Registry Ranking Comment 0

[Davids5104]

I happened to speak to a registry member about their coins.  They mentioned that they had actually sold them all off, but that the coins remain registered because they were not claimed by purchasers or users.  My comment is that once someone has a set that is registered, even perhaps one of the top few ranked, there is no way to have them verified as having ownership.  I think this makes it tough.  I am likely a few positions back from where I would be.  Is there a verification process of ownership for those that win the cash prizes or grading certificates.  Perhaps telling them they have 30 or 60 days to prove ownership (like a photo with a newspaper date similar to movies).  I am not going to win anything this year anyway, but what is the process.  thanks

[Ali E.]

Thank you for the inquiry, Davids5104.

We rely upon the integrity of our collectors to only list coins which they currently own. We do not have the capability to monitor the sales of all coins in the marketplace. We do have the three-day transfer process when someone buys a coin that is already registered to another collector in the NGC Registry.

Please let us know when we may assist with the NGC Registry in the future. You may reach us best at registry@ngccoin.com.

 

 

[Revenant]

On 4/20/2019 at 10:32 AM, Davids5104 said:

They mentioned that they had actually sold them all off, but that the coins remain registered because they were not claimed by purchasers or users.

All users have the ability to remove coins from their sets and remove them from their set / collection of registered notes / coins. You don't have to wait for the purchaser to register the item. Just remove it yourself. Your acquaintance should have done that.

It's unfortunate that these things happen and I don't think this person you spoke to is an isolated case, but it is what it is.

I'm sure there are even cases where someone died unexpectedly and there was no one around to delete them. I have a file for my wife that details what I think she should do with the coin collection and what I'd like her to keep for our sons down the road. That file includes my registry account information and instructions to kill the whole thing when / if I'm gone.

[Mohawk]

I can see how this would be a big problem on the Registry.  I'm in the process of slowly selling off several of the coins I have on the Registry currently, but I'm always sure to de-register them once the buyer pays.  It keeps things clean here and it also keeps my buyers happy when they can plug the coins into their sets immediately rather than having to contact me and wait for me to do so when they ask.  But I think it's also true that people have died unexpectedly on here and their sets are still up.  I can think of one gentleman in particular who was active with US Moderns when I first joined here that I later heard died.  Last I knew, his sets were still up.  My fiancee also knows what to do with my coins if I expire unexpectedly.  It's good to plan for that stuff, even if it's difficult.

 

[Star City Homer]

As someone who has forgotten to remove a coin a time or two (got reminded when someone else was registering a coin and then went back and cleaned up the set...) it would be nice if there was a way to ensure the coins were still in the sets or even still in NGC slabs. 

Perhaps if it came down to a cash prize the sets could be 'verified' in a manner noted above. 

Also, perhaps if a member has not been active in a year or so a gentle inquiring could be sent to ask if they are still collecting.  And, last thought, perhaps a great set can be 'archived', so still visible, but not counted for rankings or prizes.  

None of this would be easy or simple, except maybe the part about inactive over a year.

[Ali E.]

Thank you for the feedback.

We appreciate your input and will take your comments into consideration for future releases.

As far as the death of a member is concerned, many times, family members (of the person who has passed) choose to maintain and run the NGC Registry accounts themselves. It is up to their discretion if they would like to take down the sets or keep them up and visible. 

[Revenant]

7 hours ago, Ali E. said:

.As far as the death of a member is concerned, many times, family members (of the person who has passed) choose to maintain and run the NGC Registry accounts themselves. It is up to their discretion if they would like to take down the sets or keep them up and visible. 

Oh of course! My comment was made only in reference to cases where the coins were sold by the inheritors and the sets / collection no longer exist in the real world. 

[Camelhmpz]

On 4/23/2019 at 9:36 AM, Star City Homer said:

Perhaps if it came down to a cash prize the sets could be 'verified' in a manner noted above. 

Also, perhaps if a member has not been active in a year or so a gentle inquiring could be sent to ask if they are still collecting.  And, last thought, perhaps a great set can be 'archived', so still visible, but not counted for rankings or prizes.  

I like these ideas very much.

[Revenant]

On 4/23/2019 at 8:36 AM, Star City Homer said:

Perhaps if it came down to a cash prize the sets could be 'verified' in a manner noted above. 

Also, perhaps if a member has not been active in a year or so a gentle inquiring could be sent to ask if they are still collecting.  And, last thought, perhaps a great set can be 'archived', so still visible, but not counted for rankings or prizes.  

None of this would be easy or simple, except maybe the part about inactive over a year.

I think expecting NGC to "verify" a set is going to be invasive to some collectors - it'll have to be to be in any way effective - which will likely hurt registry participation, and we desperately need / want more people here, not less. I also think the idea could / would put an unreasonable administrative burden on NGC. If you start doing that, they could just as easily decide it's not worth it and just kill the awards.

