Options
Registry competition - is there a better way?
MidLifeCrisis
Posts: 10,613 ✭✭✭✭✭
The registry is good for a number of reasons, including:
- It provides a method to keep track of your collection
- It allows you to see and compare other collections
- It helps identify and bring together collectors with similar interests
Registry competition is bad for a number of reasons, including:
- It has artificially driven prices up to often crazy levels as people compete for the highest grades
- It has encouraged gradeflation
- It has encouraged dipping, cleaning and doctoring
- It has helped to discourage younger or poor collectors who cannot compete at the highest levels
Instead of being based on the slab grade assigned by the TPG, any registry competition should instead be based on anonymous votes to determine who has the most eye appealing, complete or interesting set…only one vote allowed per IP address per set, or require PCGS membership to vote, or something similar.
It could be a registry that does not show the assigned grade, only pictures of the coins and a place for descriptions and other comments - no grades allowed in the descriptions.
This would allow for a more friendly competition that focuses on eye appeal, overall set completion, well-written descriptions, and maybe even stories that make particular coins special to the owner.
Just another random thought…
- It provides a method to keep track of your collection
- It allows you to see and compare other collections
- It helps identify and bring together collectors with similar interests
Registry competition is bad for a number of reasons, including:
- It has artificially driven prices up to often crazy levels as people compete for the highest grades
- It has encouraged gradeflation
- It has encouraged dipping, cleaning and doctoring
- It has helped to discourage younger or poor collectors who cannot compete at the highest levels
Instead of being based on the slab grade assigned by the TPG, any registry competition should instead be based on anonymous votes to determine who has the most eye appealing, complete or interesting set…only one vote allowed per IP address per set, or require PCGS membership to vote, or something similar.
It could be a registry that does not show the assigned grade, only pictures of the coins and a place for descriptions and other comments - no grades allowed in the descriptions.
This would allow for a more friendly competition that focuses on eye appeal, overall set completion, well-written descriptions, and maybe even stories that make particular coins special to the owner.
Just another random thought…
0
Comments
I recently had the idea that the further complete a set was the higher its rank ought to be (regardless of average grade), and more
important than the current ratio of Average Grade : % Complete. This would represent more people who don't have deep pockets to buy
the best coins of a given series, but are willing to put forth the effort to complete a difficult set. There are obvious flaws in this idea, but the
premises would highlight completion over grade!
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
<< <i>Understand what the registry is and value it as you please. This will protect you. >>
You sound like Yoda.
I disagree that the registry ranking should be chosen by vote. It would turn into a popularity contest - the coins would become secondary.
LEAVE IT ALONE !
http://www.shieldnickels.net
Brilliant comment- short and to the point and easy to understand.
I could not have said that in 15 words or less
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
I do.
This thread is not about me or my registry sets.
Take that out of it and you enter a different relm
sorry- not 15 words
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>It has helped to discourage younger or poor collectors who cannot compete at the highest levels >>
I am none of the former and still cannot participate in the latter. You can be a considered wealthy and still not afford a Morgan set in the top 20.
1. Sets can be obscured so that no one can know what is in them, yet they get points and are in the rankings. This totally wrong.
2. The point system is totally screwy and set up for numismatic marketing, not numismatic merit. For example one can spend $100,000 on scarce to rare high collector quality early U.S. coins (paying fair market prices) and get fewer points than another collector who spends $20,000 on high Mint State grade early 20th century coins. For example you get almost as many registry points for a 1917 Type I Standing Liberty Quarter in MS-67 full head as you do for a 1796 Quarter in VF.
For these reasons I think that the registry “competition” is a farce, and I have no respect for it.
Here’s one more thing that sticks in my craw. A collector over there posted up an 1804 restrike large cent in MS-65 and got the MS-65 registry points for the Draped Bust large cent type (1796 – 1807). The 1804 restrike large cent is not even a coin; it’s a 19th century counterfeit which does not have the same reverse as the true type coin that goes into that slot. That stinks.
<< <i>LEAVE IT ALONE ! >>
<< <i>LEAVE IT ALONE ! >>
Why? And why are you so emphatic about it?
Clearly it's not perfect. Maybe we can think of a better solution that improves the hobby.
OK, What's wrong with it? You can't have us collectors deciding the rankings. Their is a system in place and the playing field is level. No need to screw around with it.
Why do people always want to change things. Change is not always better. My motto in programming was " Don't fix it if it's not broken"!!
JMHO
<< <i>>>>Clearly it's not perfect. Maybe we can think of a better solution that improves the hobby.<<<
OK, What's wrong with it? You can't have us collectors deciding the rankings. Their is a system in place and the playing field is level. No need to screw around with it.
Why do people always want to change things. Change is not always better. My motto in programming was " Don't fix it if it's not broken"!!
JMHO >>
If you had read and understood the OP's original posting you would know that he listed several things he considered "wrong" with it.
