New Registry Scores
0

136 posts in this topic

4,938 posts

The new Registry Scores on Franklin and Kennedy Half's are so low that I have taken these sets off the Registry, along with my Ike proof set. The new scores are an insult to the work and money that I have put into these sets. It took me a year to finish my Kennedy Proof set. The set is primarily PR69DCAM coins that have essentially no population above these coin's grades.

 

If someone who does not collect these coins, has told you that collecting these coins is a "fish shoot in a barrel", they obviously have not tried to find these coins (in PR69DCAM) in competition with all the others who collect these sets. The Franklin's certainly are no easier to collect then 90% of the dates in a Lincoln Cent or 100% of a Jefferson Nickel Registry Set. However the scores do not reflect this. Forty-nine points for a MS65FBL Franklin is a joke!

 

If this is the way the game is going to be played, I do not want any part of it. I have removed my Franklin, Kennedy Proof and Ike Proofs sets from the Registry. I will sell the coins at the earliest convenience and utilize my constrained resources on something else. A Registry where you only get 20 points for a PR69DCAM coin shows a total disrespect for the collector, his time and money. mad.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,484 posts

Charles,

 

Have you communicated with the CS Registry Admins about the (mis-)scoring of these series? It is possible that they're simply slow in fixing the points for those series...

 

Moreover, if you like the coins you got, then that's most of the game already -- right?

 

Regards,

 

EVP

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,938 posts

These are the new scores! With help from others who do not collect these sets, they have gutted these scores. Now the 5-coin wonder set promise that they said they would fix is a joke!! Obviously their promises do not mean diddly. They have made the 5-coin wonder set situation worse than it was before!

 

This is not fun! I spent 18 months building a Kennedy set that gets such low scores that it is a joke. THe same is true of Franklin Half Dolllars. Franklin's for everyone's information are very difficult to find in MS65FBL. The set is certainly as hard as a Jefferson Nickel Set and it gets absolutely no respect.

 

I will consider over the next few days whether I want my sets listed on this site at all!! I am truly disapointed with these latest developments. They are a slap in the face!!! Apparently, if you can not afford to collect big dollar coins you are not welcome here. This is amply illustrated by these "new scores"!

Edited by Oldtrader3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,938 posts

Consider this: For 1/5th the cost of a PR69DCAM Ike set, I could have purchased a MS64, 1924 St. Gaudens which has a population of 62,333 and gets 1138 Registry Points. My entire Kennedy Proof set does not have 62,000 coins in PR69DCAM, but it is only worth 830 points?

 

Would this registry consider giving a 1924 Saint a Registry score of 30?? Of course not, but for the price of my 830 point Kennedy Set I could buy at (5) 1924 Saints in about 5 minutes of my time and I would accrue 5990 Registry points. Had I known this when I joined this group, I would have spent my money on buying $20 Saints which I already collect, instead of a lowly Kennedy, Ike or Franklin set. Catch my drift guys?

 

You can see the irony, and double standard of this? It is a bad joke! tongue.gif

Edited by Oldtrader3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,369 posts

I understand your displeasure completely, but seriously, isn't it equal then for all who participate?

I have a MintState Kennedy and I'll add a decent coin- like an MS67 and receive something like 11 points! A 66 gives me 3 points! It's almost not even worth adding, but then I realize it is also that way for everyone and anyone else who wants to play in this set.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
682 posts

Oh yeah, it is the same rules for all players. I just always thought the whole thing should be based around what the Hobby itself is based around, and that is market value. The most desirable coins tend to be the most expensive, so why wouldn't the registry follow the same path? Just doesn't make sense to me any other way.

 

Phil

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,938 posts

Braddick:

You are correct. We are all in the same boat, but the boat is leaking fast! I fashioned these sets because I had over the years picked up a good start on the key coins for these sets in the course of my eclectic buying habits. The Franklins and Kennedy sets have some tough coins to find that are fairly costly. In fact all 68+DCAM Kennedy's from 1964 to 1971 are an expensive challenge. Most have low pops and high prices, plus being hard to find tongue.gif .

 

I collected the Franklin set because I had always wanted a high-grade Franklin Business Strike set, but up until recently, they were too expensive. I will keep my Franklin Set, lowly though it is in the eyes of this board's keepers. I just took it off the Registry so that I can enjoy it without being bothered by the insulting score that it was given.

