Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;calcol, post: 2567019, member: 77639&quot;]I think the number one motive for TPG services is to make a profit now and in the future.&nbsp; Without a positive bottom line, they&#039;ll go away.&nbsp; Exclusivity of registries forces those who want to participate to choose one service or the other.&nbsp; I think many collectors who have chosen one service would like to compete in the other too and are willing to pay for a crossover sticker to do it.&nbsp; As far as one service thinking the other has inadequate grading standards, why offer any crossover service at all if that is the case? I&#039;ve crossed plenty of coins in both directions and had about 80% success rate in crossing (either way), so their standards are similar.</p><p><br /></p><p>I think NGC has multiple reasons for making their registry exclusive.&nbsp; I think saying the standards of other services have declined and not naming any is a politic way to make the announcement so as to cause minimal upset and avoid lawsuits.&nbsp; There are likely other motives for the move including irritation that PCGS has never opened their registry NGC coins.&nbsp; I think if you ask execs of either service if they have the toughest standards, all will say yes, as in the past and forevermore. It&#039;s normal commercial puffery.</p><p><br /></p><p>It may be too that the percent of PCGS coins in the top sets in the NGC registry has been rising.&nbsp; Probably only NGC has the data to support this theory as its unlikely that anyone but NGC has been keeping historical data on the registry composition. NGC may fear that eventually the percentage of PCGS coins in the top sets could become embarrassing.</p><p><br /></p><p>I would guess that NGC is hoping for an increase in crossover submissions from collectors who choose their registry over the PCGS registry.&nbsp; This is most likely to occur with registry participants whose sets are predominantly NGC but still have a few holes to fill. It will be offset by having rare coins currently in NGC holders cross to PCGS because the owners decide to go with the PCGS registry.&nbsp; This won&#039;t have an immediate monetary effect on NGC, but in the long run, having more of these coins in PCGS holders may affect the perception of quality of the two services.</p><p><br /></p><p>There would be an increase in profits for both services if there was an increase in crossover submissions, which there would be with a sticker option.&nbsp; Registries aside, the increase in market value that would inevitably occur for dual certified coins would drive increased crossover submissions.&nbsp; I have many coins that I would submit for dual certification.</p><p><br /></p><p>It may be antitrust considerations that have prevented crossover stickers from being available so far.&nbsp; NGC and PCGS might willing to sticker each other&#039;s slabs if they agree with the grade.&nbsp; It&#039;s pretty obvious if you study their websites that they consider themselves to be the top two services. However, they may not be willing to sticker a SEGS slab even if they agree with the grade on the label.&nbsp; Stating that they would only sticker each other&#039;s slabs might bring on legal or regulatory action.</p><p><br /></p><p>As far as counterfeiting stickers goes; well counterfeiting of coins, slabs, and stickers (CAC, GSA, or crossover) will always be attempted.&nbsp; There are anti-counterfeiting measures in place already, and there are even more effective ones that could be used if needed.&nbsp; I haven&#039;t heard of counterfeiting yet being a major problem with CAC or GSA stickers.&nbsp; If the services are happy to sticker GSA slabs, there should be no additional concern about security in putting stickers on the slabs of another service.</p><p><br /></p><p>Cal[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in