Legionary1
-
Content Count
4 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Is this "top pop" quarter mislabeled?
Legionary1 commented on Cellgazer's journal entry in Cellgazer's Journal
Yes,. it is certainly mislabeled. So obvious a mistake by NGC should leave them on the hook for the price difference between a 1976 in MS68 and a 1976-S in PF68 cameo... -
If profit is the reason why NGC made the change, my respect for them just dropped significantly. My 1940, 1941, 1942 and 1944 mint sets are all #1 for their respective years, and are 100% NGC-certified. I'm working on completing the 1939 and 1943 sets, at which time they'll both be #1 in the registry.
-
WHY did NGC change course and allow PCGS-certified coins to again compete in the Registry? It was just a couple of years ago when NGC leadership informed us that PCGS coins were no longer allowed into the registry, with the proviso that those PCGS items already in the registry were grandfathered. This is an insult to those collectors who go out of their way to ensure that their sets are 100% NGC-certified...
-
I write this to protest NGC's decision to allow PCGS-certified coins back into the registry. After all, it was just a couple of years ago that NGC leadership made a big presentation about how PCGS coins could no longer compete in the registry. I feel that NGC's going back on this policy is a slap in the face of those collectors (myself included) who go to great lengths to ensure that their sets are 100% NGC certified