Registry Change 0

[Legionary1]

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... 

Edited December 13, 2019 by Legionary1

[Revenant]

They changed it back because, based on new information, they now believe they can make more money by allowing them than by not allowing them? In all likelihood, that's the "why."

On the other side of this: the major awards this year (even before they allowed them back in and all the PCGS coins were just "grandfathered") still required that at least 75% of a set had to be NGC-graded in order to compete for a major award. That's pretty significant.

To use my family's 1932 mint set as an example - it has 6 coins in it and 5 of the 6 are NGC graded. That's 83.3% NGC-graded. That 1 coin out of 6 is the only non-NGC coin I'd be allowed to still compete for a major award. If I had just 2 PCGS coins, it would be ineligible. Yeah, that doesn't impact the "Best in Category" awards, but, even there, they've been giving out "Best in Category" AND "NGC Best in Category" awards for (I think) 8 years now.

[Legionary1]

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.

[Lastufka Collection]

I've been out of the hobby for the last 2-3 years as I moved to a new state, sold my old home, and bought a new home. I'm just getting back into the swing of things with a new purchase this week, my first in years. I came back to find the forum basically empty and the registry changes very confusing and unorganized. I see now that the registry software is a bit incomplete and a lawsuit with the company who built it is pending. That's a mess I'm sure NGC is extremely unhappy about.

So I understand the decision to revert to letting PCGS coins in again as a way to boost use of the current (incomplete) registry. I do hope they get it fixed soon, the new system is very confusing and inelegant when compared with the old system. And if allowing PCGS coins boosts numbers (visits and profits), more power to them, I'd rather see NGC flourishing than floundering.

Edited December 13, 2019 by AlanLastufka

[Revenant]

26 minutes ago, Legionary1 said:

If profit is the reason why NGC made the change, my respect for them just dropped significantly.

By some theories of human behavior, all of human interaction is basically transactional, whether that's in money or something else, and all of our actions are geared towards maximizing our individual outcome in some way. So that's not really something to hold against them IMO.

You're unhappy and posting about it, but on the thread about the announcement there's a ton of people who are THRILLED at this decision. On balance, it looks like more people like the decision so far than don't like it. When they banned new PCGS additions in 2017 there seemed to be way more people ticked off than happy, and the unhappy parties have continued to voice that unhappiness overtime. This decision is ultimately a response to that.

Personally, while I do think it's, at least on some level, based on enlightened self-interest, I like the decision because it makes NGC look more "collector-friendly" as their announcement puts it and it just makes them seem... nicer? Than PCGS.

Edited to add: It's especially interesting to me to see NGC opening things back up and trying to make things MORE inclusive again as PCGS is rolling out their "CAC Registry" and ratcheting up the competition on the high end and financialization of the hobby more (as others have put it). Allowing PCGS and NGC coins both in the registry and allowing people to even have ungraded / other graded coins in custom sets make this seem like a place where people get to just share what they love and it isn't about the label or the plastic, it's about the coins. What PCGS is doing says, "Hellz yeah! It's all about the plastic and the label and the bragging rights that come with it."

Edited December 13, 2019 by Revenant

[VKurtB]

Being nicer than PCGS is a little like being taller than a mouse. Not a tough mark to achieve.

[Revenant]

8 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

Being nicer than PCGS is a little like being taller than a mouse. Not a tough mark to achieve.

Yeah. That may well be true. I've never dealt with them as everything I've heard about them left me little desire to do so.

[kbbpll]

I see it as a counter to that whole CAC registry thing over there.

[Walkerfan]

2 hours ago, kbbpll said:

I see it as a counter to that whole CAC registry thing over there.

If that is true, then this announcement over here is MUCH more of an attractive option to me.

This facilitates Registry building more, whereas, a 'PCGS/CAC only' qualifier restricts it, even more.  My     

Edited December 14, 2019 by Walkerfan

[Revenant]

5 hours ago, kbbpll said:

I see it as a counter to that whole CAC registry thing over there.

