John Albanese is held in such high regard ( as he should) and he beans two coins ( same date/type) one in a PCGS holder and the other NGC holder.....
why do collectors crave the PCGS beaned coin over the NGC beaned coin? Afterall both coins have been blessed by JA.
Is it because they bring more at auction? And if so does that create a better buying opportunity for the NGC beaned coins to be bought?
Seems to me experienced collectors would want to buy the coin and not the the holder.
Comments
PCGS has done an outstanding job of marketing for their product. There is no question PCGS CAC coins bring the most money.
Also, the PCGS registry is far stronger and bigger.
The OP is asking why if there is equality based on the CAC opinion, why should a person pay more for a PCGS piece?
Granted, advertising and Registry proficiency certainly influences some (maybe a majority) of collectors, and I would think collectors participating in the PCGS Registry are deciding between the 2 offerings because of that.
People are People. The individual will make a choice based on self interest and preference. However, the reply has a presentation of supporting inequality. Given the scenario the OP presented, would and should a Dealer inform the buyer that the PCGS piece is "superior" as a choice? If I approach the Dealer and inform the Dealer I do not participate in the Registry, and the piece will be, for the foreseeable future, "off the Market", what does it matter that a TPG has too many bad coins graded in the past? Both coins are equality in the OP Post, are they not, by virtue of having a CAC sticker?
I am also curious about another aspect of the reply. Realizing I don't get out much, I would like to know what the meaning of "grade more commercially" means, as I have never come across this observation as an applied buy/sell decision process. I can surmise it means a TPG is more forgiving about a condition that influences the Grading opinion, but that does not transfer as a logical reason to buy only a PCGS coin that has been passed by CAC, over an NGC coins that has been passed by CAC.
This one is in an Old Green Label (OGL) PCGS AU-58 holder. It has no CAC sticker, but I'm guessing that it has never been submitted. I bought it in an auction run by one of the big houses 5 and a half years ago.
This one is NGC AU-58 CAC graded.
Which one do you like better?
A lot of it seems to be sheep mentality. We have had it drilled into our heads that PCGS coins, in general, are just BETTER.
But I have been employing contrary thinking this last 18 months or so and been profiting nicely: I am finding that by selectively seeking out NICE NGC proof coins (mostly PF68CAMEO), and cracking them out and sending to PCGS I am getting higher grades. This really flies in the face of conventional thought....
Without a doubt I would choose the first (PCGS) coin of Bills example. It has much nicer luster and detail than the NGC CAC. Now I am not saying there is an not another NGC out there as nice as the PCGS in that grade. Picking nice coins is key.
Above all that the buzz around the bourse for years is PCGS is preferred by the market. I can’t disagree with that.
2. The power of the PCCGS registry is underestimated by most. It has an outsize effect on the market, and for many series is the engine that drives the bidding and the prices. Think of how many major collectors have participated in the PCGS registry - TDN, Hansen, Blay, Pogue, Simpson, High Desert, Duckor, Forsythe, etc.
Whatever this phrase means, does it apply to NGC and PCGS equally?
Is this phrase just marketing gobbledygobbeldness?
Is this phrase just marketing gobbledygobbeldness?
Bingo!! yes Laura's comments are nothing but bluster and misinformation. Lets fact check, Laura said "Also, the PCGS registry is far stronger and bigger" sorry that is false. The PCGS registry shows just over 146K sets as of this moment, see my page copy.
The NGC registry has just over 160K sets in the US section alone not including all the world sets, a segment of the market that NGC dominates.
It is this type of bluster and spreading of false information by dealers and some collectors that have led the market to believe that there is real difference when in fact there is very little difference. However, it is true that
the PCGS registry has and does host some top notch collections and big name collectors, that has had an influence on some collectors to be sure as a great many of the great coins originally graded and holdered by NGC have been crossed for registry reasons alone.
And I cannot deny that ascetics do play a part in the decision to buy or not or buy then cross for some collectors. The NGC holder could be better and that is an area that NGC could (and should imo) spend some time to address.
My opinion, if NGC spent the time and money to address what some collectors want in the way of holder design it would be easy for NGC to bury PCGS in the future.
Edited to add: One other thing, this push was a bigger issue when PCGS was a publicly traded company, dealers and collectors had real skin in the game then and a big incentive to push for a bigger disparity.
Bingo!! yes Laura's comments are nothing but bluster and misinformation. Lets fact check, Laura said "Also, the PCGS registry is far stronger and bigger" sorry that is false. The PCGS registry shows just over 146K sets as of this moment, see my page copy.
The NGC registry has just over 160K sets in the US section alone not including all the world sets, a segment of the market that NGC dominates.
It is this type of bluster and spreading of false information by dealers and some collectors that have led the market to believe that there is real difference when in fact there is very little difference. However, it is true that
the PCGS registry has and does host some top notch collections and big name collectors, that has had an influence on some collectors to be sure as a great many of the great coins originally graded and holdered by NGC have been crossed for registry reasons alone.
And I cannot deny that ascetics do play a part in the decision to buy or not or buy then cross for some collectors. The NGC holder could be better and that is an area that NGC could (and should imo) spend some time to address.
My opinion, if NGC spent the time and money to address what some collectors want in the way of holder design it would be easy for NGC to bury PCGS in the future.
Edited to add: One other thing, this push was a bigger issue when PCGS was a publicly traded company, dealers and collectors had real skin in the game then and a big incentive to push for a bigger disparity.
I sincerely appreciate the reply, and my thoughts are parallel in direction, with only a slight bend.
I suspected the same concerning the phrase (and admit I still don't know what it means).
There is logic in your reply, and that is important. If I was to add to the post, it would be that I recall a time not long ago when PCGS had a reputation of exercising a tendency to be generous with grading, as the norm.
So.....