Quote:
Originally Posted by Leon
This reminds me of the time I was at a good hobby friends house (Hi John E.). I was perusing his binders as he is an old time collector with great stuff. As I was going through his E92 binder I noticed all kinds of backs, Crofts and Allen, Crofts Cocoa, Dockman etc.... He doesn't care what is on back he only collects those by the fronts. He has the player for the set....check. No need to look at the backs  .... (however, I have always been a back collector too so of course looked) |
I understand, for the most part, I think, the rare backs of some of the cards you speak of so I can understand the importance of those being in good shape.
I think of my card, as an example, with the paper loss on the front and if it were on the back instead.
I believe, based on what I have read/seen, that in either case, my card would come back with a PR-1?
I guess, depending on the mindset of the collector, I would have more buyers and likely higher bids if it were on the back instead of the front, but at the same time, I think paper loss on the back should be graded slightly different, or with a qualifier which states that, than what it would be if the paper loss were on the front?
Not likely to happen based on what I said above, but it is something, imo, for the TPG's such as SGC, PSA and BVG to consider.