If you mean "counter," as in "direct response," I'm not so sure. PCGS didn't make that announcement too long ago. If there's one thing NGC is not famous for, it's rolling out registry features and functions quickly / on short notice. My feeling is NGC has been planning this for a while, completely independently, and was just holding off announcing / launching it until after the awards deadline.

Of course, I could be wrong and this was something they could roll out fast because it's easy to implement.

 

[Coinbuf]

5 hours ago, kbbpll said:

I see it as a counter to that whole CAC registry thing over there.

This seems like a very likely motive to me as well, I really don't see how allowing PCGS coins back into the competitive sets will have any positive affect on the bottom line.  It may make the registry here more attractive to more people but it surely wont bring in any more submissions monies, at least not that I can see anyway.

[Revenant]

28 minutes ago, Coinbuf said:

This seems like a very likely motive to me as well, I really don't see how allowing PCGS coins back into the competitive sets will have any positive affect on the bottom line.  It may make the registry here more attractive to more people but it surely wont bring in any more submissions monies, at least not that I can see anyway.

I wouldn't expect it to directly, but it might get more people over here and it can increase the overall positive perception / goodwill towards NGC, and that can influence buying and submission patterns.

[Coinbuf]

3 minutes ago, Revenant said:

I wouldn't expect it to directly, but it might get more people over here and it can increase the overall positive perception / goodwill towards NGC, and that can influence buying and submission patterns.

While there are a few that have expressed happiness over being able to renew their old mixed sets many more put NGC in their rearview mirror after the initial suspension.  I think it will take a great many years before NGC can hope to see any new positive goodwill.  It is what it is and while I understood the original move (tho not in total agreement with it then) it was not a smart move then and I'm not really sure this is the right move now; time will tell I suppose.

[kbbpll]

2 hours ago, Revenant said:

If you mean "counter," as in "direct response," I'm not so sure. PCGS didn't make that announcement too long ago. If there's one thing NGC is not famous for, it's rolling out registry features and functions quickly / on short notice. My feeling is NGC has been planning this for a while, completely independently, and was just holding off announcing / launching it until after the awards deadline.

Of course, I could be wrong and this was something they could roll out fast because it's easy to implement.

 

I have no idea, the timing just struck me, that's all. But on your point, the CAC exclusivity thing didn't happen overnight either, and perhaps NGC got wind of it. And as an old coder, some of these "features" are as simple as an "allow PCGS" flag set to Yes or No. It's probably not as simple as that, but it could be.

[Zebo]

14 hours ago, AlanLastufka said:

I've been out of the hobby for the last 2-3 years as I moved to a new state, sold my old home, and bought a new home. I'm just getting back into the swing of things with a new purchase this week, my first in years. I came back to find the forum basically empty and the registry changes very confusing and unorganized. I see now that the registry software is a bit incomplete and a lawsuit with the company who built it is pending. That's a mess I'm sure NGC is extremely unhappy about.

So I understand the decision to revert to letting PCGS coins in again as a way to boost use of the current (incomplete) registry. I do hope they get it fixed soon, the new system is very confusing and inelegant when compared with the old system. And if allowing PCGS coins boosts numbers (visits and profits), more power to them, I'd rather see NGC flourishing than floundering.

Tell us more about the lawsuit. Most likely involves promises (functionality) made (and/or milestones missed). Shame, but I hope NGC is compensated well. I view the registry using both the the old and new software. 

[Lastufka Collection]

4 minutes ago, Zebo said:

Tell us more about the lawsuit. Most likely involves promises (functionality) made (and/or milestones missed). Shame, but I hope NGC is compensated well. I view the registry using both the the old and new software. 

This is all I've read so far: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20190808005907/en/Certified-Collectibles-Group-Files-Lawsuit-Alleging-Tens

Looks like they spent quite a bit on the new Registry software and the firm dramatically under-delivered.

