Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Seattlite86, post: 4175635, member: 59737"]Let's be clear, I called you out for the fearmongering effort you employed with the word epidemic, but if you think that's all you got wrong in your write up, you've severely overestimated your abilities, or at least your efforts. The only "fact" you introduced in your "scope" was that fake slabs have been around since 2008. Or maybe it was 2007, since you don't actually know that information and had to guess. You failed to present a single "fact" regarding how many fake slabs exist. You failed to say how many are PCGS, or how many are NGC. You failed to present anything that helps quantify how much of the market this takes up, which slabs or coins are the most faked, or who is at the most risk from this. You failed to show anything regarding customers and their likelihood to come across a fake slab vs a real one. At no point in your scope did you do anything to elaborate the problem. I believe this is because you have so little facts to go on, you simply avoided them altogether. As far as "facts" regarding PCGS, the only thing you have done is present the ones that support your narrative and bias. Why didn't you discuss their generations of holders? Their security measures on the slabs themselves? Why didn't you discuss how many coins they've certified? Why didn't you discuss the fact that PCGS Gold Shield photographs the coin? Anyone who buys a gold shield slab can do exactly the same thing you can with NGC and have a high resolution image for their coin. Why didn't you mention this at all? It certainly seems like a solution PCGS has to counterfeiting... Regarding NGC, why didn't you show a single fake NGC holder? I think you intentionally only showed PCGS holders to push your agenda. When exactly did NGC switch to taking photographs of all coins? Where was that fact? Aren't all of the older coins slabbed by NGC and not photographed at risk? Why did NGC get a perfect pass on those millions of slabs that have been faked prior to implementing the photograph policy? Why didn't you mention that NGC only recently changed their database access and that up until just recently, you could data mine all of their coins? Why didn't you mention that tens of millions of certified NGC coins have likely already been data mined and are at risk? I think the answer to why all this was ommitted is at best simple: laziness and confirmation bias. At worst, you intentionally wrote a hit piece on PCGS. You've admitted several times to conflating the problem to increase viewership. This article lacks significant amounts of information, it intentionally omits positive aspects of PCGS, and comes to a conclusion not supported, not only by what you presented, but by what you failed to present. And for the record, I'm an NGC fan, and have only ever submitted coins to NGC and ANACS. I'm not pro-PCGS, just ask [USER=76863]@baseball21[/USER] . You'll also notice I'm absent from the US coins forum, precisely because I do not wish attention because of arguments. I was tired of the arguments, so I left. Interesting flex though, projecting your desire for attention onto me. The only reason I even saw this article was because it was featured on the homepage. [USER=112]@GDJMSP[/USER] and [USER=15199]@desertgem[/USER] I believe that featuring and encouraging shoddy efforts like this detract from the hobby and lower CT's reputation. As to what readers gain from reading my critical questioning of your article, that's simple: they get the full truth so they can make informed decisions without being shepherded by someone who admits to misleading them from the beginning. They can learn about Gold shield from PCGS, or hear that NGC has millions of coins encapsulated that have no photos and thus no protection.[/QUOTE]

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches