"PCGS Announces Next Steps to Improve and Protect Hobby"

I think a machine could determine eye appeal based off the parameters someone plugged into it. The problem is every collector has a different opinion of eye appeal - so some like blast white, some like rainbow toning and some like lusterous gun metal gray. So you could come up with something - but in the end it will be the buyer or collector who determine the coins eye appeal.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I read the first page, then fast forwarded to the end...WOW!!! This thread got seriously derailed somewhere.

Part of me wants to know what happened, but another part wonders if it's worth the effort.

On one hand you have the sum total of CT's Illuminati and on the other you have a guy named "Mad.Outcast" with a big "No Clue" sign.

Hmmm...is this really worth an effort?

 

Good call Charmy. I bet (hope) that ANACS/ NGC have already been put on notice of submissions from certain people.

 

Rob, also, in furtherance of this, when I became a PCGS authorized dealer, I had to sign a lengthy and detailed agreement (the one referred to in the complaint), but I did not have to do so with NGC, so other TPGs may also have a harder time supporting any of the same claims PCGS has made since the dealers, as far as I know, were not required to agree to behave as "honorably" as PCGS required.

In any event, I hope they do join and can help PCGS prove their allegations.

 

.wrong thread

 

Wow. I'm out of pocket for ten days and things get lively.

1. It seems straightforward that we should all applaud PCGS for taking the steps to bring a lawsuit against coin doctoring.:hammer::hammer: I have no knowledge of the underlying facts and hope that they have picked the right defendants to go after. I have no reason to think that they didn't but will leave it to the courts to decide. Central District of California is slow so don't expect a decision any time soon.

2. This thread is a bit tough to go through since it got derailed. I am certainly interested in Doug's take on the lawsuit but don't know if I ever found it.

3. Methods of use are patentable subject matter, Doug.

4. It's always nice to get Mark Feld's thoughts here. His reappearance on CU means we don't see him enough here.

 

I completely agree, though it will take a few years for them to get there, particularly since the Central District Court is one of the busiest federal courts in the country - and I'm sure the defendants, after pooling their vast assets, will give them a heck of a costly fight.

But, in any event, even right now, I think it is really going to put a huge damper on coin doctoring (however that is defined), which in and of itself is a BIG win for PCGS - and for the coin world.

 

Round one goes to the coin doctors. In the January 3,2011 issue of Coin World page #4, a federal judge has dismissed all charges. The serious charges (RICO Act and Lanham Act violations) were dismissed with prejudice. i.e., they may not be refiled. The rest were dismissed without prejudice to be refiled in state courts.

 

Well doesn't that suck for the collecting community? At least their names are out there and people will most likely (hopefully) stay away from them.

 

It's one thing to have an opinion about this or that, substantiating it is another . I applaud the efforts and actions of PCGS . I have had some personal dealings with one of those defendants named, whom I later discontinued doing business with, for some of the issues being addressed in the lawsuit . I'm fairly confident Collector's Universe ( PCGS ) will succeed in this suit. They have more than enough proof to not .

 

Lanham Act is federal, but the rest were ruled to be state issues. It is far from over yet. Aside from appeals, they are still alive for state courts.

 

That issue has't even gone to press yet. Surely you meant 2010 . ahhh o.k. I just received it.

 

I wonder if CU will appeal the ruling. Interesting.

 

Nope!. I really and seriously meant 2011.