[Revenant]

8 hours ago, Coinbuf said:

While there are a few that have expressed happiness over being able to renew their old mixed sets many more put NGC in their rearview mirror after the initial suspension.  I think it will take a great many years before NGC can hope to see any new positive goodwill.  It is what it is and while I understood the original move (tho not in total agreement with it then) it was not a smart move then and I'm not really sure this is the right move now; time will tell I suppose.

And you won't get back those burned people that left for the most part because they're burned - they likely understand that what NGC gives, takes back, and gives back, can be taken again. This is more about trying to get new people / be more attractive to new collectors I suspect.

[LINCOLNMAN]

If NGC hadn't gone back and forth on this we would all applaud this as a magnanimous and hobby-friendly decision, although it is clearly a business decision. I have a mixture of coins and always will - I prefer doing business with NGC but consider crossing a waste of time and money, other than replacing damaged holders with my holder of choice. I joined the forum about the time that the NGC-only decision was made. Although I have no interest in competing for awards, I am interested in the registry for other reasons. I had decided not to bother, but will now likely give it a shot. All good for me. 

[Zebo]

3 hours ago, AlanLastufka said:

This is all I've read so far: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20190808005907/en/Certified-Collectibles-Group-Files-Lawsuit-Alleging-Tens

Looks like they spent quite a bit on the new Registry software and the firm dramatically under-delivered.

Thanks Alan

firm Fixed Price contracts are easy to litigate as compared to level of effort. I hope NGC takes them to the bank! This type of situation happens far too often. Often the contractor will substitute lesser, and sometimes - not qualified, workers to reduce their cost. This often results in mistakes, missed milestones and severe glitches in systems. Too bad

Edited December 14, 2019 by Zebo

[numisport]

Most of my coins are NGC certified so I built a couple registry sets in the [NGC only] registry at the Collectors Society site which does not allow PCGS coins. I wonder if that registry will start to allow PCGS coins now. If it ends up that way my sets will be down graded by Pf 70 DCam coins that NGC doesn't grade. Its my opinion that NGC's Pf 69 Star Ultra Cameo Ikes are superior to PCGS Pf 70 DCam coins in nearly all cases.

[Coinbuf]

50 minutes ago, numisport said:

Most of my coins are NGC certified so I built a couple registry sets in the [NGC only] registry at the Collectors Society site which does not allow PCGS coins. I wonder if that registry will start to allow PCGS coins now. If it ends up that way my sets will be down graded by Pf 70 DCam coins that NGC doesn't grade. Its my opinion that NGC's Pf 69 Star Ultra Cameo Ikes are superior to PCGS Pf 70 DCam coins in nearly all cases.

There are not two registries, the new registry is incomplete and not fully functional which is why you can still access the old registry format on collectors society.com.  But the sets are the same so if you update a set on the old system that change will also be reflected in the new look system, and vice versa.

 

3 hours ago, Revenant said:

And you won't get back those burned people that left for the most part because they're burned - they likely understand that what NGC gives, takes back, and gives back, can be taken again. This is more about trying to get new people / be more attractive to new collectors I suspect.

I agree completely.

[Coinbuf]

6 hours ago, LINCOLNMAN said:

If NGC hadn't gone back and forth on this we would all applaud this as a magnanimous and hobby-friendly decision, although it is clearly a business decision. I have a mixture of coins and always will - I prefer doing business with NGC but consider crossing a waste of time and money, other than replacing damaged holders with my holder of choice. I joined the forum about the time that the NGC-only decision was made. Although I have no interest in competing for awards, I am interested in the registry for other reasons. I had decided not to bother, but will now likely give it a shot. All good for me. 

Could not have said it better, the one plus for me is that now I can (and have) add the final piece to my 09-58 Lincoln set a PCGS graded 25-S.  My set has been complete for a couple of years and now I can show it as complete.