Quote:
Originally Posted by Al C.risafulli
I use the term.
I use it for two reasons:
1) Typically I use it to describe a card that's NOT a total beater. I use it to describe a card that's lower grade but still has eye appeal - maybe something an investor might avoid, but something that a collector will love. I like the idea that someone that's a "true" collector is looking carefully at what the card looks like, and not the number on the flip, and so a 2 or a 3 that looks nice, or a 2 or a 3 that's so rare that the grade doesn't matter, is something that would appeal to a collector.
2) I have to describe the card, sometimes between 500 and 800 cards in an auction, and its sometimes hard not to use the same expressions again and again - there are only so many ways to describe cards. My consignors depend on me to describe their cards accurately, and at the same time, I like to avoid terms like "low grade" or "off condition" because they're gauche and because they sound negative. I try and keep the hyperbole to a minimum and instead accurately describe the cards, but at some point you can't sound insulting, so there are some euphemisms that creep in. "Collector grade" is one of them. Another one I use is "Well worn." Or "Well-loved."
-Al
|
I agree with Al’s assessment.
I use the term all the time in my listings. I have always thought of “collector’s grade” to refer to a card that is presentable but not overly abused. A card that would look good in what some refer to as “binder sets” or a set that is in a binder to be flipped through without fear or ruining a high dollar card that may be in there. To me “collector grade” cards typically fall into the 2-5 range with a clean front and typically a clean back (back being less important.)