M.T.

Member
  • Posts

    11
  • Joined

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. That would be great, I support this request. At least, if this is not doable (which is unlikely), consider adding sort option "by ranking" - at the moment there is no convenient way how to look at your sets, current options are not very helpful (IMO)
  2. Thank you for clarification, Lisa.
  3. Hello, I just do wonder if I send NGC graded coin, let’s say MS 64 for Conservation + re-grade - is the MS 64 grade guaranteed or is there a possibility the coin can receive lower grade or even Details grade (cleaned)? Thank you.
  4. Thank you for your reply, Ali. The three slots I'd like to question are in the following set: Half Crown, Victoria, 1839-1901, Circulation Issue, Including Varieties: Slot No. 1: Halfcrown 1839, currency issue. This coin is extremely rare, rated R4 by ESC (only 11-20 examples believed to exist), even if very rarely available the purchase price is prohibitive for even above average collector. Slot No. 18: Halfcrown 1876/6. This is even not recognized variety at all, just re-punched numeral as very common on most Victorian coins. This is not recognized in Spink, ESC, Bull or Davies (most comprehensive catalogue of every known date,type and variety of British silver coins since 1816). Not sure how/why this attribution was made, normally it's quite challenging to achieve variety attribution even if the variety is in the books mentioned above. Only one coin graded and most likely is destined to remain the only one forever. I believe that these two slots should be surely non-competitive, there is no chance that average collector will be ever able to complete this set and compete with these two slots being competitive. Slot No. 17: Halfcrown 1876/5 This is rare but recognized variety. It's for consideration. At the moment again only one example is graded and in this case NGC normally refuses to make slot competitive (as happened to me with 6027677-026) but for some reason not in this case. Thank you for consideration.
  5. Hello Ali, I understand that the whole point of non-competitive coins is to make 100% completion of any registry set attainable for our average collector and that there are several factors involved when making the decision to mark a coin as non-competitive in an NGC Competitive Registry Set and that these factors may include low mintage, difficulty in obtaining/purchasing the coin, and an unusually high price in relation to the other coins required to fill the set. I have recently had one coin made non-competitive for this very reason. Now, there is a set where 3 slots surely fulfil all these criteria and in spite of that these slots are competitive and surely make 100% completion of this registry set attainable for even above average collector. My question is – if I provide you with details would you consider changing these slots from competitive to non-competitive?
  6. Hello. Thank you very much for creating requested sets. I have, however, noticed that one of them (Groat, Anne, 1702-1714, Circulation Issue) is not in the correct category (IMO): Currently: Competitive Sets - United Kingdom - Great Britain-Maundy Sets - Groat, Anne, 1702-1714, Circulation Issue. So it is listed under "Maundy Sets" but should be under "Pre-decimal": Competitive Sets - United Kingdom - Great Britain - Pre-decimal - Groat, Anne, 1702-1714, Circulation Issue ( e.g. for 6029193-014 ) was listed under "Maundy sets" but should be under "Pre-decimal" Can this be corrected, please - obviuously if you agree with me. Thank you. Michal
  7. It's nice to see that NGC is working on further improvements and is interested in collectors views. Apart from points 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 16 and 17 from Blake's list I would also welcome: Ability to do some basic editing in “comments” window (such as bold, underline etc) including ability to import pictures/drawings. This IMO would make the texts more clear and “reader friendly” When looking at coin information (this concerns not only NGC Registry but also “Verify NGC certification” and other functions) it would be really helpful not to have only information how many coins is graded in particular grade and how many are graded higher but also total number of coins graded and possibly even current highest grade. For example, if NGC graded 698 of 1887 Crowns and you own example in MS 64, the current information provided in Coin information/verification is: Total graded by NGC in MS 64: 104 in higher grades: 31 My suggestion: Total graded by NGC: 698 in MS 64: 104 in higher grades: 31 +/- ? (highest grade MS 66+ ) Obviously this information is available in NGC Census but it takes many, in my opinion unnecessary, clicks to get there. I consider this information quite basic and important. It makes a difference if the coin is finest or second finest from 1000 examples or just 3 examples .... - Finally (unless there are any legal issues which I am not aware of) I would suggest to allow members to choose (= give permission) if they can be contacted or not by other participants in the Registry via email and facilitate this function
  8. Hello, can you please consider adding the following sets: Competitive Sets - United Kingdom - Great Britain - Pre-decimal - Shilling, George II, 1727-1760, Circulation Issue ( e.g. for 6029193-012 ) Competitive Sets - United Kingdom - Great Britain - Pre-decimal - Groat, Anne, 1702-1714, Circulation Issue ( e.g. for 6029193-014 ) Competitive Sets - United Kingdom - Great Britain - Pre-decimal - Shilling, Anne, 1702-1714, Circulation Issue ( e.g. for 4866154-008 ) Thank you, Michal
  9. Thank you, Ali. I do appreciate it. Kind regards, Michal
  10. The thing is, in this particular set there is slot for 1819/8 variety (only 2 graded!) and slot was created, if I am not mistaken, when only one coin was graded. Also in this set is slot for 1820 Inverted 1 in date (non-competitive, for display only) with only one coin graded. So there's seems to be no consistency or logic. Can you at least consider creating non-competitive slot for this coin so that this rare variety can be displayed (it is much rarer variety than 1820 inverted1)? If I use 1819 slot as you suggesting, I would loose slot for 1919 MS66 incl points. Thank you for consideration and replay. Kind regards, Michal
  11. Hello Ali, Could you please add a new slot in the “Great Britain - Pre-Decimal # Sixpence, George III, 1787-1820, Circulation Issue” set for the “1819 Bull-2203 ESC1636B T/B in BRITT” ? Thank you very much, Michal