| Author |
 Replies: 24 / Views: 4,364 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Moderator
 Canada
10463 Posts |
You folks are assuming (wrongly) that ICCS actually cares about Canadian numismatics and the collectors. It is a business, it makes money. The adage, 'if it is not broken, why fix it' applies. ICCS will never have a web presence, never have a searchable database and will not like ever make the transition to hard slabs. Their 4-page disclaimer regarding the validity, security and integrity of their soft flips pretty much is a precis of where that company stands with respect to the service they provide. Even their hard copy population reports are incredibly erroneous.
Go ahead, phone ICCS, or talk to Brian at a coin show - I'll buy anyone here a beer if you get more than the trademark shrug in return.
"Discovery follows discovery, each both raising and answering questions, each ending a long search, and each providing the new instruments for a new search." -- J. Robert OppenheimerContent of this post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses...0/deed.en_USMy eBay store
|
|
Valued Member
 Canada
212 Posts |
If they need a partner I have friends that have very very very DEEP pockets (generations of old money passed down and tons of land. they have WAY WAY WAY more money than I have) that may want to invest so that option may be the case.
Edited by Matrix1980
05/21/2011 5:30 pm
|
|
Moderator
Canada
10463 Posts |
A simple fight? This is not politics - your analogies fail in any kind of context. ICCS is a privately run business owned by three partners at the most - if there are no shares, then you cannot put pressure on anyone how to run their business privately, unless you control most of that business' revenue. Most of their customers, whom are coin dealers, are happy with the current level of service they provide, it is quick and cheap (you also get what you pay for, in my opinion). ICCS does not care how valuable the coin is inside their holders, they care about quantity of coins graded - that is how a business survives. As long as the revenue stream continues, then nothing will happen. Do you really think this business, which operates successfully by generating solid revenue, is going to listen to you and change their business model? How much of their business do you actually provide/consume?
My generation? I am not much older than you padawan. A numismatic Jedi you are not. Much to learn you have...
"Discovery follows discovery, each both raising and answering questions, each ending a long search, and each providing the new instruments for a new search." -- J. Robert OppenheimerContent of this post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses...0/deed.en_USMy eBay store
|
|
Moderator
Canada
10463 Posts |
Funny you should mention that... ICCS was offered a considerable subsidy to upgrade to hard slabs (funded by CAND - ask Zonad why...). ICCS declined. It is not about the money, they do not, and will never, want to assume liability of any coin they certify. The reason PCGS is internationally known, is partially because of their policy on the coins they grade and certify. http://www.pcgs.com/bill_of_rights.chtml"Discovery follows discovery, each both raising and answering questions, each ending a long search, and each providing the new instruments for a new search." -- J. Robert OppenheimerContent of this post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses...0/deed.en_USMy eBay store
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
212 Posts |
Sheerwood Park Pennies I know you are just trying to get back at me I will just ignore you here on this site because you are not a influence in my life thank God.
Edited by Matrix1980
05/21/2011 5:57 pm
|
|
Moderator
Canada
10463 Posts |
This has nothing to do with you. Everything I have posted, from Canadian PCGS authorized dealers, to known CAND interactions with ICCS, has been factual. You could argue that ICCS is reluctant to change is speculation, but their track record speaks volumes of it - for example, they still do not have a web presence. I have been dealing with ICCS for over a decade, and I personally know Brian (and his trademark shrug). While I do have the upmost respect of his numismatic opinion, especially with pre-confederate tokens, I simply don't trust my best coins to reside in his soft flips and I approach buying higher end coins in ICCS holders with caution.
Lastly, learn to accept constructive criticism. Not every opposing opinion on this (and other) coin forums are personal attacks.
"Discovery follows discovery, each both raising and answering questions, each ending a long search, and each providing the new instruments for a new search." -- J. Robert OppenheimerContent of this post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses...0/deed.en_USMy eBay store
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
212 Posts |
SPP-Ottawa:
''Lastly, learn to accept constructive criticism. Not every opposing opinion on this (and other) coin forums are personal attacks''.
On that note you are very right and I am trying slowly to do so.
|
|
Moderator
Canada
10463 Posts |
Well, in writing and posting my last reply, there has been some housecleaning going on here. I apologize to the general forum members if my previous series of posts seem completely out of context. They were each specific responses to intervening posts. I think you get the general point of the conversation though.
Enough about coin politics. We have important numismatic issues to discuss. As you were....
"Discovery follows discovery, each both raising and answering questions, each ending a long search, and each providing the new instruments for a new search." -- J. Robert OppenheimerContent of this post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses...0/deed.en_USMy eBay store
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
212 Posts |
SPP-Ottawa:
I agree there are better things to talk about and also apologize for ANY bad vibes!!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3692 Posts |
The minting processes in both countries are a tad different. I suspect there would be a slight variation in grading from a U.S. perspective or standard.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
103 Posts |
I had a conversation with Michael Walsh back in the late 1990's about different types of slabs, and distinctly remember that Michael mentioned that he and a group of other dealers had offered to provide ICCS with all of the start up costs associated with switching to hard slabs, including the slabs and machine, yet ICCS declined. My recollection was that ICCS just wasn't interested in change.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1051 Posts |
ICCS has no reason to change, as mentioned. If you want a solid, secure slab issued by a professional
company that stands behind their product, then PCGS is your company. I like the CCCS hard slabs too, but
they make lots of grading/attribution mistakes.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
109 Posts |
The only way ICCS will respond is to sue them. When the Company can't hide behind behind the disclaimer" this is only an opinion" when they are the defacto experts is an interesting defence but probably would not be accepted in court. When this smokescreen is diffused then they or their group will have to step up to the plate and redo the whole process including the holder. As no one has sued anyone in Canadian numismatics for things like what Marc Varette did there is a shadow cast over the whole industry that lingers to this day.
Pcgs has already addressed things like conflict-of-interest and people tampering with their holders...ICCS has done nothing because no-one forces them to...!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1442 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
84 Posts |
Have heard from dealers the rumors (I assume that someone has determined they are more than that but have seen nothing in writing) that coins sold in ICCS holders were not the original coins in those holders.
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 24 / Views: 4,364 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 05/21/2011 5:18 pm
