psa smr on old judge Hof's a joke

[Delray Vintage]

can anyone tell me how Psa with a straight face has smr prices so far from reality? Let's take the Delahanty which they list at anout 50% or less or prices realized at auction. Or take the anson in uniform which I have never seen listed at absurdly low prices. Come on Psa where is your credibility?

I own the only Psa 7 connie mack which somehow psa decided to reduce in value from 10K to 9k last month based on what? A joke source of prices for this category. I'll buy any psa 8 at their smr value.

[HRBAKER]

SMR = Seldom (even) Moderately Relevant

[travrosty]

you figured out to sell or value the cards you have at your own discretion, not psa's. psa will never tell you how they do things. do be a slave to them. buy what you want for what you think it is worth, and sell the same, and disregard psa.

[itjclarke]

(Preface- I don't buy/sell near as much as many on the board, so all just based on my opinion/experiences, or as I've come to learn IMHO)

Some sets seem closer than others.. the rationale I've always heard is they're more accurate on sets who's examples sell more often (makes sense), so they have a better basis for value. That said, Cracker Jacks are a JOKE too!! I'd love to be able to buy a 3 graded 1915 CJ Grover Alexander for $175, but am pretty sure that's never going to happen. The only one I know sold recently (outside eBay) was a 2, which I think got no less than $995... it's now being offered on eBay for $1099. SMR for that card=$110=??HUH??. Other sets I've bought extensively, have been much closer to SMR.. 1933/1934 Goudeys- though most seem to be available for less aside from Gehrigs/Ruths/Deans/Greenberg/etc, T206 give or take, the Play Ball sets. Postwar Bowman/Topps seem pretty close to me.

NOT close- the afore mentioned CJ's. 1938 Goudey Heads Up- not near as bad as CJ, but seem to be worse than other Goudeys. T202- these seem to sell all over the map with respect to SMR.. have gotten several HOFer's for 45-65% of SMR, but have had to go well over for some of the popular ones.

I only sniff the surface of some of the rarer stuff/sets, so have no valid opinions there.

Anyway, IMHO I think price guides of any kind are still invaluable. They offer much of the basis for the "I got a great deal!"(s), and "what should I list this for?"(s) of collecting. I think it would be chaotic without them, and would prevent some buyers and sellers from participating. I know I'd bid a LOT less confidently if I didn't have the SMR to use as a quick starting point... I do use a pretty extensive list of past auctions/prices/pictures to refer to before any large purchase.. I do this part manually, as I'll never be willing to pay for the VCP.

[U240robert]

The SMR is just a guide, definitely do not go by that.
I have no idea where they get the values from.
Sometimes I think they just print the previous months prices over and over and sometime add a - or a + to make it look like they are doing something.
I collect mostly cards from the 1960's and I've seen some nutty prices that are not a reflection of the true market, a good example is with 1966 Topps high numbers which tend to go well over the SMR.

[DJR]

.

[Delray Vintage]

I think smr serves as a good guide for many sets, but 19th century it is not. My problem is they claim they do evaluations of all the evidence and come up with what are realistic selling prices.

if I never see any of their smr high grades selling for that price at realized prices at auctions, then where is that data coming from? That is an issue of credibility. Why even have the list if those prices do not exist in any real transactions? I use Vintage card prices and check auctions not in those prices as well as dealer quotes to get a real price. Smr needs some real changes in how they do 19th century prices estimates.

[Exhibitman]

SMR = Silly Marketing Rag