Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Caleb, post: 1252585, member: 32795"]Hi, I wasn’t trying to be disrespectful with my comment, just stating that the online Registry at PCGS and NGC are not all that they are cracked up to be. PCGS treats the 1964 Accented Hair Proof as a variety.  How can the first design be a variety of the second design?  Shouldn’t the first design be the standard and any modifications or differences are the varieties?  NGC requires both the Accented Hair and the “non” Accented Hair 1964 Proofs in its Registry basic set.  I couldn’t imagine collecting a complete basic set of Stand Liberty Quarters without wanting an example of both Type1 and Type2 1917 quarters. PCGS treats the 1998-S Mattie as a variety and not a basic coin.  What is it a variety of?  Is there another 1998-S Silver circulation strike coin out there in the Kennedy series?  I don’t understand how PCGS can designate a coin a variety when there is no basic coin.  In the basic Jefferson nickel collection in the PCGS Registry, they require both the 1994 SMS and the 1997 SMS along with the regular business strike coins for those years.  Why is the 1998-S SMS treated differently in the Registry, where is the consistency?  All three coins came from the US Mint in “special” offerings of commemorative coins. Don’t even think about getting me going on PCGS in their Registry concerning the variety sets.  PCGS has what they call the “Major Varieties” and requires the 1964-D DDO-005 but not the 1964-D DDO-003 when they are both classic varieties for the series and both as strong on the spread as each other.  How about the 1964-D RPM-001 or RPM-002.  In the PCGS Registry the set owner decides which one to put into the “Major Variety” set.  Neither one is a “major” variety. PCGS stated that they will use the 4[SUP]th[/SUP] Edition, Volume II of the Cherrypickers’ Guide to determine which varieties they will attribute and require in the modern coin series.  Talk about a cop out, some of the varieties listed in this book for the Kennedy series wouldn’t even make the top 150 list, let alone the top 50.  After studying the Cherrypickers’ Guide for the past couple of years, the only conclusion that I can come up with is that when they were completing Volume II of the 4[SUP]th[/SUP] Edition they must have been using what ever varieties they had laying around just to fill the pages, at least for the Kennedy series.  Just to give a few examples:1.      The 1972-D “no FG” gets listed but not the 1982-P or the 1983-P “no FG”.2.      The 1967 DDO-007 but not the 1967 DDO-001.3.      The 1964-D DDO-004 but not the 1964-D DDO-009 or DDO-010.4.      The 1972 DDO-001 but not the 1971 (P) DDO-001.5.      How about the 1968-D DDO-002 or the 1965 DDR-001 both got listed in the Guide and they are so minor that I hope the collector looking for these has a good loupe to spot them. The only bright side to the Cherrypickers’ Guide is I believe Ken Potter is putting in more thought on what should “make the cut” for inclusion in the 5[SUP]th[/SUP] Edition. So don’t worry about what place you are in at the online Registries, build your sets they way you want them, what makes sense to you, and above all else …. Have fun!  And no, I don’t consider myself as being on the “top of the heap look down”, like most collectors I’m always looking for upgrades or that coin I just don’t have yet. Caleb[/QUOTE]

Create my FREE Account!

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches