One of my peeves against both NGC and PCGS registries is that they allow obscured sets. These are sets that are listed and ranked, but the public can't see which coins are in the sets or the grades of the coins in the sets. All you know is the set exists and has a certain number of points (and therefore, a rank). Yeah, I know, NGC doesn't actually state the rank, it just shows the points and places it between two ranks based on the points. Really same thing; amounts to half-step ranking is all. If someone isn't willing to at least let the coins and their grades be listed, the set shouldn't be listed at all. There are a couple of reasons for my opinion. First, it's not very interesting to see Joe Blow's Nifty Nickels is the no. 7 ranked set and not see what's in it. Might be a lift to the ego of the owner of the set, but for the rest of us, either it's "so what?" or just plain irritating. In addition, it's often difficult for competitors whose sets are ranked just below the obscured set to know the minimum needed to upgrade or add to their set to equal or pass the obscured set. Sure, they can match the set just above the obscured set, but they might not need to go nearly that far to beat the obscured set. And sure, they can play around with numbers to see which coins to upgrade or add to advance to the rank of the obscured set. But with big sets, this could mean thousands of possibilities considering multiple coins might be upgraded. Throw in qualifiers, like PL, DMPL, RD, RB, BN, FS, FB, etc. for some sets, and the combinations could be in the millions. Throw in pricing (set points often don't relate proportionately to cost), and it gets really complicated for the collector just below the obscured set to know how to advance to its level at lowest cost. Whereas, if the one-down collector saw there was a missing coin in the obscured set and it's missing in his as well, it might be a simple decision. Or it might be only a minor upgrade to one or two coins that's needed. I can see some privacy and security reasons for not requiring registry participants to make public cert. numbers or pictures of their entries. If this information were public, persons who recognize the coins might recognize the identity of the owner and make that information available. For example, if a coin is bought on eBay, the seller knows quite a bit about the new owner (real name, address, etc.). If the seller later sees the coin in a registry, then they could leak the private info. However, I think the privacy and security risks are pretty minimal if only the coins and their grades are listed in the registry. It might be possible that a collection with a lot of "top of pop" coins might be recognized as belonging to a particular individual. But if the owner has been careful to protect their identity in other ways, such as by not exhibiting the set at shows, chances of a the set being traced personally to them are slim. Some owners of obscured sets appear to name the set after themselves using their real names, but don't allow the coins or the grades to be seen. Why? I can think of a number of reasons, but most are bit far out, so it's still puzzling. I do think though that collectors who include pictures of their coins in the registry should receive a substantial reward for doing so, say a half notch increase in points for the coin. As it is, there is little or no reward. One problem is that the pictures should be of reasonable quality, and insuring this would be a headache for NGC and PCGS. Cal
I personally don't understand why obscured sets exist, but if they want to do that, then it is their choice. Kind of defeats the whole point of putting them in the Registry, though. NGC does not award obscured sets a rank, and they are not eligible for awards. So really, they are just taking up space on the website. I ignore them and move on. I'm not sure how PCGS handles them.
Effectively NGC does award a rank to obscured sets. They stick them between the two non-obscured set just above and below in points, but don't assign a rank number. PCGS assigns a rank just like to non-obscured entries. I think it's unfair to the set just below the obscured set. If an obscured set is in the #10 position (whether it's labeled as such or not), then #11 is deprived of bragging rights to be in the top ten. Cal
Well, life's not fair. That's just reality. The fact of the matter is, their set is *not* in the top ten. They aren't being deprived of anything. The obscured set contains the coins/points to earn the higher spot, and #11 doesn't. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. If they want to be in the top ten, they need to upgrade their set.
I agree. But I also personally know of at least one of my coins that belongs to me, yet is still in someone else registry set. I don't do registry sets, but if I did, I would pursue it. Also, I spoke with someone at the ANA about this and he admitted he no longer owned a few of his registry set coins. He attributed it to laziness, for not removing them.
I find the whole concept hilarious, and admire those who obscure their sets - doubtful it's their intent, though - as righteously trolling the braggarts who depend so heavily on their precious Registry Sets for the feeling of self-worth. It's compensation, plain and simple, and emblematic of many of the Seven Deadly Sins.
I wonder if it would be possible to generate a no. 1 registry set by going through auction records and picking top coins. Bound to be enough that aren't already registered to do it. Ownership verification is one of the weak points of the registries as currently run. Cal
It's possible, but fraudulent. Each time you try to register a coin already in the registry, I think an email is sent to the existing owner. If they prove they still possess the coin, I would assume your account gets flagged for potential fraud. Too many flags and likely a ban ensues. Beside that, this is such a small hobby community (on the high end, it really is) that you don't want to be known as "that guy."
I'm not about to try it for multiple reasons. And you're likely right that someone who tries to register falsely too many coins gets kicked out. Cal
