Grade Rarity

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>Numismatics is a much older hobby than baseball card collecting. Documentation of the best condition coins and identification of their location is typically no mystery. Additionally, the coin grading standards are accepted and established.<br /><br />Since our hobby is much younger, with some exceptions, we have not achieved the same level of certainty (in my opinion). Specifically, the grading of cards between today's nine and ten can be subdivided into tenths or greater breakdown. Additionally, buying near perfect specimens rated by PSA, SCG, GAI, etc. as 1 of 1, 2, 3 ... can be risky if suddenly several equivalent examples appear from private holdings.<br /><br />Due to the above and related considerations, I feel it is a gamble to pay a premium for a card which may not have the actual grade rarity that current awareness indicates.<br /><br />What do you think?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Tom Botticelli</b><p> <br /> In my very humble opinion, I agree with you Gilbert even though I do pay a premium for graded. If I am wrong please correct me but there are approximately 900,000 T206 cards floating around between dealers and collectors yet there have, to date, only been about 50,000 graded. Add in the ones coming back trimmed and you probably have 75,000 total (high estimate). So I can see where you are coming from in relation to population ungraded and population graded.<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />Tom B.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Hal Lewis</b><p>The way I see it is that you are correct in theory, but not in your conclusion.<br /><br />Certainly there MUST be some gem mint cards out there in private collections that have not yet been graded... although logic would dictate that most of the cards that have NOT been sent in for grading and slabbing (protection is key for me) have NOT been sent in because they would NOT grade very high.<br /><br />Nonetheless, I agree that calling ANY card a "1 of 1" at this stage of the game is too early.<br /><br />HOWEVER ... I do NOT believe that the emergence of a second or third such card will decrease the value of the first known card.<br /><br />TONIGHT will give us some indication, because MASTRO has the SECOND known PSA 10 Hank Aaron rookie card up for grabs.<br /><br />The first one sold for $110,000 (including the juice) when it was billed as a "1 of 1" card.<br /><br />The second one is currently at about $85,000 with the juice, and will probably go much higher tonight. Let's see how the final price compares with the $110,000.<br /><br />Would the emergence of a SECOND T206 Honus Wagner in PSA 8 condition DECREASE the value of the first one ... or would there simply now be TWO cards worth $1.5 million each?? I think the latter.<br /><br />So I guess someone's EGO might take a hit when some of these "hidden" mint cards are eventually submitted for grading ... but not their wallet. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>Well, Im sure that I could discuss this subject for quite a while, however, since it relys on projections, conjecture and other attempts to read between the lines, why speculate about it, one may ask. Because it may provide additional insight, or perhaps just be fun for some, perhaps.<br /><br />Although I agree with most of the points which you raise, it is my guess that many high end cards are sitting in collections owned by persons who don't feel any urgency to have a grading service confirm what the owner already knows about the quality of his cards.<br /><br />Additionally, as you state Hal, the potential emergence of subsequently recognized high end cards will not necessarilly devalue the initially identified ones. But if the grading focus and criteria shifts (as it did in coin collecting) todays GAI 10 can be tomorrows GAI 9.8.<br /><br />That is, initially coin grading had the equivalent of a 9, 9.5 & 10 scale for uncirculated (mint) coins. When it was found that many coins actually fell between these grades they went for the equivalent of a 9.0, 9.1, 9.2 ... system of grading. This potential could impact the eventual value of the card which is selling tonight. But this is the stuff that crystal balls were made for. To really do well you need brass ones.<br /><br />Good luck,<br />Gil

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Hal Lewis</b><p>I see your point now Gil, as I was unaware of the rigors of coin grading, etc.<br /><br />But then again ... a coin is made of METAL ...<br /><br />so it is probably a LOT EASIER to keep the coin in the range between a 9 and a 10 than it is to keep a fragile piece of cardboard in that range.<br /><br />Drop the coin one time ... no loss.<br /><br />Drop the card one time ... no 9 or 9.2 or 9.5.<br /><br />Given how TIGHT the standards are NOW for a card to be graded HIGHER than a 9 ...<br /><br />I really can't foresee a category of cards IN BETWEEN the 9's and 10's. <br /><br />Hopefully your concerns will never come to fruition!!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>If you put a 9 and 10 next to each other, can any of us honestly figure out why one card got a 9 and the other a 10? The differences between the 2 is almost negligable. But then again, I never have to worry about since I will never be able to afford cards in thoswe grades, lol.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I like to sit outside, drink beer and yell at people. If I did this at home I would be arrested, so I go to baseball games and fit right in.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>hankron</b><p>Murphy's law of collecting rare items: If you buy the only example known to exist, the next five will show up on eBay in about a month.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Hal Lewis</b><p>and they will be sold by "tonis-cards" <img src="/images/sad.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>hankron</b><p>They will be real but sell for 1/3 what you paid