Additionally, the OP did not suggest that we change the system just for the sake of change (as you imply). And he pointed out areas where he thought the system was "broken" and needed tweaking or change.
- The hidden sets option should be rescinded. What is the point? If you don't want to display any information - not even the coins' grades - then why would you put it in the registry to begin with?
- Should be more collections with pictures. It would be more of an experience to see the coins.
- Implementing a vote would be tough - do we re-vote every time a set is modified/upgraded?
I would like to set top sets dropped after a period of time - say 5 years. If your that damn good, you will bounce back, but let some of the folks who have or will never be number one since they do not own the 1-2 two only known examples sit in the driver seat. I would like to see the return of pedigrees if you are in the top 5 and at least 90% complete. Thats the way PCGS originally had the pedigree program.
WS
<< <i>Registry competition is bad for a number of reasons, including:
- It has artificially driven prices up to often crazy levels as people compete for the highest grades
- It has encouraged gradeflation
- It has encouraged dipping, cleaning and doctoring
- It has helped to discourage younger or poor collectors who cannot compete at the highest levels >>
Isn't this why they started the "Everyman Collections"?
I enjoy participating in the PCGS registry, there is always room for improvement. The point system will never be perfect but it needs improvement in many areas. The Everyman collections were a great addition to the registry.
I agree with the op that:
The registry is good for a number of reasons, including:
- It provides a method to keep track of your collection
- It allows you to see and compare other collections
- It helps identify and bring together collectors with similar interests
Registry competition is bad for a number of reasons, including:
- It has artificially driven prices up to often crazy levels as people compete for the highest grades
IMHO,
The hidden sets option that allows members to hide their entire sets should be rescinded. If you don't want to display any information, not even the coins' grades, there is absolutely no benefit to other members or numismatists.
There needs to be more collections with pictures. This would make the registery a much more valuable resource.
The registry gives us all collectively a way to share our love of collecting with others. The internet and the hard work of the staff at PCGS have made this a show-piece for PCGS. I wish all the sets had complete and professional photos (mine included), but as time goes on, more and more of the sets do have images. I admit I am impressed when I see top-end sets of rare coins put together, but also appreciate other sets that may not be the highest grades or are of coins that I don't collect or have some other attribute that makes them neat. We are all collectors and we collect different things in different ways.
There is nothing I know of to stop someone from setting up their own website and putting together a product like the PCGS registry, but with different criteria. First of all, it would be a LOT of work. Most of us have NO idea how much time and money PCGS puts into their Set Registry product on an on-going basis.
I currently have a few set in the registry ranked #1, and many that are not. I am OK with that. I collect what I want to collect, and I find it fun to put together sets or parts of sets and see how they rank. I plan to continue to participate in the set registry.
<< <i>My two cents:
- The hidden sets option should be rescinded. What is the point? If you don't want to display any information - not even the coins' grades - then why would you put it in the registry to begin with?
- Should be more collections with pictures. It would be more of an experience to see the coins.
- Implementing a vote would be tough - do we re-vote every time a set is modified/upgraded? >>
JBN -
I can understand someone wanting to hide their sets. Last year, I querried a well known Barber Half collector
who had been blocking his set off and on - for years. He opened it for a day or two once in awhile just so his
fellow collectors would have a chance to see what his set looked like [ at that time ]. He immediately closed it
because he didn't want to be held prisoner by dealers who were holding his needed coins captive by asking ex-
orbitant amounts for. Once his collection was as complete as he wanted it to be - he opened it up for all to see
on a permanent basis. Edit to add: BillJones, This is your first point as well.
I agree fully with your second point : I feel that PCGS should automatically provide a service
[ similar to the one offered ATS for a nominal charge of $3.00 per coin - which is basically a
scan and nowhere the quality of TrueView. ]
The scan should be built into the price of the submission [ JMHO ] that way it forces all registrants
to have images of their coins. [ It would also help a great deal with the possibility of counterfeit holders
and coins inserted there-in.]
Re: your third point:
The Registry at PCGS is handled differently than ATS. Here we are concerned with % completed and its coupled
with the grade which gives the set its ranking. I feel that if an average collector who doesn't have deep pockets
[ and we have all been there at one time or the other ] - then that collector who has strived to complete his set
to the best of his ability should be rewarded with a higher rank than some one who buys one or two very
expensive coins and is pushed to the top of that particular Registry .
[ As it is ATS, where the rank is Dollar Driven ].
EDIT: Bill Jones: I agree with you 100% on your assesment of the Registry ATS !!
You hit upon nuances I neglected to bring out, thanks for your learned insight !!
If we allowed the participants vote on "Best Of" category - then it becomes a popularity contest.
{ I like Bob better than Ben - so I'll vote for Bob's set } .
Its not to say that the Registry can not be fine tuned - but - its working very well as it is -
but it could use a few pointers: [ ie: photo/scan of every coin certified ].
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
New Barber Purchases
1) Collectors have the right to hide their sets......period....sure it would be fun to see them.....but that is their right.
