View Single Post
  #84  
Old 02-26-2019, 12:15 PM
jchcollins's Avatar
jchcollins jchcollins is offline
J0hn Collin$
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: NC
Posts: 3,238
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToddW. View Post
Obviously this thread is filled with tons of examples of what appear to be cards that have eye-appeal that substantially surpasses the technical grade. The question is how much of a premium are you willing to pay to get those cards that have great eye-appeal? Of course the easy answer if you can get them in the range of a 3 when it looks like a 5 or 6 it is a no brainer. But are you willing to pay almost 5/6 graded price level for the 3? Its a dilemma I've faced a number of times. I try to look at all recent graded purchases to compare the actual cards, but at the end of the day (assuming new slab) you still have a 3 you paid 5/6 pricing for, even if you like it (and other like it). If you keep track of purchases or sales vs. market, those cards put you significantly underwater, even if the optics are impressive to those who appreciate the card itself. Is there a rule of thumb people generally use?

Your point is valid. I weigh each decision on the particular card and what my situation dictates I think should be paid for it within my limits. There are times I’m willing to overpay for something that I think won’t come around again for a while, and then times I’m really, really not willing to do that. Yes sometimes it simply comes down to "how bad do I want it?" There are a number of ways to look at it, and it depends where you put what value. In the case of my ‘65 Mantle - I believe I paid around $100 more than what a “normal” nicer 3 (noticeable rounded corners) - but still a card with eye appeal - should go for. But my card looks like a 6, and to get a true 6 centered as well as the card I bought, I would be looking at spending anywhere from $500 to north of $800 based on recent sales. So I would prefer to look at it as yes, I paid a steep price for a 3 - but it’s an anomaly because the card looks nothing like a 3. If resale or trying to flip entered the equation - that would make things more difficult - but in this case it’s just a card I want to add to my PC. Same deal with a higher-end centered ‘62 Mantle 200 PSA 5 I snagged right before Christmas. I paid well more than VCP for a 5, but a hell of a lot less than a 6 - and my card looks better than half of the 6’s out there I compared it to.

It is difficult to buy nice examples of “the card and not the grade” consistently, and that’s an understatement with a player like Mantle - perhaps the single most difficult postwar player to get any kind of deal on, simply because he is so popular and if you are buying online he’s everywhere - if an undergraded or strong-for-the-grade card is out there, people are going to see it and pay attention. You are right in that the value for cards in lower grade that still retain a lot of eye appeal is ostensibly that you can get them at bargain bin prices. I think sometimes yes, and sometimes maybe not for so much of a bargain - but still in many cases you can get a card for cheaper than the card could be had for otherwise without some small hidden flaw.

Here's another way of looking at it - I paid maybe close to a "Dean's Card" price for a PSA 3 '65 Mantle. But if you spent that money with Dean you will get a PSA 3 that looks like a 3; doing it my way I got a card that looks more like a 6.

I do see your point. Sometimes I'm willing to go for this kind of thing, other times not. I'm not sure there is any grand rhyme or reason behind it for me personally.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
__________________
Vintage Cubs. Postwar stars & HOF'ers.

Last edited by jchcollins; 02-26-2019 at 01:11 PM.
Reply With Quote