 

I should have stayed in the Type Set and Gold Registries where, for the same money, I could have scored major points. This is not a "value system" Registry. I do not know what it is?

 

My Ike scores were bad enough to make me crack some of the Proof set coins and add them to my Capital Plastic Ike Set where I can enjoy them as a whole set. So the Ike's are out of the game completely except for "Type Coins" that are in other sets.

 

So, yeah, we are all in the boat together, but it is a leaky row boat in a sea of Cruisers. tongue.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
126 posts

Charles--

for what little value my! opinion counts for, please remain posted in the Registry!!! Like you, today, I was deeply upset with the Reg. numbers for the

scoring the first of the year, and pulled my sets.

Although I deeply disagree-- still!-- with much of this point grading, it has improved considerably since the first of the year. No doubt, there will always! be room for improvement, from time to time, and I would ask that you give the folks yet more time-- time to continue in their refinement of the numbers involved; time to adjust the differing sets (as well as their internal scores per coin), to reflect the

differing levels of difficulty involved for collectors to add 'delicate' coins; time to merely sit back and enjoy-- as well as allow US! (the viewers of your entries!) to enjoy your hard-fought labors...!!!

Granted, it's something of a slap in the face, and 'frustrated' is a polite! way to express the pain and disgust, yet who?! 'loses' most!, when you pull your sets???

Please count ME!, as a humble ONE...!!! We both! know there are many! others...!

You've taken it upon yourself to hold-- as well as maintain-- fragile segments of American history, commerce, trade, art... please shrug off the numbers, and revel in the glories of your amazing accomplishments, and continue to share with those of us coin "junkies" who feel that EVERY! set registered, regardless of whatever 'points' they are given, truly are! IMPORTANT-- TO US ALL!!! smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
682 posts

coin "junkies" who feel that EVERY! set registered, regardless of whatever 'points' they are given, truly are! IMPORTANT-- TO US ALL!!!

 

Yup Yup, got to agree with that smile.gif

 

Phil

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,938 posts

I am going to hold off on doing anything until I see if there is any interest on the part of NGC to at least live up to their promise of equitable scoring, where a 5 coin wonder set cannot outscore a completed MS66/67 set. They have not only forgotten about their promise of equitability, they have regressed to the point where you have to say why bother? Collecting minors on this board is a waste of time for no respect.

 

I have destroyed some of my Ike set to finish a Capital Plastics set. I would rather see my whole set in perspective, than participate in a time and money exercise with coins in little pieces of plastic that are supposed to be worth something. This whole Registry game is a lot of effort that gets you nothing. So, burn the plastic, it aint worth a anyhow, except in a Type Set!!

 

I will focus my money and energies on gold from now on where a XF 1924 Saint is worth 916 points with 181,000 pop above the XF grade. This 1924 Saint is more points than my whole 48 coin completed PR67DCAM to 69DCAM Kennedy Proof set was worth.:p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
126 posts

No arguement here. Still, your devotion-- and mastery!-- of the hobby, are reflected in the effort YOU! put forth, to create such wonderful sets!!! Consider the mantra: buy the coin, not the holder!!! Screw the points!!! What's 'hot' today, will be 'cold' tomorrow... those points will continue to change over time-- just watch!!!

So, too, will hobbyist/investor interests!!! Think back to how 'hated' Franklins were, before they got 'hot'...!!! Look at them today!!!

 

You want 'numbers'??? My '55 proof 69 Franklin garners 619 points. It's one of TWO!, with a single 69 UC higher!!! Meanwhile, a 68 UC gets 1,658 points-- and there are 13 of them...!!! I shake my head and ask-- what's wrong with THIS! picture...!!! mad.gif

 

Yes, it IS! aggravating, irritating, etc. SO WHAT!!! Your love of the hobby, not to mention all the knowledge you offer to the rest of us, is priceless!!! A 'gem' in this post, a 'jewel' in that one... they all add up!-- and help those of us who are coin-

knowledge challenged!!!

 

How many coins have you replaced-- with better! examples???!!! Now-- just where?! did 'those' examples go??? They went into collections of dip-sticks like me!, who have lots to learn...!!! Yanking your sets just leaves a void...

 

You put those sets together because of your desire!!! Please don't tread on our! desire to build sets in your! footsteps!!! frown.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,369 posts

The GOOD NEWS is it sounds like we are all collecting for the RiGHT reasons- the 'coins' first, and the 'Registry' much farther down that list.

 

It would be nice to see the sets tweeked though to reflect the deep efforts placed in gathering some of these beauties. Unfortunutely it is no less "leak proof" across the street!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
195 posts

Oldtrader:

 

Calm Down Some !!

 

Surely you are not Building your Sets just for the Points, anyway I hope not. One of these days (Maybe not in our life time) NGC will get the scoreing correct. Thier Mistakes run rampant through, it appears, most series.

 

Enjoy the Hobby, Enjoy what you Collect and try to Forget the Scoreing both Here and Other Places as really it does not mean Squat !!

 

It would be Nice to see a Registry some where that was Scored Correctly though. grin.gif

 

Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
723 posts

I guess I am just slow or something, but in my wildest dreams it didn't dawn on me that someone would get upset over total points assigned in a certain series. This is not a criticism of your post, maybe its just my naivete at work. I have seen NGC respond quickly to suggestions about scoring within a series maybe they will take another look at total scoring. I have to say that if you collect what you enjoy, then who cares how it measures up to Saints, Trade Dollars, Washingtons, etc.

 

I'd like to say I feel your pain, but I just don't see it that way and I don't collect expensive coins either. My wife might disagree with that comment. I never even noticed total scoring in a set until you brought it up. I reckon I will just keep on collecting what I enjoy, personally I don't what a grading company sees fit to score a certain series. How naive of me. crazy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 posts

Oldtrader3 -

As one who has a Registry set of both proof & mint state Kennedy Half Dollars and a mint state Franklin set, I certainly understand your frustration, however, if you enjoy the series that you are concentrating on, then the heck with the points assigned within the registry... collect what you enjoy. If you chose to list within ANY registry, do so to share what you enjoy collecting with others - the points should not matter.

 

EVERYONE collecting these particular sets face the same "point" values so all sets are ranked against others within the series... ultimately, what difference does it make if the set garners 100,000 points or 800 points?

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,484 posts

Charles,

 

I didn't read your post carefully enough the first time around, and now realize that I'm also wondering why it matters how set A compares to set B, as long as both sets A and B are properly scored within themselves so as to provide fair competition for A and B collectors.

 

For your halves, do you think they are properly scored within the Type Set? That is the only time you get an inter-set point comparison.

 

Regards,

 

EVP

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,938 posts

I think that the Type Set scores reflect much more reality than the set scores. Of course, that begs the question of why are the Type Set scores different from the denomination set??

 

The parallel comparison that I made between St. Gaudens and Franklin Halves is valid. I honestly feel that these new scores denigrate the incentive to collect them. I am not going to spend over a $100 for a coin worth 12-25 points. I probably will still keep the sets because it was so much effort (and expense) to build them.

 

I just will not display a set that I worked this hard on for 800 points. It is an insult to my intelligence to have built the set in the first place. To say nothing of the promise to help eliminate 5 coin wonder sets. Does this make sense to you all? tongue.gif

Edited by Oldtrader3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,471 posts

There were no changes made to the scoring of the date sets for Franklin and Kennedy Halves, though some scores were revised for Kennedy Halves in the type set. There's no direct relationship between the scoring of the type and date sets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
682 posts

The parallel comparison that I made between St. Gaudens and Franklin Halves is valid. I honestly feel that these new scores denigrate the incentive to collect them. I am not going to spend over a $100 for a coin worth 12-25 points.

 

I have a Franklin Proof that I spent $150 on and it gets 3 points. I pointed this out a few weeks ago and Mr. Lange stated then that the Franklin sets were not yet tweaked out. This is likely the situation with the Kennedy halves as well. I am pretty confident that in the end they will get it straightened out.

 

Phil

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,938 posts

No criticism of what was done in the past. It's past. However, do you understand my frustration? I feel that I am going backwards with these sets. I do not collect sets for their respective points. That would put me in the middle of the other board. I do think that there needs to be some economic balance from one set to another.

 

I got carried away with this subject but it needs to be addressed. I do not have any problem with the balance of scores within the set. That's life. Higher grade coins cost multiples of more common grades. If coins in the Type set are worth 500-1100 points, why are they only worth 12-25 points in the set.

