price, there might be others out there willing to do just as good a job for less
Here's a pic I recently had taken with the coin in the holder. I am very happy with how it turned out. I recently purchased the coin already holdered.
edited to add, I plan to use the obverse as my aviator the next time we can upload new images. The coin looks just like the picture.
<< <i>Nobody is forcing anybody to use this service.
It's there, use it if you want. If you don't like the price, there might be others out there willing to do just as good a job for less
Here's a pic I recently had taken with the coin in the holder. I am very happy with how it turned out. I recently purchased the coin already holdered.
edited to add, I plan to use the obverse as my aviator the next time we can upload new images. The coin looks just like the picture. >>
'Dude,
Just want to make sure that you know, it's a quarter.
Edit: That image looks like a Brandon.
He took some pics of some Franklins for me too
edited to add: The "quarter" is in an MS67 holder form across the street.
It's like taking a McDonalds burger and making them $4 each. I eat that stuff (occasionally) cause it's convenient and cheap...
">"http://www.cashcrate.com/5663377"
<< <i>This program is a luxury. TD you would be right with a 30-40% price hike. But if you take a luxury program and double the price, the fall in users will outweigh the profit.
It's like taking a McDonalds burger and making them $4 each. I eat that stuff (occasionally) cause it's convenient and cheap... >>
There is a salient difference between TrueView and McDonalds: If McDonalds raises prices too much, people just go
to Jack in the Box or Burger King. There is nowhere else to get photos of PCGS coins out of the holder.
I think very highly of Phil's work, and I think they'll continue to do just fine (economically, that is, even if this particular service drops in volume). For those who want less expensive options, you're not going to be hard-pressed to find numerous board members *cough* who take great photographs at a lower price.
>>to Jack in the Box or Burger King. There is nowhere else to get photos of PCGS coins out of the holder.
I don't know what "salient" means, but a coin does NOT have to be out of the holder to take a good pic!
<< <i>"I want an elastic good." >>
<< <i>
<< <i>This program is a luxury. TD you would be right with a 30-40% price hike. But if you take a luxury program and double the price, the fall in users will outweigh the profit.
It's like taking a McDonalds burger and making them $4 each. I eat that stuff (occasionally) cause it's convenient and cheap... >>
There is a salient difference between TrueView and McDonalds: If McDonalds raises prices too much, people just go
to Jack in the Box or Burger King. There is nowhere else to get photos of PCGS coins out of the holder. >>
No, but there is a way to get pics of coins IN holders that are just as good, and at a fraction of the cost of what PCGS is now charging.
Some people know a technique to get equally good pictures from coins already in a slab as pics of a raw coin, no matter how scratched up or mangled it is.
I think very highly of Phil's work, and I think they'll continue to do just fine (economically, that is, even if this particular service drops in volume). For those who want less expensive options, you're not going to be hard-pressed to find numerous board members *cough* who take great photographs at a lower price.
Raises Hand along side Jeremy.
No need to cough.
<< <i>This program is a luxury. TD you would be right with a 30-40% price hike. But if you take a luxury program and double the price, the fall in users will outweigh the profit.
>>
Objection - assumes facts not in evidence. ;-)
ps - I got my business degree in the real world. So far, seem to be passing with flying colors.
<< <i>This program is a luxury. TD you would be right with a 30-40% price hike. But if you take a luxury program and double the price, the fall in users will outweigh the profit.
It's like taking a McDonalds burger and making them $4 each. I eat that stuff (occasionally) cause it's convenient and cheap... >>
I don't know who is teaching you micro, but I'd ask for a refund of my class fees or pay attention better. A lot of luxury items tend to be less price elastic.
I love threads like this as they illustrate why most folks couldn't be successful owning and running a significant business.
<< <i>I love threads like this as they illustrate why most folks couldn't be successful owning and running a significant business. >>
Which I am not.............which is why I tend to whine and groan when prices go up by 100%!
20% would be acceptable.
30% would be palitable.
40-50% might be acceptable.
Heck, even multiple 20% increases in the same year would be acceptable, however, 100% is a statement.
I think PCGS is simply tired of handling all the common True View requests just like they are tired of all the Variety Attribution submissions and the minor error coin submissions. Why else raise Error rates to $50 per coin?
Its actually quite a simple statement. Quit sending minor mint error's and quit sending so dang many True View submissions for common coins.
If you price the service to the point where it is trivial in cost compared to the price of the coin, then you'll keep the value of the service for the coins which warrant the service. Why ever would I pay PCGS $30 ($20 photo + $10 reholder) dollars to photograph my $20 coin?
The name is LEE!