NGC REGISTRY NO LONGER TO ACCEPT PCGS COINS? posted by Kaiser14

[CSJournals-migration]

NGC REGISTRY NO LONGER TO ACCEPT PCGS COINS?

 

Maybe it's just that I haven't looked hard enough but I haven't seen much of a reaction to Marc's Saltzberg's announcement a few weeks ago that, beginning in January, the NGC will no longer accept coins graded by PCGS in their Registry. I think it's an atrocious idea---a disservice to collectors and injurious to NGC itself.

 

The switch may not mean much to collectors of modern and some foreign sets, but it will effectively wipe out active Registry participation in most, if not all, of the classic sets. Take the Mercury dime set for example. FB Mercs are a popular series and, when compared to other classic sets (e.g., Saints, $10 Indians, Barber Halves, etc.), relatively easy to complete. But, there just aren't enough NGC-graded Mercury dimes in the better dates to make completion of a high-end FB NGC set possible. For example, the NGC census reports 21 1931S dimes in 65FB or better. PCGS, on the other hand, reports 125 of them. Of the 21 NGC coins, I'd bet many or most have been crossed and not deleted from the count. I've been collecting Mercs for 30+ years and I have NEVER come across a FB '31S in ANY grade in an NGC holder. Only 4 FB gems have sold in Heritage auctions from the beginning of time. The '31S is a semi-key, but hardly an impossible find---unless you are looking for a FB '31S in an NGC holder. The same may be said of most (if not all) of the other keys, semi-keys and hard dates. OK, you get lucky and find a 1931S NGC 65FB, now try to find a 65FB '19S, '21, '21D, '45, etc. If PCGS coins are no longer accepted in the NGC Registry, NO ONE will EVER be able to start, register and complete a collection of high-end FB Merc dimes.

 

A vital Registry benefits, not only collectors but NGC itself. NGC is essentially forcing collectors to choose and, if forced, a classic collector absolutely HAS to go with PCGS if he aspires to do a high end Registry set. Forget about a '19S, '31S, or '45 Merc., kid's coins, in the final analysis---try to find an NGC '21 or '27S MS Saint. Most, maybe even all, of the classic sets in the NGC Registry will eventually be reduced to what's there now and even those sets will necessarily stagnate. None of the classic Registry sets can ever grow, or attract new participants, unless NGC grades another 200 MS coins in each of the hard dates. That can't happen.

 

I've commented on the issue of "zombie" sets before, but it bears repeating now and it's for NGC's own good. You'll find many of the top sets still registered at NGC have long been sold off---the #2 and #3 Merc sets, for example, went to auction at Heritage years and years ago. Many/most of the registered PCGS coins in those sets can't "go" anywhere since, because of regrades, the certs are dead. Look at the 20th C. classic gold sets for another example---almost none of the sets are legit because of regrades and cross-overs. Obviously, NGC isn't in the business of checking PCGS cert numbers repeatedly to see whether they're still alive. The answer isn't to refuse PCGS coins. The solution is to require that set owners whose sets haven't had activity in say, a year, reaffirm that they still own the coins. Those that don't reaffirm lose their sets (and are maybe given a year's grace period to restore them). Those that do affirm, keep them. It's a simple computer programming thing---owners of inactive sets get an email every year and a month to reaffirm. It's a simple solution that will assure credibility in the NGC registry.

 

Then again, maybe grading junk is where the money is. Maybe NGC WANTS to be out of the classic coin business and focus its efforts on modern stuff, silver Eagles, etc. If that's the case, why not just tell us?

 

See more journals by Kaiser14

[USAuPzlBxBob]

There is a 14-pages-deep thread on this topic in U.S. Coins, currently on the front page there.

 

The NGC Registry world will evolve with the new rules, the battle has been joined one step further, and so be it.

 

It will be "registry wars" going forward, and each TPG will have to come up with enticements to try and win the day.

 

Your "reaffirming" idea toward the end is interesting.

[jackson64]

I have to agree with your primary premise--PCGS has tons of more certified classic US series coins graded than NGC.

My Standing Liberty one-per-date set, my Indian Head Cent Set, My Mercury Dime 67FB short set and my Buffalo Nickel MS66/67 short set are 80% PCGS--and this is not by any efforts to pick one slab over another, this is because there are just a lot more classic high-grade and quality coins in PCGS holders.

There will just be a switch from "registry participation" toward a personal set-listing on the old excel spread sheet or Custom Set area in order to build and track my collection.

Highly disappointing but I won't quit collecting--I also won't become a "brand" doofus like those guys who argue: "Chevy vs Ford"...or "Yankees vs Red Sox" or "Microsoft vs Apple" or "Cowboys vs Redskins"...I will buy the coin, but now I'll have no need to do any submissions to NGC of raw coins since there won't be registry sets of mine with holes to fill.

[MarkFeld]

 

You "haven't seen much of a reaction"? So the 140 post (as of the time I am writing this) thread to which you recently posted doesn't count?

[comicdonna]

NGC REGISTRY NO LONGER TO ACCEPT PCGS COINS?