 

It is all relative. I appologise for going overboard on this but it needs at least the promise of some review and modification. My memory is crappy because of my heart condition. I do not get enough blood to my brain. I am often wacked out on short term memory. That is why I appologised. All that I am looking for is some defendable relationship between the sets. Thanks for answering. tongue.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,938 posts

I have remounted my Kennedy Proof and Franklin MS sets in the NGC Registry. I like the sets and am satisfied with them overall. The PR69DCAM Ike Proof set no longer exists, except for Type Set coins. I have cracked it and mounted the coins along with a Business Strike Set in a Capital Plastics holder. This way, I can see the whole set in one board.

 

The points issue is something that will have to be addressed by NGC. It is out of my hands. Life goes on. tongue.gif

Edited by Oldtrader3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,938 posts

Phil:

Thanks for your support in this. I agree with your position whole heartedly.

Charlie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,325 posts

OK, according to David Lange, nothing changed except Type scores, so nothing to worry about.

 

But, I have to agree with some of the others. It doesn't matter if a MS-67 1964 Kennedy gets 100 points while a MS-65 Saint 1924 gets 1,000 points. What matters is whether the MS-66 and MS-68 scores for the Kennedy and the MS-64 and MS-66 scores for the Saint are appropriate in light of the rest of the coins in the series, in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,221 posts

Charlie - Thanks for coming around on this one and remounting your sets in the registry. If your initial desire was to draw attention to a basic condition of the registries - that there is really no equitable point comparison between sets - you did that. Thanks. But your sets merit consideration simply for what they are - "preserves" (so to speak) for exceptional coins through time. The points are only relative internally to the set and they do not reflect (1) the effort of collection, and (2) the dollars in that pursuit. We all know that and perhaps the write-up that you provide at the front-end of your set can educate other collectors on those issues.

 

I hope that you are enjoying your Ike set much more now. I also choose not to grade out some of my nicest coins (e.g. my Washington quarters) just so that I can look at them in my Intercept Shield album! (I have even cracked out some really nice coins to put in that set!) The pleasure of your collection is paramount and the preservation reflects the love that you have for the coins as a whole, so who cares if they are in slabs. I also think that your Cap Plas Ike collection must be stunning! Hope to see it some day. wink.gif

 

Take care, and be well. Hoot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,938 posts

Hoot: Thank you for your morale support in this matter. I appreciate the support. Hopefully, I made my point and we can move on to something more equitable. Sometimes you need to use a 2x4 to get people's attention. Hopefully, I have done that.

 

The Ike set looks great in the holder. I have it stting on my desk on top of my printer where I can look at it while I am online. You apparently share these feelings.

Charlie tongue.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,938 posts

There is no doubt that a Saint set is a massive undertaking that one probably (in my case) never complete. However, the scores for the more scarce Saints proportionately reward the set total. I have most of the easy dates. Now it gets serious, but am I going to invest more in my Kennedy set? Probably not.

 

My point is: that all one has to have to collect the more available Saints is $450 and a telephone. They are infinitely more available then a PR69DCAM, 1964 Kennedy, which by the way, is worth several times the cost of the maligned 1924-P Saint. tongue.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,325 posts

I don't think that NGC has ever tried to be "equitable" between sets. There has never been any indication of that between series, and it would complicate scoring considerably.

 

A $1,000 Saint and a $1,000 Kennedy do not have to get the same amount of points (except in a Type set laugh.gif ) as long as the points make sense within the set itself.

 

I doubt that many collectors are going to notice that $10,000 worth of Franklins have a total score that is less than $10,000 worth of Saints. With the exception of looking at scoring for post-1964 coins as they relate to Type sets, I haven't looked at the scores for sets. And that was strictly because it was brought up that moderns were overweighted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,938 posts

I guess that this is where we agree to have differing opinions. I feel that the Kennedy's, especially the 1964-1971, are if anything underweighted. The flow of new PF69UC Kennedy's of this era has been staunched, particularly the SMS-CAM coins.

 

The SMS-CAM coins are very scarce and are not building new populations as many of the more recent Proof coins are. If you look closely at the SMS coins, in PF66CAM and above, the populations are quite small (<50). These coins may be modern rarities soon. tongue.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0