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>hankron</b><p>I once bought for cheap a super desirable item from a longtime NYC dealer. He knew what it was, but was unaware of its significance. Stupidly assuming it was the only one he had, I told him all about it after I bought it. Turned out he had 9 different ones and he proceeded to raise on them the price several times over. I bought them all, but, in essence, raised the price on myself.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>If demand is constant and supply increases, prices will fall. That is basic economics. The only way a so-called second one-of-one would sell for as much as the first one-of-one would be because of an increase in demand.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Hal Lewis</b><p>And when people see something sell for $110,000...<br /><br />it logically INCREASES the number of people who would be interested in paying so much for a piece of cardboard, even if just for an investment. People just feel more comfortable spending $110,000 on something when they are NOT the first to do so!<br /><br />After all, if one person paid $110,000 in the first auction...<br /><br />the whole World knows that there was someone else out there willing to bid $109,000 for it.<br /><br /><br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>honus3415</b><p>Some good points.....<br /><br />it should be remembered that basic economics principles apply to items of necessity and not necessarily to collectibles. These are collectibles, they have no real value...only a preceived value in the minds of us collectors. Any previous sale does not predict tomorrow's value, nor does it necessarily indicate a true current value....only a value at a given point in time with factors which will never again be duplicated exactly.<br /><br />There is absolutely no way of predicting what price someone might pay for a 1/1, 1/2...1/3 or even 1/100. It all depends upon a multitude of variables at any given point in time. Is the second highest bidder still interested? Have other bidders found more funds? Has interest shifted? All these and more are factors with "collectibles". As is the fact that any desirees of a given item may or may not be aware of the availability of that item at any given point in time.<br /><br /><b>As far as a second highest graded or new highest graded items.....I have yet to see the consistency and accuracy in grading to warrant more than a few hundred dollars between a 9 and a 10. Grading companies just have not instilled in me a confidence that their "<i>unbiased accurate opinions</i>" are worth investments of any great magnitude.</b> Which is better a "9" with a centering flaw, a print spot, or loss of luster? Opinions.....Opinions......their only opinions!!! <br /><br />We each have an opinion, wants and funds... and as we all know these are constantly changing. The possibile effects of items not in the game cannot be considered just as the effect you might have by hitting the lottery tomorrow can't be considered.<br /><br />Buy or sell at what an item is worth to you, for if we try to assign values based on the past I fear we will only fool ourselves.<br /><br />My 2 cents....

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>hankron</b><p>A common false premise for armchair economicry is that the (hobby) market is entirely efficient. <br /><br />A second false premise is that bidders are entirely sane.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Paul</b><p>I have to agree that there's no room for fractional grades between a 9 and a 10 until someone can actually perceive a difference between most 9s and most 10s. On the other hand, there's a lot of room for more grades at the bottom of the scale. Some 2s are actually quite respectable, while others look like they have been through a garbage disposal. This is partly due to "technical" grading standards (microscopic back damage may be an automatic 2 or 1), but it's also due to the wide range of cards that legitimately fall into the lower grades.<br /><br />I could see a 50 point system where the top 3 grades (48, 49, and 50) are equal to today's 8, 9, and 10, and the remaining 47 grades are divided up among the current 1-7.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>I've always thought that a 4 or 5 section criteria for grading with each section with 20 or 25 points so there is a max total score of 100. You could break it down to centering, gloss, corners, erdges, register, etc. This would give you a true 100 point scale and allow for nuances.<br /><br />Jay<br /><br />I like to sit outside, drink beer and yell at people. If I did this at home I would be arrested, so I go to baseball games and fit right in.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>I offer one more opinion. If the difference in price between a card graded 9 and ten is several hundred dollars, or even somewhat more, there is no motivation to subdivide the scale between these values. As the spread between the value of these two grades increases, so does the rational in support of fractional grading.<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Mike Mac</b><p>With old cards, especially, the board has old posts that point out that true high grade cards are difficult to find: production and wear since production. Anything old and produced perfectly is difficult. Well, sometimes, it seems to me, anything produced well by Topps prior to (not including) 1987 is difficult relative to their total production, but this is a vintage board. If the card was produced well and entered a collection, then it was subject to 60-160 years of potential wear. Although I do not know this for a fact, I would think that more copies of superstars exist but they are likely to be subject to greater amounts of wear. Anything is a 1 of 1? Unlikely, but maybe truely scarce.<br /><br />That's my opinion.<br /><br />Also, I understand that high valued collectibles may be used as collateral. I think it would easier to carry a $110,000 baseball card accross the country than $110,000 in cash or a check, although I wouldn't know this to be true from experience.<br /><br />With respect to Jay's comment about grading, I agree that attributes should be separately evaluated and published by 3rd party graders. I disagree that there should be some sort of formula deterimining a final grade. The true final grade might be determined by the seller and potential buyers. In essence, the market will eventually determine the desirable attributes.