 

Maybe it's just that I haven't looked hard enough but I haven't seen much of a reaction to Marc's Saltzberg's announcement a few weeks ago that, beginning in January, the NGC will no longer accept coins graded by PCGS in their Registry. I think it's an atrocious idea---a disservice to collectors and injurious to NGC itself.

 

The switch may not mean much to collectors of modern and some foreign sets, but it will effectively wipe out active Registry participation in most, if not all, of the classic sets. Take the Mercury dime set for example. FB Mercs are a popular series and, when compared to other classic sets (e.g., Saints, $10 Indians, Barber Halves, etc.), relatively easy to complete. But, there just aren't enough NGC-graded Mercury dimes in the better dates to make completion of a high-end FB NGC set possible. For example, the NGC census reports 21 1931S dimes in 65FB or better. PCGS, on the other hand, reports 125 of them. Of the 21 NGC coins, I'd bet many or most have been crossed and not deleted from the count. I've been collecting Mercs for 30+ years and I have NEVER come across a FB '31S in ANY grade in an NGC holder. Only 4 FB gems have sold in Heritage auctions from the beginning of time. The '31S is a semi-key, but hardly an impossible find---unless you are looking for a FB '31S in an NGC holder. The same may be said of most (if not all) of the other keys, semi-keys and hard dates. OK, you get lucky and find a 1931S NGC 65FB, now try to find a 65FB '19S, '21, '21D, '45, etc. If PCGS coins are no longer accepted in the NGC Registry, NO ONE will EVER be able to start, register and complete a collection of high-end FB Merc dimes.

 

A vital Registry benefits, not only collectors but NGC itself. NGC is essentially forcing collectors to choose and, if forced, a classic collector absolutely HAS to go with PCGS if he aspires to do a high end Registry set. Forget about a '19S, '31S, or '45 Merc., kid's coins, in the final analysis---try to find an NGC '21 or '27S MS Saint. Most, maybe even all, of the classic sets in the NGC Registry will eventually be reduced to what's there now and even those sets will necessarily stagnate. None of the classic Registry sets can ever grow, or attract new participants, unless NGC grades another 200 MS coins in each of the hard dates. That can't happen.

 

I've commented on the issue of "zombie" sets before, but it bears repeating now and it's for NGC's own good. You'll find many of the top sets still registered at NGC have long been sold off---the #2 and #3 Merc sets, for example, went to auction at Heritage years and years ago. Many/most of the registered PCGS coins in those sets can't "go" anywhere since, because of regrades, the certs are dead. Look at the 20th C. classic gold sets for another example---almost none of the sets are legit because of regrades and cross-overs. Obviously, NGC isn't in the business of checking PCGS cert numbers repeatedly to see whether they're still alive. The answer isn't to refuse PCGS coins. The solution is to require that set owners whose sets haven't had activity in say, a year, reaffirm that they still own the coins. Those that don't reaffirm lose their sets (and are maybe given a year's grace period to restore them). Those that do affirm, keep them. It's a simple computer programming thing---owners of inactive sets get an email every year and a month to reaffirm. It's a simple solution that will assure credibility in the NGC registry.

 

Then again, maybe grading junk is where the money is. Maybe NGC WANTS to be out of the classic coin business and focus its efforts on modern stuff, silver Eagles, etc. If that's the case, why not just tell us?

 

See more journals by Kaiser14

You "haven't seen much of a reaction"? So the 140 post (as of the time I am writing this) thread to which you recently posted doesn't count?

I didn't see anyone jumping up and down with joy in that thread.

[coinman_23885]

NGC REGISTRY NO LONGER TO ACCEPT PCGS COINS?

 

Maybe it's just that I haven't looked hard enough but I haven't seen much of a reaction to Marc's Saltzberg's announcement....

You "haven't seen much of a reaction"? So the 140 post (as of the time I am writing this) thread to which you recently posted doesn't count?

No, it is like a Dan Carr thread: There is never enough or a clear end in sight.

[Kaiser14]

Ummm, I don't chat, don't bother much with forums (work for a living), so I didn't even know where to look for reactions. Another collector pointed the thread out to me and I followed up there.

[Kaiser14]

Agree with the cliche, the smart collector buys the coin not the holder. My premise was, however, that IF (highlight "IF") a classic collector wants to do a Registry set (as opposed to simply keeping a personal spreadsheet or list), there is no way he can go with NGC-graded coins, because there's just not enough of them to make a respectable set in most classic series. I personally like the Registries, not because they're a convenient way to track coins, but because I've met other collectors through my sets and theirs. As a result, I meet up with them at the shows, we exchange thoughts about specific coins, and, of course, buy, sell, and trade among ourselves That's what I like about Registries. It's good for the hobby and should be stress-free. .

[RichH]

Kaiser,

I agree with the premise of your post and most importantly the value

of friendships and sharing that can be derived from registry participation.

 

Best wishes,

Rich

[Ali E.]

Thank you for the feedback. Please see our latest announcement here:

 

Re: NGC-graded coins only in the NGC Registry