2) Forced images to make submission even more expensive........NO WAY !!! TOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO expensive now!!!
3) The point system is the ONLY way it can and should be.....the higher the grade.....the higher the set!!! Should my 65 set of Mercury Dimes be ranked ahead of Larry Martin's 67 set because mine has pics and his doesn't!!!! I DON'T THINK SO !!!!
Come on people....get real...we have a great thing going on here. Quit your whinning and play or get out!
JMHO
Who is John Galt?
<< <i>
<< <i>My two cents:
- The hidden sets option should be rescinded. What is the point? If you don't want to display any information - not even the coins' grades - then why would you put it in the registry to begin with?
- Should be more collections with pictures. It would be more of an experience to see the coins.
- Implementing a vote would be tough - do we re-vote every time a set is modified/upgraded? >>
JBN -
I can understand someone wanting to hide their sets. Last year, I querried a well known Barber Half collector
who had been blocking his set off and on - for years. He opened it for a day or two once in awhile just so his
fellow collectors would have a chance to see what his set looked like [ at that time ]. He immediately closed it
because he didn't want to be held prisoner by dealers who were holding his needed coins captive by asking ex-
orbitant amounts for. Once his collection was as complete as he wanted it to be - he opened it up for all to see
on a permanent basis. Edit to add: BillJones, This is your first point as well.
I agree fully with your second point : I feel that PCGS should automatically provide a service
[ similar to the one offered ATS for a nominal charge of $3.00 per coin - which is basically a
scan and nowhere the quality of TrueView. ]
The scan should be built into the price of the submission [ JMHO ] that way it forces all registrants
to have images of their coins. [ It would also help a great deal with the possibility of counterfeit holders
and coins inserted there-in.]
Re: your third point:
The Registry at PCGS is handled differently than ATS. Here we are concerned with % completed and its coupled
with the grade which gives the set its ranking. I feel that if an average collector who doesn't have deep pockets
[ and we have all been there at one time or the other ] - then that collector who has strived to complete his set
to the best of his ability should be rewarded with a higher rank than some one who buys one or two very
expensive coins and is pushed to the top of that particular Registry .
[ As it is ATS, where the rank is Dollar Driven ].
EDIT: Bill Jones: I agree with you 100% on your assesment of the Registry ATS !!
You hit upon nuances I neglected to bring out, thanks for your learned insight !!
If we allowed the participants vote on "Best Of" category - then it becomes a popularity contest.
{ I like Bob better than Ben - so I'll vote for Bob's set } .
Its not to say that the Registry can not be fine tuned - but - its working very well as it is -
but it could use a few pointers: [ ie: photo/scan of every coin certified ]. >>
Appreciate the input, MFH. Point 1: You raise an interesting point w/regard to not divulging which coins you need to upgrade the set. While I don't want to be too pedantic; if this individual wanted absolute secrecy, they shouldn't post the set until it is where they want it to be. That way, they can debut at #1. For WLH, the Forsythe set is hidden. I'll admit I'm a math geek - it did not take more than a few minutes with Excel and the pop report to figure what was in the Forsythe late date set. I would contend that someone sitting on a low pop condition census coin they wish to sell (and make some big bucks on) could also play Columbo in this regard, and determine the coin's desireability to a #1 registry set collector. The LuLu short set allows its quality to shine through - got more respect for that, even though it highlights the value of the lone 41-D and 45 in 68 coins would have to this collector (I note his name is no longer associated with the set, so I'll stay mum on it for respect for privacy). I would LOVE to see that lone 67 42-S, however.
Point 2: Your idea is a good one, anything to have more pix in the registry.
I've never perused the NGC registry set, so I won't comment on the their system. The PCGS weighting system seems fine to me - it recognizes overall condition, and adequately (IMHO) rewards set completion. For WLH, someone without deep pockets (relatively speaking) can put together a 66 short set and rank at #22 finest. Pretty good in a field of 160. A more affordable 65 set lands your collection at 53/160. Reasonable to me.
<< <i>Sorry folks.....I disagree with every change wanted here.
1) Collectors have the right to hide their sets......period....sure it would be fun to see them.....but that is their right.
Edit: I agree fully !!
2) Forced images to make submission even more expensive........NO WAY !!! TOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO expensive now!!!
EDIT: SQUEEK ... SQUEEK...
[ That's the sound of Dimeman's change purse opening up !! ]
3) The point system is the ONLY way it can and should be.....the higher the grade.....the higher the set!!! Should my 65 set of Mercury Dimes be ranked ahead of Larry Martin's 67 set because mine has pics and his doesn't!!!! I DON'T THINK SO !!!!
Edit: No one said anything of the sort - I think PCGS does a great job on how they rank sets !!
Come on people....get real...we have a great thing going on here. Quit your whinning and play or get out!
Edit: No one is whinning either... only suggestions !!
JMHO >>
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
New Barber Purchases