Are the major TPGs missing an opportunity?

jmski52 · August 22, 2010 2:36AM

I'm curious why neither of the major TPGs are willing to accept the other's certification when it comes to First Strike or Early Release status. It seems to me that Registry participants are being ill-served when they aren't allowed to cross their coins into the plastic of their choice when it comes to this special designation.

Since the designation bears no direct relationship to the actual die state or striking sequence of the coins, and since both TPGs are in direct competition anyway in terms of re-grading coins that their owners want to cross, turning a blind eye toward collectors in this area seems bull-headed to me.

Do they not believe each others' labels when it comes to this type of documentation? It's not like their customers wouldn't pay for the service. I don't get it. Has anyone pursued this question with either TPG?

SeaEagleCoins · August 22, 2010 2:50AM

This is not a new topic...

In all honesty... both designations say "different" things... they are not the same and do not have the same meaning... and the true meaning of each is somewhat obscure, with one possibly being more "honest" than the other... I make no "public" judgement on that...

To truly discuss this matter, which has been attempted on this forum in the past... will only lead to some fireworks and when that happened "long ago" ... some members ended up banished from the forum...

All these terms are is marketing... and TPGs obviously have the need to market their product... however, the best advice I have ever heard is this ... "If you want a coin in a certain TPG holder, then buy it already in their holder" ... in this case, either buy one already holdered or submit your raw coins to the TPG of your choice. They each have their own rule books and playing fields and it is not really their job to support each other.

ricko · August 22, 2010 3:01AM

Well said SeaEagleCoins... Cheers, RickO

Gemineye · August 22, 2010 3:32AM

You mean the term First ..."ahem...cough..cough.."..is subject to interpretation....?!?!?!....

SeaEagleCoins · August 22, 2010 5:23AM

<< <i>You mean the term First ..."ahem...cough..cough.."..is subject to interpretation....?!?!?!....

>>

Let's just say that when one is talking about a manufacturing plant and the attached storage facility where what is manufactured gets stored until shipping...

...the old proverb "and the first shall be last and the last shall be first" takes on a whole different meaning

Gemineye · August 22, 2010 5:39AM

<< <i>

<< <i>You mean the term First ..."ahem...cough..cough.."..is subject to interpretation....?!?!?!....

>>

Let's just say that when one is talking about a manufacturing plant and the attached storage facility where what is manufactured gets stored until shipping...

...the old proverb "and the first shall be last and the last shall be first" takes on a whole different meaning

>>

.......and let's not forget...... "Don't cross the street in the middle of the block..."....

Steve · August 22, 2010 7:08AM

It blows my mind to think ANY knowledgeable collector would actually collect so called "first strike" or "early release" slabbed coins with labels. The only conceivable reason to me is that they believe people will actually pay MONEY for such a label above what a similar coin will sell for in the market. I assume that all the action takes place early in the year with so called dealers rushing to acquire lots of these coins from the good old US Mint and then getting them slabbed by PCGS or NGC. The poor guys who actually buy these labels from the dealers have really bought a "pig in the poke" and then the whole thing starts again next year. I guess it is good marketing and good MONEY for PCGS and NGC so there is no one to blame but the stupid collector who gets stuck holding a piece of plastic. JMHO. Steve

botanist · August 22, 2010 9:32AM

Yes, it's a very difficult situation. On the one hand, the TPGs would greatly enhance their prestige and reputations if they ceased any deceptive marketing gimmicks which ultimately victimize the uninformed. How can they be taken seriously in their campaigns against coin doctoring, counterfeits, nefarious overcharging and other forms of dishonesty, when they are involved in their own skulduggery? On the other hand, if they stopped very soon, which could possibly be done by the beginning of 2011, would they be ethically if not legally bound to find some way of compensating victims? Any decision will ultimately devolve upon the major stockholders. My own feeling is that the benefits of coming clean and providing full honest numismatic disclosure will outweigh any short-term financial considerations, and that those of us who are stockholders should let our opinions be known.

19Lyds · August 22, 2010 10:06AM

From what I understand, TPG A and TPG B have different dates for some of the coins regarding First Strike™ and Early Release qualification. This most specifically applies to bullion coins issued mid year where TPG A feels/thinks the release date was XX/XX/XXXX and TPG B feels/thinks the release date was YY/YY/YYYY.

I have in the past successfully crossed SAE First Strike NGC slabs to SAE First Strike™ PCGS slabs. Only for First of the year releases though, no mid year releases such as the 2006-W, 2007-W, and 2008-W coins which is where some big difference exist. Primarily because each TPG must rely upon shipping dates from individuals which may or may not be the same. 30 days from release for a coin shipped on 10/12/2006 is different than 30 days from a coin shipped on 10/11/2006.

Are the major TPGs missing an opportunity?

Comments

Leave a Comment