When I won the Best Presented award in 2011 I hadn't really been active / online since 2010. The set still existed. I was still thrilled and honored to get the award. I'd just been caught up in surviving the first years of my doctorate. That change would have ruled me ineligible, so I can't say I'd be a fan of something like that.

The registry isn't perfect, but it's never going to be because you can't compel people to participate just because they own NGC coins - the same reason the Census isn't ever going to be perfectly accurate.

Just a thought.

[Star City Homer]

Agree, definitely wouldn't want to impose too much of an administrative burden and ruin the fun.  I was thinking something simple like perhaps just an email to say 'hey are you still active and is this set still in your hands?' would be good enough.  And only to those 'winning' the bigger awards.  Maybe an archive option would be something a member could do pro-actively with a radio button.

[GW]

The one thing it was good about this registry is that if any of your coins are stolen and then somebody registers that coin, this website will notify you who has it now. 

[Coinbuf]

It is certainly true that some sets that show as active are not, I know of one such set of Lincolns.  Over the past few years the set has moved down as some of the coins have been sold/resold and other owners have plugged those coins into inventories or registry sets.  But the set still exists as a top 10 set the last time I looked, that is unfortunate for the set owners under that phantom set.

[Revenant]

1 hour ago, Coinbuf said:

But the set still exists as a top 10 set the last time I looked, that is unfortunate for the set owners under that phantom set.

Unfortunate is a good word for it but... is such a set really hurting or costing anyone anything? If the set isn't ranked #1 and isn't winning anything, it's not really taking anything away from anyone else - and yeah, I think I know of a few cases of ghost sets that are still sitting as #1 in a category.

Edited May 7, 2019 by Revenant

[Coinbuf]

1 hour ago, Revenant said:

Unfortunate is a good word for it but... is such a set really hurting or costing anyone anything? If the set isn't ranked #1 and isn't winning anything, it's not really taking anything away from anyone else - and yeah, I think I know of a few cases of ghost sets that are still sitting as #1 in a category.

You are correct that set is not impeding any awards or such now, but for about one or two award cycles it was a #1 or #2 set even though the coins were being sold off.  This may have been a case where the owner may have died or fallen on health issues and the family wasn't/isn't aware of the registry to deactivate the set/sets.  Recently I got into a verbal scuffle with a poster ats over registry shenanigans, that fellow feels it is ok to use a higher NGC grade even tho the coin was crossed to a P holder at a lower grade.  I have no doubt that many do or would be ok doing things like this but it just makes the registry bloated and inaccurate for the folks not "working the system"

 

But I digress; it would be great if NGC would just do away with hidden sets, I do understand the some folks don't want competition for coins and want to build sets in the dark so have the option to have a hidden set but it just wouldn't show up on the registry at all until published.  Then all sets should remain in full view all the time, any set that is published and then hidden would be automatically eliminated from the system.  Too much extra burden perhaps for the NGC staff but that is what I would like to see in the way of changes to the registry. 

[Star City Homer]

I'm a bit of a contrarian with the idea of hidden sets being done away with.  I use the registry for both it's primary purpose to display sets, but also for secondary reasons.

I use them for organizational purposes--mostly custom sets to set things up differently than how the PTB want (ie following Krause, or doing a single year set instead of a denomination set for things like Britannias), and to have time to fiddle with sets until they look nicer.  Life gets in the way and I have to do things in fits and starts.  I'd rather have the option to get started and have time to buff the sets.  If they had to be 'good enough' I might never get to them. 

Plus for my duplicates it helps me keep track of what not to buy (again) or try to think of ideas on how to fix up a 'real' second set (ie one toned, one white).  Also as noted above, the sets can help you in case of theft.  I regularly add significant coins to a set right after purchase so if the package goes missing there is a notification if it were to show up later.  Granted that hasn't happened yet, but I like that feature.

That said, any 'winning' set really needs to be there for everyone to see as a condition of being a winning set. 

Also, I don't like zombie sets for winning sets.  I would love to see the option to 'archive' a set though.  Keep it visible at the bottom of the list (or under the current top three).   Something simple like a log in within the last year, or a quick answer to an automated email to confirm set status for #1 sets. 

I suppose nothing would stop someone from cracking a coin and resubmitting it for an all new cert#, and no one ever knowing the old one was permanently retired.  Shoot, there could be a black market for cert #s/cracked labels for all I know.  Someone could have a mixed pop of PCGS and NGC slabs and crack them all, submit each across to the other service, and end up with a fab set at both places...meanwhile all the coins have changed clothes.  

Maybe, and only for the special awards, there could be some kind of spot check to make sure the coins are even still in an NGC slab, or at least the same one it's competing under.

Or, maybe this is waaaayyy too much work.