Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Tom B, post: 1965622, member: 11854&quot;]Thank you for taking the time to post.&nbsp; As I wrote in my post, I am ignorant of the process with which the ANA interacts with the US Mint, which was why I wrote about decision makers at the &quot;US Mint and/or ANA&quot;.&nbsp; I had not realized how autonomous or heavy-handed the US Mint might be while having a booth at the ANA.&nbsp; Given that history, might it be worth debating whether or not the US Mint may rent booths at future ANA shows?</p><p><br /></p><p>My initial reaction was also to be angry at the TPGs (PCGS and NGC), but I backed off that reaction by realizing these are for-profit companies in competition with one another for submission dollars.&nbsp; This puts them in a different class than the ANA or the US Mint.&nbsp; The ANA might have been able to change the series of events by prohibiting the US Mint from renting a booth or by putting other restrictions in place while the US Mint, of course, might have done any number of things.&nbsp; However, PCGS and NGC are at the end of the chain, even if their special labels fuel the actions of others, and they require the ANA, US Mint, rented hands and larger dealers to each do their parts before either PCGS or NGC can enter the mix.</p><p><br /></p><p>I, too, would definitely list the US Mint as the primary cause of the events followed by an undefined stew of the rest of your list.&nbsp; Thank you again for adding to the discussion.[/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